| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Downtown 
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
 Posted - 07/11/2005 : 06:10:08
|
In this case, it's not a quote for it's own sake. It's a summary of the film, which just happens to also be a quote. The "Soylent Green is people!" review was given the green light for the same reason. I think benj's made the right decision.
|
 |
|
|
Downtown
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 07/11/2005 : 18:58:26
|
I just caught what I think is a mistake in Noncentz's review of Fantastic Four: "Alba wears see-through clothes!" I have to acknowledge I might be wrong about this because I haven't seen the film yet, but I don't think so.
At first, this appears to be a clever way of pointing out a plot hole. Sure she's invisible, but shouldn't people still be able to see her clothes? But The Invisible Woman doesn't literally make herself invisible. She has the ability to bend light around her, making it so that people can't see her. The light would bend around her clothes, too, so they would also vanish. It's the exact same concept as the "cloaking device" in Star Trek. The ships appear to vanish, but the people inside them can still see each other and the inside of the ship because it's just bending light around the whole thing. It's not a plot hole at all. It makes perfect sense.
|
|
|
|
benj clews 
"...."
|
Posted - 07/11/2005 : 20:05:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
I just caught what I think is a mistake in Noncentz's review of Fantastic Four: "Alba wears see-through clothes!" I have to acknowledge I might be wrong about this because I haven't seen the film yet, but I don't think so.
At first, this appears to be a clever way of pointing out a plot hole. Sure she's invisible, but shouldn't people still be able to see her clothes?
I assumed Noncentz was just making a potentially pervy-sounding comment about Alba that's both true, but also not pervy, it turns out.
I always got the impression from the comic that the garment was designed by Reed Richards and was indeed capable of turning invisible (like the young girl's outfit in The Incredibles). Mind, I have to admit I've so far read nothing in the comics that implies one way or the other.
Not that that matters- it's all down to what the film reckons is the case 
|
|
|
|
roger_thornhill 
"'scuse me while I disappear..."
|
Posted - 07/12/2005 : 00:09:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
quote:
Originally posted by george_kaplan
Another niggle from me. Rovark's much-voted-on review of Empire Strikes Back -- "Hand lost. Han found." -- is wrong. Han Solo is not "found" until Episode VI. A good replacement would be "Hand lost. Han lost."
I disagree. I think both versions could work, because Boba Fett found Han Solo. He was probably looking for him long before Vader put a bounty on the Millenium Falcon, because Jabba the Hutt had already put a price on Solo's head.
Ah, ok. Makes sense now. I was confused as to who was doing the finding. :)
|
Edited by - roger_thornhill on 07/12/2005 00:10:17 |
|
|
|
noncentz 
"Myself in four words."
|
Posted - 07/12/2005 : 01:48:23
|
quote:
I assumed Noncentz was just making a potentially pervy-sounding comment about Alba that's both true, but also not pervy, it turns out.
No. I just wanted to imagine her without pants.
|
|
|
|
Animal Mutha 
"Who would've thunk it?"
|
Posted - 07/12/2005 : 02:04:19
|
In Britain what you just said is pure filth
|
|
|
|
noncentz
"Myself in four words."
|
Posted - 07/12/2005 : 02:23:53
|
Pure filth - bit of an oxymoron, but I apologize. (although, why you find filthy my hope for a lack of heavy breaths as the talented Miss Alba performs some of her own stunts, is beyond me)
|
|
|
|
E.L.F 
"Me, nice Elf, aye."
|
Posted - 07/12/2005 : 02:40:01
|
For people that share a common language, sometimes it's amusing at our different names for things.. At risk of pointing out the obvious....
Over here 'pants' are underwear. and over there 'pants' are trousers, yes? The other Pants ( to breathe heavily) is the same, however.
pssst! Good recovery, N |
Edited by - E.L.F on 07/12/2005 02:42:00 |
|
|
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 07/12/2005 : 02:48:27
|
I thought he meant he'd like to rip her gear off. 
|
|
|
|
Animal Mutha
"Who would've thunk it?"
|
Posted - 07/12/2005 : 03:02:40
|
quote:
Pure filth - bit of an oxymoron, but I apologize.
Originally posted by noncentz
No need to apologise, but don't be callin' me no moron!
For some reason what we call trousers, you americans call pants and what we call pants you call shorts. I don't even know what you guys call what we call shorts! It's all very confusing.
I'm reading a book by Bill Bryson called 'Made in America' all about how the american lexicon deviated from the british and where saying originated from stateside, it's all very interesting. For example, I learned that the term 'rain check' comes from baseball. Apparently in the early 1900's when a game was interupted by bad weather, all the spectators were given tickets with which to re-enter once the conditions were better. These stubbs were called 'rain checks'. Cool huh? Bryson also wrote a book called 'A Short History of Nearly Everything' which pretty much spans every major scientific event since the beginning of time. It's pure genius. Here's a link to some of his works
|
Edited by - Animal Mutha on 07/12/2005 03:04:31 |
|
|
|
AC 
"Returning FWFR Old-Timer"
|
Posted - 07/12/2005 : 03:27:02
|
The Yellowstone Park volcano chapter is the first time in YEARS that I have been literally drop the book flabbergasted with something I was reading.
|
|
|
|
thefoxboy
"Four your eyes only."
|
Posted - 07/12/2005 : 04:10:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by AC
The Yellowstone Park volcano chapter is the first time in YEARS that I have been literally drop the book flabbergasted with something I was reading.
Yep, scary stuff.
|
|
|
|
AC
"Returning FWFR Old-Timer"
|
Posted - 07/18/2005 : 21:39:53
|
george's new review for Spidey 3, while very clever, is not quite right - there has been no substantial confirmation that the Sandman will be appearing in SM3 - most people believe it will be Venom, Mysterio or Sandman, but there has been no confirmation: the closest we have heard is the following blurb from the official SM website re Thomas Hayden Church's casting:
"As to which character, nobody knows for certain but we do have clues. Church has recently said that his character was "an amorphous collection of protons, electrons, and neutrons, of different colors"
Once Sandman is confirmed, I will vote on the review, but until then, it's pure speculation. That said, if the review is declined and later we discover that Sandman DOES appear, then I will be the first to defend to the death George's ownership of said review.
http://www.fwfr.com/display.asp?id=12843
|
|
|
|
TitanPa 
"Here four more"
|
Posted - 07/18/2005 : 21:49:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Animal Mutha
quote:
Pure filth - bit of an oxymoron, but I apologize.
Originally posted by noncentz
No need to apologise, but don't be callin' me no moron!
For some reason what we call trousers, you americans call pants and what we call pants you call shorts. I don't even know what you guys call what we call shorts! It's all very confusing.
I'm reading a book by Bill Bryson called 'Made in America' all about how the american lexicon deviated from the british and where saying originated from stateside, it's all very interesting. For example, I learned that the term 'rain check' comes from baseball. Apparently in the early 1900's when a game was interupted by bad weather, all the spectators were given tickets with which to re-enter once the conditions were better. These stubbs were called 'rain checks'. Cool huh? Bryson also wrote a book called 'A Short History of Nearly Everything' which pretty much spans every major scientific event since the beginning of time. It's pure genius. Here's a link to some of his works
Is this your way of asking what we are wearing????
(Im wearing Jams by the way.........no not grape!)
|
|
|
|
Wheelz
"FWFR%u2019ing like it%u2019s 1999"
|
Posted - 07/18/2005 : 22:01:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
I always got the impression from the comic that the garment was designed by Reed Richards and was indeed capable of turning invisible (like the young girl's outfit in The Incredibles). Mind, I have to admit I've so far read nothing in the comics that implies one way or the other.
In the film, the Fan 4's DNA is altered by a mysterious energy cloud in space. At the time, they were wearing these special "smart" space suits that react to their body temperatures, etc... So the explanation goes something like: "Gee, since we were wearing these suits when our DNA was altered, the suits must have been altered along with us!"
I found that to be exceedingly lame, but hell, it's a comic book movie, so you just gotta go with it!
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Reviews that are wrong
