WTF!! When did IFC start showing commercials during movies?

WTF!! When did IFC start showing commercials during movies?

You kidding me??? That f***ing blows.

I've gone on a movie spree that past week. Saw True Grit, No Strings Attached, and The Green Hornet....with 3 different girls, haha. I was impressed with all 3 of them. Probably liked True Grit the best because I think it was the first Western I've gone to and there was awesome acting involved. No Strings Attached was pretty funny, but probably my 3rd out of the 3. I was also impressed with Seth Rogan's acting in The Green Hornet. The Green Hornet had good comedy and good action.

"Devil" actually isn't a bad little horror movie. Some suspense and it's only like 80 minutes so not time consuming.

I've gone on a movie spree that past week. Saw True Grit, No Strings Attached, and The Green Hornet....with 3 different girls, haha. I was impressed with all 3 of them. Probably liked True Grit the best because I think it was the first Western I've gone to and there was awesome acting involved. No Strings Attached was pretty funny, but probably my 3rd out of the 3. I was also impressed with Seth Rogan's acting in The Green Hornet. The Green Hornet had good comedy and good action.

 

 

How were all three girls impressive, do tell?

How were all three girls impressive, do tell?

I read that statement and scrolled down to see if anyone else had made the joke. You won this round.

It was a long hunt. After rumors of "Mad Men" star Jon Hamm and "True Blood" star Joe Manganiello stepping into the role of Superman, it's been confirmed by Warner Bros. that British thesp Henry Cavill will be the new Son of Krypton.

 

As we reported back in November, the studios were searching for thesps between 28 and 32 years of age and whoever they chose would probably be from a TV series or a relative unknown ala prior Men of Steel Christopher Reeve and Brandon Routh.

 

Ladies and gents, meet 28 year-old Henry Cavill, star of "The Tudors" on Showtime and the upcoming "Immortals," opening this fall.

 

The film will be directed by Zack Snyder, who stated in a press release, "In the pantheon of superheroes, Superman is the most recognized and revered character of all time, and I am honored to be a part of his return to the big screen. I also join Warner Bros., Legendary Pictures and the producers in saying how excited we are about the casting of Henry. He is the perfect choice to don the cape and S shield."

 

Charles Roven, Emma Thomas, Christopher Nolan and Deborah Snyder are the producers of the film. It will be written by David S. Goyer based on a story by Goyer and Nolan. Thomas Tull and Lloyd Phillips are serving as executive producers.

Link

Interesting, I really like his character in The Tudors but don't know how he will be as Superman. Can't be worse than the last movie...

Zack Snyder is directing the new Superman movie? Ugh, so I guess we have nothing but ridiculously shot slow motion action scenes to look forward to.

Zack Snyder is directing the new Superman movie? Ugh, so I guess we have nothing but ridiculously shot slow motion action scenes to look forward to.

 

I like Zack Snyder movies, Dawn of the Dead, 300, and Watchmen were all entertaining imo. I know a lot of people didn't care for Watchmen but I was a big fan.

I like Zack Snyder movies, Dawn of the Dead, 300, and Watchmen were all entertaining imo. I know a lot of people didn't care for Watchmen but I was a big fan.

 

I liked Dawn of the Dead and didn't care for 300 or Watchmen at all. I just hate the way he shoots his movies and I think his action scenes suck.

Dinner for Schmucks might be one of the worst movies I've seen in the last 10 years. My wife left the room after 20 minutes. I stuck it out but wanted to jab a fork in my eye the whole time.

I really don't think the world needs more Superman movies. It's so hard to care about Superman in a movie, because he's so indestructible. Each one needs to come up with some way to sap his powers for a period so he can get the s*** beat out of him, and that's just not Superman 99% of the time.

 

If they find a way to tell the Doomsday story, with all the JLA characters, and oh, what the hell, include the cool rebirth storyline, then I might, MIGHT be hooked. That would be cool, but also take like 10 movies.

 

Just let the Superman franchise die and tell us some new stories.

I really don't think the world needs more Superman movies. It's so hard to care about Superman in a movie, because he's so indestructible. Each one needs to come up with some way to sap his powers for a period so he can get the s*** beat out of him, and that's just not Superman 99% of the time.

 

If they find a way to tell the Doomsday story, with all the JLA characters, and oh, what the hell, include the cool rebirth storyline, then I might, MIGHT be hooked. That would be cool, but also take like 10 movies.

 

Just let the Superman franchise die and tell us some new stories.

 

I have sort of the same feeling and I don't think it's about the indestructibility. I think you could basically say the same thing about almost any superhero film. Regardless of whether the character is indestructible or not, you know going into a hero click that the marquee characters are going to survive and triumph regardless what stumbling blocks are encountered during the film. Fans of the hero genre accept that and others see something else.

 

For me the problem is sticking with a believable portrayal of a character that is so cut-and-dried "Truth, Justice, and the American Way" in an era that is very far removed from the 4-color one-dimensional world Siegel and Shuster created in 1938.

 

 

I have sort of the same feeling and I don't think it's about the indestructibility. I think you could basically say the same thing about almost any superhero film. Regardless of whether the character is indestructible or not, you know going into a hero click that the marquee characters are going to survive and triumph regardless what stumbling blocks are encountered during the film. Fans of the hero genre accept that and others see something else.

 

For me the problem is sticking with a believable portrayal of a character that is so cut-and-dried "Truth, Justice, and the American Way" in an era that is very far removed from the 4-color one-dimensional world Siegel and Shuster created in 1938.

 

Yeah, so tell us more about that 1938 world

Yeah, so tell us more about that 1938 world

 

The dames back then were a tall drink of water, I'll tell you that.

 

I have sort of the same feeling and I don't think it's about the indestructibility. I think you could basically say the same thing about almost any superhero film. Regardless of whether the character is indestructible or not, you know going into a hero click that the marquee characters are going to survive and triumph regardless what stumbling blocks are encountered during the film. Fans of the hero genre accept that and others see something else.

 

For me the problem is sticking with a believable portrayal of a character that is so cut-and-dried "Truth, Justice, and the American Way" in an era that is very far removed from the 4-color one-dimensional world Siegel and Shuster created in 1938.

 

But, if a woman dies in batman, she dies, with superman he can turn back time with his flying! That and all problems are solved by him throwing whatever into space.

But, if a woman dies in batman, she dies, with superman he can turn back time with his flying! That and all problems are solved by him throwing whatever into space.

 

Obviously all that is needed to shake things up in the next movie is some RED KRYPTONITE, because you never know how that stuff will effect Superman.

 

 

And Superman throwing stuff into space to save the planet doesn't come close to the predictable and over-done broody-moody-scowly-growly Batman thing. In the end, Batman's mortality does tend to make those films at least seem like there is an element of suspense and maybe he won't win the day. Comic heroes just aren't particularly deep characters. I still end up seeing most of the films anyway eventually.

Obviously all that is needed to shake things up in the next movie is some RED KRYPTONITE, because you never know how that stuff will effect Superman.

 

 

And Superman throwing stuff into space to save the planet doesn't come close to the predictable and over-done broody-moody-scowly-growly Batman thing. In the end, Batman's mortality does tend to make those films at least seem like there is an element of suspense and maybe he won't win the day. Comic heroes just aren't particularly deep characters. I still end up seeing most of the films anyway eventually.

 

Naw, the throwing stuff into space is way worse. Also how they just sort of make up powers for superman. Ohhh and there's a lazer coming out of his chest.

But, if a woman dies in batman, she dies, with superman he can turn back time with his flying! That and all problems are solved by him throwing whatever into space.

This.

Naw, the throwing stuff into space is way worse. Also how they just sort of make up powers for superman. Ohhh and there's a lazer coming out of his chest.

Yeah, Superman's powers are too all over the place. F*cking heat-vision and ice-breath... they should do an entire movie on his teenage years where he uses his x-ray vision to stare at tits.

Naw, the throwing stuff into space is way worse. Also how they just sort of make up powers for superman. Ohhh and there's a lazer coming out of his chest.

 

I'm going to try to break it to you gently, but they just sort of make up powers for Batman too because he's just sort of made up.

 

I'm going to try to break it to you gently, but they just sort of make up powers for Batman too because he's just sort of made up.

 

I think there's a huge difference between the two.

I think there's a huge difference between the two.

 

Elaborate?

I'm going to try to break it to you gently, but they just sort of make up powers for Batman too because he's just sort of made up.

Batman buys his powers... he's like Jose Canseco but not a douchebag.