Greatoneshere

What a shame, I just saw him in the episode of Curb that aired two weeks ago from the currently airing final season, he seemed good.

That's a good point, it is a much more straightforward narrative, the harder part I suppose will be nailing the right atmosphere, which should be druggie and surreal to a degree. Blade Runner but . . . even more in a way. Grungy.

Hopefully it's a closer adaptation to the books than Foundation has been.

Yeah, this isn't an M. Night film, OP thread title should be updated. But yes, this is directed by his daughter who has been learning the craft through the show he made, Servant. Could be good!

Yeah, I agree, his track record overall is pretty good - the only question will be if he's still got it since it's been 20 years since he directed Open Range in 2003. Here's to hoping this is good.

I imagine how much you'll enjoy this will depend on how much you enjoyed Costner's three previous directorial efforts Dances with Wolves, The Postman and Open Range (all three of which he also starred in, as is the case here). Or how much you enjoyed projects he starred in that he was also heavily involved in shepherding like Wyatt Earp, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, Waterworld or Thirteen Days despite not writing or directing them. I don't watch Yellowstone but I do think it's a super dick move of him to leave the show midway through season 5 when the show was always planned to just be 6 seasons. He could have easily finished the show and then made this but instead chose to screw over the cast, crew and fans of Yellowstone instead.

The weekend recap: -Babylon (2022; dir. Damien Chazelle): 8.5/10 -The Matrix Resurrections (2021; dir. Lana Wachowski): 7/10 -Mayhem! (aka Farang; 2023; dir. Xavier Gens): 6/10 -The Gentlemen (2019; dir. Guy Ritchie): 7.5/10 -The Wandering Earth (2019; dir. Frant Gwo): 6.5/10

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. StarCraft II doesn't really have "expansions", it is just three equally lengthy full games: Wings of Liberty, Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void. Whatever collection has all three is probably the best/cheapest way to get them then. There is Nova Covert Ops (a mission pack), but I believe that would come with any collection.

Worrying about this movie was like worrying about Joker when it was about to release in theaters. It's a whole bag of nothing. If the movie is good, it's good, if it's not, because of this worry it'll be eviscerated more than normal. Alex Garland did stumble a bit with his last film, Men, but I do find it hard to believe the guy who wrote 28 Days Later, Sunshine, Never Let Me Go and Dredd as well as writing and directing Ex Machina, Annihilation and Devs is gonna do some empty, superficial fantasy escapist BS. A24, the studio, whether you like what they put out or not, don't typically make sensational nonsense like Sound of Freedom, but far more dense and/or thoughtful movies. That doesn't mean this movie won't be peoples' worst fears realized, just that it's unlikely.

I finally sat down and watched this this past weekend - just a heads up the film is called "Mayhem!" internationally now, with "Farang" being considered its original French title only. It was easier to find the movie once I realized that. Anyways, the film was solid! I didn't realize Xavier Gens co-wrote and directed this, he's done 6 feature films in the past, including the original Timothy Olyphant Hitman movie from 2007. This may easily be his best movie looking at his filmography. The film is economical (only one hour and 40 minutes) and beautifully shot, taking place primarily in Thailand. The Thai police inspector from Only God Forgives plays the main character's father-in-law here, which was cool. But it's a bit incorrect to really call this a martial arts film. The first 40 minutes have no action at all for the most part, and the martial arts scenes are pretty short and sparing for the next hour (though well done when they do happen, so worth it). The movie is more like Man on Fire-lite than it is something in the vein of The Raid, Ong Bak/The Protector or John Wick. Still, I think this is worth watching, I'd give it a 6/10 or a 6.5/10, around there. OP thread title should probably be edited to reflect the new title for the film so it's more easily findable in searches online.

Yeah, I agree, it's best to combine the RT and IMDb scores to get a good sense of things. The average rating on RT for films, as you mentioned, it way more important than the percentage score, which they do not provide for TV shows unfortunately. I don't like Metacritic for anything but games (and that's more because of a lack of options) as I find that to be overly harsh about almost everything. I get a sense that the worst kinds of fans go there and/or review bomb the audience score on RT.

That's true, which is something. I will say that RT isn't a great site for TV show aggregation, it's really only good for movies. However, when combined with IMDb, for TV shows you get a better idea since IMDb usually has more votes rating the show than RT. The additional problem with RT and TV shows is RT does not provide any additional breakdown beyond the basic percentages, whereas with films they provide a lot more data. on IMDb, tt's actually sitting pretty comfortably at 7.6/10 after 8,000 votes which is pretty good. For movies on IMDb, anything that is a 6.5 or above is at least decent/solid, but anything at a 7.0 or above is a good to great film almost guaranteed. However, TV show scores (compared to films) skew noticeably higher than movies, probably because of the sunk cost fallacy from what I've gathered over the years. Anything above a 7.5/10 means it's a decent/solid show, anything above an 8.0/10 means it's a good to great show almost guaranteed. So sitting at 7.6/10 means it's at least decent/solid, but maybe not good or great.

This is exactly my point. We have some idea if it will be good or not, and all they've given us is reason not to be optimistic. That's been my entire point from the start. It doesn't matter how long it's been (they weren't responsible for two games out of 8+, that means little) if the only evidence we have is bad. Again, it could end up being surprisingly good, but there's no evidence currently to believe so except the hope that time has magically made things better since Banana Blitz HD and Banana Mania. But go on being hopeful.

No, logic is simply not used by Biggie, but unfortunately it will frequently be foisted on Biggie whether Biggie likes it or not because logic is right and Biggie is wrong. If Biggie used logic, he'd get to be right.

Banana Mania wasn't that good, it was a poor carbon copy of Super Monkey Ball 1+2. The only reason it got good reviews is because the level designs are simply remakes from those games, it's not really a new game. And it is the same studio making these, it's always been Amusement Vision/New Entertainment/CS1 R&D/Ryu Ga Gotoku Studios. As you can see on their page, they are credited with all the games. Not sure where you got it hasn't always been the same studio but that's not what I'm seeing. So yes, the dev has a bad reputation for poor Super Monkey Ball games since Super Monkey Ball 2. They obviously make great Yakuza/Like A Dragon games. You are reaching really hard to find a way to think this will be good when there is no basis to think it will be. It may end up being good, but there's little reason to think it will be good ahead of time. Why you think it will be is a mystery to me as I'm not sure on what basis of evidence your placing your faith on. Ryu Ga Gotoku Studio - Wikipedia EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG

But it's the same company that made Banana Mania three years ago (which you keep ignoring, as well as the HD version of Banana Blitz which came out in 2019), and while staff have changed since the Super Monkey Ball game before Banana Mania from 2012 (Banana Splitz) it's still the same studio having made all the bad Super Monkey Ball games since after Super Monkey Ball 2, and despite 20 years of staff changes at the same company in all that time, the Super Monkey Ball games have remained universally panned. You're playing against the very likely odds, which is a strange take. No one is saying the game can't be good, I'm saying based on past evidence it's unlikely to be good, so why would I get excited and presume the far less likely option that it will be good? Again, I'd rather end up wrong and pleasantly surprised than thinking this time will be different. It could be, but it's unlikely to be. Logic's a bitch.

Umm, yes, you can prejudge a director's upcoming film based on their previous filmography. There are outliers and exceptions but it's pretty consistent: bad directors frequently make bad movies and good directors usually make good movies. Of course there's a chance this is good but I wouldn't be excited for it, best I'd do is wait and see. I'd rather be pleasantly surprised than typically disappointed.

I think there's potential for her to make a really great season, just some nips and tucks in writing, more style and bombast and less meandering and they might have something.

I'm completely down for a divisive ending, I'm worried about them writing a poor one. They did a solid enough job blowing the doors open to some timey-wimey nonsense that could be done really well or really poorly, hence my concern. Multiverse stuff can get dumb really quick, and lose stakes for the characters fast. I'm impressed with the ideas they've introduced metafictionally, but Nomura doesn't have my confidence, but I'm open to being surprised.

Well it sounds more like the story is great until the end, which is divisive, just like the first game. I liked the idea of turning a remake into a metafictional sequel (it's certainly ballsy to trick and piss off your entire fanbase, which I like), but that is a tough story to write well (even The Matrix Resurrections was divisive due to how hard this is to do). That's my only concern and Tetsuya Nomura doesn't have my confidence on this one. Other than that one part though I expect the game is phenomenal.

Sounds like every aspect of the game is excellent, which is what I expected . . . except the story, which I only skimmed to get an idea overall if it was good, and it sounds like it is and it isn't. Fortunately the reviews I scanned didn't spoil a thing but that seemed to be the only real issue people had with the game (that and some forced stealth sections it sounds like). Glad I could be wrong about the story but it doesn't sound like a slam dunk on that front either.

Right, but what you said is you don't get the hate which is a bit more than just saying I like something, you don't. And while art/film is subjective to some degree, we can arrive at intersubjective truths using macro data like RT and IMDb. So it's not just purely subjective. I like a lot of movies the majority doesn't like but I usually get why they don't like something en masse even if I disagree or see some merit(s) to the film even if they don't. Intersubjectivity - Wikipedia EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG Additionally, all opinions are not equal. As the great writer Douglas Adams (The Hitchiker's Guide) once said: “All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.” Saying something is "subjective" is just a cop out from entering an educated discourse which can help arrive at an intersubjective understanding of whatever it is that is being discussed. Currently, Eli Roth is fairly universally panned. If everything was purely subjective with no intersubjectivity, then there'd be no point to message boards or reddit or any discourse on anything that is considered an opinion and not a fact. But because all opinions aren't equal and there is a higher understanding to be had with any subject than simply one's simple visceral/emotional response to it, I'm gonna say no, it's not subjective, not completely.

Yeah . . . I'm not sure what your floor is on films but there's a reason all those films (except Thanksgiving) are rated low by both critics and audiences across both IMDb and RottenTomatoes. There are a lot of reasons Eli Roth gets hate, just check out basically anyone's review of any of those films. I'm not counting Fin as it's a documentary and thus not really about his skills as a writer or director of films in the same way. Even films he hasn't directed but just co-wrote are terrible like Aftershock, The Man with the Iron Fists and the remake of his film Cabin Fever.

Kind of weird to delay it a year and have John Wick series director Chad Stahelski come in and help director Len Wiseman with additional reshoots and additional action scenes (two directors at the same time?). Either something was really wrong with Wiseman's cut or I don't know. I mean, are we sure the director of Underworld 1+2, Live Free or Die Hard (which I like) and the Total Recall remake can deliver a great John Wick spin-off film? I hope so. I like Wiseman but he hasn't directed a feature film since 2012. He's always been solid with action though.