Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Power Rangers Fan Film. Holy Sh!t


chknwing

Recommended Posts

Don't think it's a test movie.....just a short film this guy wanted to make apparently. 

 

And I believe that is the edited /toned down version....The NSFW version is here for those that care to see it:

 

*Edit* 

 

Link won't work for some reason but you can get to it on Deadspin:

 

http://io9.com/holy-hell-this-power-rangers-reboot-is-dark-as-f-ck-1687689958/+marchman

 

.not a pilot, not a series, not for profit, strictly for exhibition. This is a bootleg experiment not affiliated or endorsed by Saban Entertainment or Lionsgate nor is it selling any product. I claim no rights to any of the characters (don't send me any money, not kickstarted, this film is free). This is the NSFW version. An alternate safe version is on youtube.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok...

 

 

I have generally said "fug the Power Rangers".  They debuted at a time when I was just old enough that they were too juvenile for me.  Its always been right there with Barney and Captain Planet. Don't judge me I loved Sigmund and the Sea Monsters.

 

 

 

But fug me...

 

 

Im sooooo down to see this when it gets to a feature film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was made to parody how everyone wants a dark gritty take on everything; however, i would love to see the power rangers be more dark than what the tv show gives up. If the original show in japan (super sentai) can kill of a power ranger and make the villians ruthless why cant an american version.

 

Kahn explains in an interview with HitFix, Power/Rangers is meant as a satire, taking Hollywood's "Dark and gritty" reboot mania as far as it could go. Says Kahn, "the dark and gritty reboot thing is such a cliché that the intention was not only to make it dark and gritty but make it even darker and grittier than you could possibly imagine, hence the brains, the blood and the violence and the sex."

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/02/24/power-rangers-fan-film-starring-james-van-der-beek-and-katee-sackhoff-gets-dark-and-gritty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...