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!

     

Pacific. fuging. Rim.


SZ James (banned)

Recommended Posts

I'm trying to find a Tbox slant for this....

but giant human controlled robots fighting giant monsters.....I'm in!!!!

 

i just get tired of seeing fighter jets doing fly-bys....why would they ever get within a miles of the target i don't know. Strafing the target with guns?....looks cool but it is a pet peeve of mine in films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here, I submit, is the mark of great director:

 

Last night, gf and I are watching TV. Trailer for Pacific Rim comes on. We watch for 30 seconds. Trailer ends, and gf remarks how fugging stupid it looks, and she has no interest in seeing it. Shrugs her shoulders at the pathetic offering of summer movies. In the rant that follows, the names "Battleship," "Transformers" and "G.I. Joe" get bandied about. I tell her generally I would agree. However, I am still giving the movie a chance because the director isn't Michael Bay, it's not a Jerry Bruckheimer productions; it's Guillermo del Toro. Her eyes go wide, she stares blankly back at the TV, obviously playing the trailer over again in her head, except now taking into account the GDT slant. She remarks, "I must admit I'm slightly intrigued now." Within another minute we have already decided that we are locked in to see this movie.

 

And that's when I realized that GDT is an amazing director, if not the best director working today. No other director could do that, I think. No other director could make you look at a movie that looks like total trash, and then totally change your opinion of if because of his name alone. Not Spielberg, not Scorsese, not Allen. No one else could convince me wholesale that a movie that looks like crap is actually worth seeing. No one else would I give the benefit of the doubt. Only Guillermo del Toro.

 

He doesn't make the best movies. He doesn't make the highest grossing movies, but he's got a rare skill; the ability to bring you into his imagination and let you crawl around in there for a while. And I can't wait to see what he throws at us next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here, I submit, is the mark of great director:

 

Last night, gf and I are watching TV. Trailer for Pacific Rim comes on. We watch for 30 seconds. Trailer ends, and gf remarks how fugging stupid it looks, and she has no interest in seeing it. Shrugs her shoulders at the pathetic offering of summer movies. In the rant that follows, the names "Battleship," "Transformers" and "G.I. Joe" get bandied about. I tell her generally I would agree. However, I am still giving the movie a chance because the director isn't Michael Bay, it's not a Jerry Bruckheimer productions; it's Guillermo del Toro. Her eyes go wide, she stares blankly back at the TV, obviously playing the trailer over again in her head, except now taking into account the GDT slant. She remarks, "I must admit I'm slightly intrigued now." Within another minute we have already decided that we are locked in to see this movie.

 

And that's when I realized that GDT is an amazing director, if not the best director working today. No other director could do that, I think. No other director could make you look at a movie that looks like total trash, and then totally change your opinion of if because of his name alone. Not Spielberg, not Scorsese, not Allen. No one else could convince me wholesale that a movie that looks like crap is actually worth seeing. No one else would I give the benefit of the doubt. Only Guillermo del Toro.

 

He doesn't make the best movies. He doesn't make the highest grossing movies, but he's got a rare skill; the ability to bring you into his imagination and let you crawl around in there for a while. And I can't wait to see what he throws at us next.

 

 

that's weird because I felt the exact same way when I first saw the trailer, then my friend told me del Toro was directing and I completely changed my thoughts on the movie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

probably the only movie i'll bother seeing in the theaters this summer

 

another director that could do this flick and i'd go see it in a heartbeat is christopher nolan (but i didn't watch inception cuz its dumb)

 

but yes, this concept by any other directors in hollywood is absolute traaaaaash

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • He is also a player that has that "lock room cancer" tag.  We don't see much of the full picture, but I try to stay far away from that type of player. He is historically not good at losing, and we tend to do that a good bit. Not a good fit in my opinion.  I respect the skill, though.
    • I honestly can't think of a teams first line basically telling the coach to fug off like last night's line of Aho, Jarvis and Svechnikov did to Rod. 
    • Do you even know what the term "below average" means? Because I'm genuinely not sure if you do. There are 32 QB's in the league, which means to be playing "above average" he'd have to be the 15th best QB at the league, and even then, that's in essence the "average NFL QB" still. Even going by these rankings, which have him 20th, that by itself is the definition of "below average", and that's before you consider there are multiple QB's ranked below him in this list that I'd 100% trade him for in a heartbeat. Again, no matter what you think the eye test tells you, he's made 28 starts and has a grand total of FOUR games over 247 yards.  Drake Maye has made 10 starts, all with a significantly worse group of pass catchers than Bryce has had, and he already has 3 games over that number himself. I don't need to see or know anything else beyond that to determine he is a below average QB in this league so far and I don't know how anyone can honestly argue against that.  If he was a Lamar Jackson type putting up 75+ yards rushing on a consistent basis, then you can look at those passing yards differently, but that's not the case here. Could he still improve and get to average or better?  Of course. But you're trying to extrapolate a few throws/drives/moments from a handful of games and trying to say that makes him even an average, if not above average, QB in this league.  Which is just nonsense when the players you're comparing him to have played at that level for full seasons or their entire careers.
×
×
  • Create New...