MNightFans.com

Archived => The Connected => Topic started by: Rohan on June 28, 2010, 12:08:39 PM

Title: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rohan on June 28, 2010, 12:08:39 PM
Cooper's Character. A father on desparate search for his missing child and supernatural happens.

Why Bradley Cooper? I like the dude, but can he pull it off in a M.Night Shyamalan film?

Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: mnightfan4lyfe on June 28, 2010, 12:31:16 PM
The only movie I saw him in was The Hangover, so I have no idea.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on June 28, 2010, 01:58:30 PM
Who's Bradley Cooper? :P
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Specter on June 28, 2010, 04:49:53 PM
He also appeared for a few seasons on J.J. Abrams' Alias.  He was very good on that show.  Kitchen Confidential not so much, but that was more of a problem with the content of the show and not his acting.  He did a good job with what he was given for The A-Team, but that was a two dimensional role to begin with.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Wags on June 28, 2010, 05:17:47 PM
Never saw Alias, but looking at his resume, he doesnt really have much experience in dramatic roles.  He has been in a horror film though, Midnight Meat Train, that I never saw, but found a clip to it: (WARNING: HAS SOME LANGUAGE)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRL6jqaLwkg

I personally like the guy, but I do worry a little bit about how he seems to fall back on his huge smile and big eyes routine. He just always seems like he is similing.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on June 28, 2010, 05:44:23 PM
Oh, he was Faceman in the new movie? Ah ok. He's cool in my book then. XD I've not seen him in anything else though so I can't give a full opinion of how he will do this role, but actors are often surprising people.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on June 28, 2010, 06:45:31 PM

I personally like the guy, but I do worry a little bit about how he seems to fall back on his huge smile and big eyes routine. He just always seems like he is similing.

But you got to admit, that is the BEST SMILE ever. I can't think of another that's quite so shiny. lol
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rohan on June 29, 2010, 05:52:44 PM
I have seen him MIDNIGHT MEAN TRAIN. Not a powerful role to show acting talent. I guess I should say I BELIEVE IN M.NIGHT.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on June 29, 2010, 07:10:29 PM
Yes, even if we're not sure of Mr. Cooper with the brilliant smile, we can always be sure of Mr. Shyamalan with the brilliant brain. :D
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rohan on June 29, 2010, 11:21:15 PM
Yes, even if we're not sure of Mr. Cooper with the brilliant smile, we can always be sure of Mr. Shyamalan with the brilliant brain. :D

I agree  ;D  I am pretty sure Mr. Cooper will do something supernatural.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on June 30, 2010, 10:34:29 AM
If Night wants him, I trust him to be up to the task. :)
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rohan on June 30, 2010, 06:47:59 PM
If Night wants him, I trust him to be up to the task. :)

With whats going on with TLA right now I am not super hyped personally about the choice of Bradley Cooper. I am sorry I rather see Bruce willis as the main character and I hope Bradley cooper is in different minor role in the movie.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: mnightfan4lyfe on June 30, 2010, 10:39:48 PM
I'm almost positive Bradley was @ the premiere. When I was leaving I saw either him or an exact look-alike walk by me...
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Wags on July 01, 2010, 03:37:55 AM
So, not being a Negative Nancy here, but with the immense negativity surrounding TLA, is this going to hurt Night's chances of getting another film greenlit?  I really don't mean to sound negative or mean-spirited, but after seeing TLA tonight, I don't have the best of feelings right now...
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Specter on July 01, 2010, 03:50:25 AM
I know how you feel, and I'm hoping the caliber of his selected cast is enough.  I think that The Night Chronicles is a step in a positive direction, for him.  That is, if it works.  I really hope that Night gets to go into production on another thriller.  This one sounds great.  One thing I wouldn't mind, and this will sound odd, is having Night collaborate on future scripts with someone that is great at polishing dialog.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Wags on July 01, 2010, 03:59:13 AM
I agree about the cast.  I think that the way Night writes his scripts, you need to be a certain type of line reader to make it work.  Bruce Willis, Joaquin Phoneix, Paul Giamatti, Bryce Dallas Howard, they all know how to read Night's scripts.  Mark Wahlberg, Nicola Peltz, Zooey Deschanel...eh, a little iffy.

As for the Night Chronicles, while I still think it's a great idea, I am a little worried about "Devil" being moved to September unannounced.  I mean, that is 3 months away, and we haven't heard a thing.  Reminds me sadly of what happened to Jonah Hex: a terrible movie that they just sort of threw out into the theatres basically unannounced. You'd think we'd at least be getting a trailer of some kind...

And I'm totally on board for a script polisher. Just someone to collaborate with.  But then again, other people's notes is what turned "The Green Effect" into "The Happening".
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on July 01, 2010, 03:33:25 PM
The Happening was a satire. Their line reading was supposed to be corny.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rulm on July 02, 2010, 01:52:35 PM
^ The Happening was bad in every way, even as a satire. Btw, is there an interview where he mentions it's a satire?

Anyway, I like Bradley. I think he's a fairly talented actor. We'll see how it goes. But after the horrendous acting in The Last Airbender, expectations are low.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rohan on July 02, 2010, 06:31:24 PM
^ The Happening was bad in every way, even as a satire. Btw, is there an interview where he mentions it's a satire?

Anyway, I like Bradley. I think he's a fairly talented actor. We'll see how it goes. But after the horrendous acting in The Last Airbender, expectations are low.

Bradley is not even in TLA. In fact, there is news that Bradley Cooper will not be attach to Night's film.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on July 03, 2010, 04:11:48 PM
I read Night's explanation of TH being spoofish the day it premiered on yahoo somewhere. If I find it I'll show you, but it was two years ago so it might take some looking. I do think there was something on this very site where he said "It's just meant to be a B-film" but don't hold me to that.

I just remember walking into that movie with that in mind and going "Well that explains a lot." lol If I hadn't heard it was supposed to be cheesy I'd have been going "Am I supposed to be laughing?" but laughing anyway. Our audience nearly died when they ran past the sign for the model homes that said "You deserve this!"

The first Night film I saw in theatres was Lady and everyone applauded at the end, the first time (I missed the Village by a week). The later showings I saw of it were in a smaller, quieter theatre with the reserved audiences. The Happening had a lot of laughter and "Hmmm, you know, I wonder..." going on at the end, and TLA most people were just cussing out the group that wouldn't shut up the entire film so it was hard to get a reading on them.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rohan on July 04, 2010, 01:50:48 PM
I really don't know how critics and some people calls THE HAPPENING the worst film ever. I thought The Happening was meant to be funny and with wierd dialogues and environment. M.Night Shyamalan basically made audience sit in the dark room to watch his characters kill themselves with a unknown threat. No Godzilla, No Cloverfield, No rats or serial killers, No Michael from Halloween. I think that's pretty daring for a filmmaker to direct such a film and show it to the world that you can be basically bothered by dialogues and tension not blood and gore only. He also added a little bit of blood because he never played with blood before.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on July 04, 2010, 02:22:42 PM
Ugh. Cloverfield. The trailer made my nose bleed and my epileptic friend apparently had a seizure, though I wasn't in the theatre when she saw the trailer. Never mind what the MOVIE did to people.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Unbreakable888 on July 09, 2010, 08:37:13 PM
I really don't know how critics and some people calls THE HAPPENING the worst film ever. I thought The Happening was meant to be funny and with wierd dialogues and environment. M.Night Shyamalan basically made audience sit in the dark room to watch his characters kill themselves with a unknown threat. No Godzilla, No Cloverfield, No rats or serial killers, No Michael from Halloween. I think that's pretty daring for a filmmaker to direct such a film and show it to the world that you can be basically bothered by dialogues and tension not blood and gore only. He also added a little bit of blood because he never played with blood before.

But did the characters in the film had to kill themselves? What, do the plants have mind control or something? I liked M. Night Shyamalan because he made supernational thrillers that seemed believable. I still liked The Happening, I would rate it 3 out of 4 stars, but if the invisible toxin just killed the people instead of making them kill themselves, it would have been 3 1/2 out of 4 stars. And I don't like the name of the movie, either. It would have been better called, "The Invisible Killer" (cheesy, I know, but isn't Unbreakable a cheesy name for a movie too? It could have been good with The Green Effect too) or something like that.

Hey, you know what would have been cool? If the toxin actually made people suffocate to death! Like carbon monoxide poisoning!

I'm sure if those two changes happened in the movie, there would easily be another 20 million people who would have saw it in the theaters.

Now, there is only two M. Night Shyamalan's I haven't seen: Wide Awake and The Last Airbender. I'm waiting for Wide Awake because while I have the DVD of it, I want to watch every M. Night Shyamalan movie in order from Praying with Anger to The Happening. And I haven't seen The Last Airbender yet because I prefer having less crowds in the movie theater when I go see it. And I had 4th of July celebrations so my time was spent last weekend.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rulm on July 09, 2010, 11:04:13 PM
I really, really want an M. Night come-back. And, you know what, if he has to go back to his trademark twist endings, I say go right ahead. It gave him a point to focus on, so he never really 'lost it.'  The biggest problem I had with The Happening is that it wasn't scary at all, and that's the reason I went to watch it. I hope he goes back to respecting the audience, and giving them something they expect, along with that little extra something his first 3 films had.

^ The Happening was bad in every way, even as a satire. Btw, is there an interview where he mentions it's a satire?

Anyway, I like Bradley. I think he's a fairly talented actor. We'll see how it goes. But after the horrendous acting in The Last Airbender, expectations are low.

Bradley is not even in TLA. In fact, there is news that Bradley Cooper will not be attach to Night's film.

I'm aware of that -- I was just talking about M. Night directing his actors. You don't need GREAT actors, just believable ones. The kids from his previous movies have done way better.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Unbreakable888 on July 10, 2010, 11:32:50 AM
I hope he goes back to respecting the audience, and giving them something they expect, along with that little extra something his first 3 films had.
By his first three films I'm guessing you are talking about The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, and Signs, although those aren't really his first three films. I dislike it when people don't mention his first two real films, Praying With Anger and Wide Awake. You can easily get both on DVD if you know where to look. I guess I'm just a hard-core M. Night Shyamalan fan, although I haven't really read Labor of Love (although I will one day), and I haven't seen Stuart Little (which isn't a real M. Night Shyamalan film, but I'll see that one day too). I only own the Unbreakable soundtrack, but that's because that's my favorite of James Howard Newton's soundtracks. Although I do like his others, and I will get them eventually. I haven't seen most of The Buried Secret of M. Night Shyamalan, but I own it, and I haven't read The Man Who Heard Voices, although I will buy it and read it one day...

And I thought I was a hard-core M. Night Shyamalan fan... Well, I do own and have seen Praying With Anger.

People who only like The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, and Signs are only casual fans of M. Night Shyamalan. I wouldn't rate any Night movie less than 3 stars out of 4.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Unbreakable888 on July 10, 2010, 11:43:39 AM
I read Night's explanation of TH being spoofish the day it premiered on yahoo somewhere. If I find it I'll show you, but it was two years ago so it might take some looking. I do think there was something on this very site where he said "It's just meant to be a B-film" but don't hold me to that.

I just remember walking into that movie with that in mind and going "Well that explains a lot." lol If I hadn't heard it was supposed to be cheesy I'd have been going "Am I supposed to be laughing?" but laughing anyway. Our audience nearly died when they ran past the sign for the model homes that said "You deserve this!"

The first Night film I saw in theatres was Lady and everyone applauded at the end, the first time (I missed the Village by a week). The later showings I saw of it were in a smaller, quieter theatre with the reserved audiences. The Happening had a lot of laughter and "Hmmm, you know, I wonder..." going on at the end, and TLA most people were just cussing out the group that wouldn't shut up the entire film so it was hard to get a reading on them.
I heard the exact same thing; The Happening was meant to be taken as a b-film. (http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/06/17/mnight.shyamalan/index.html)

The first Night film I saw in the theaters was Unbreakable when I was just 11 years old. My mom disliked it so much that she made us leave in the middle of it. But I think she felt bad though, because right when the movie came on DVD she immediately bought it for me.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rulm on July 10, 2010, 06:43:48 PM
I read Night's explanation of TH being spoofish the day it premiered on yahoo somewhere. If I find it I'll show you, but it was two years ago so it might take some looking. I do think there was something on this very site where he said "It's just meant to be a B-film" but don't hold me to that.

I just remember walking into that movie with that in mind and going "Well that explains a lot." lol If I hadn't heard it was supposed to be cheesy I'd have been going "Am I supposed to be laughing?" but laughing anyway. Our audience nearly died when they ran past the sign for the model homes that said "You deserve this!"

The first Night film I saw in theatres was Lady and everyone applauded at the end, the first time (I missed the Village by a week). The later showings I saw of it were in a smaller, quieter theatre with the reserved audiences. The Happening had a lot of laughter and "Hmmm, you know, I wonder..." going on at the end, and TLA most people were just cussing out the group that wouldn't shut up the entire film so it was hard to get a reading on them.
I heard the exact same thing; The Happening was meant to be taken as a b-film. (http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/06/17/mnight.shyamalan/index.html)

The first Night film I saw in the theaters was Unbreakable when I was just 11 years old. My mom disliked it so much that she made us leave in the middle of it. But I think she felt bad though, because right when the movie came on DVD she immediately bought it for me.

If this is so, The Happening should have been promoted as a comedy -- but it wasn't. It had a very manipulative  marketing campaign and it didn't deliver on its premise.

Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rulm on July 10, 2010, 06:48:33 PM
I hope he goes back to respecting the audience, and giving them something they expect, along with that little extra something his first 3 films had.
By his first three films I'm guessing you are talking about The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, and Signs, although those aren't really his first three films. I dislike it when people don't mention his first two real films, Praying With Anger and Wide Awake. You can easily get both on DVD if you know where to look. I guess I'm just a hard-core M. Night Shyamalan fan, although I haven't really read Labor of Love (although I will one day), and I haven't seen Stuart Little (which isn't a real M. Night Shyamalan film, but I'll see that one day too). I only own the Unbreakable soundtrack, but that's because that's my favorite of James Howard Newton's soundtracks. Although I do like his others, and I will get them eventually. I haven't seen most of The Buried Secret of M. Night Shyamalan, but I own it, and I haven't read The Man Who Heard Voices, although I will buy it and read it one day...

And I thought I was a hard-core M. Night Shyamalan fan... Well, I do own and have seen Praying With Anger.

People who only like The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, and Signs are only casual fans of M. Night Shyamalan. I wouldn't rate any Night movie less than 3 stars out of 4.

Yes, I'm aware of all this and by 'first three films', I was talking about his first three thrillers. I wasn't crazy about Praying With Anger and Wide Awake. I found them very forgettable. Why would you assume that people who only like his first three thrillers are casual fans?? You do realize that those movies are the reason he had such a loyal following, right? In other words, those first three movies brought in the hardcore fans. Those movies also didn't have a manipulative marketing campaign. They respected the audience and trusted them to make the decision to show up base on trust. Just look at the Signs special features -- there he talked about this very thing; the trust of the audience. Don't know what happened since, unfortunately.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on July 11, 2010, 04:49:35 PM
They did the same thing when Markeing Lady in the Water.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Rulm on July 11, 2010, 06:05:29 PM
They did the same thing when Markeing Lady in the Water.

Yup. Wasn't scary at all like the trailers were insinuating. The Village also had a similar marketing campaign, but that movie did have its moments of chills.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Wags on July 11, 2010, 11:33:28 PM
[\quote]

If this is so, The Happening should have been promoted as a comedy -- but it wasn't. It had a very manipulative  marketing campaign and it didn't deliver on its premise.


[/quote]

I don't think Night meant "B-Movie" in a comedic-way, but more like a B-movie in the sense of somewhat over-the-top violence and a lighter approach thematic-wise, with any sort of symobolism/meaning being blatantly explained, like how at the end of old 50's monster movies the hero would stand there and say things like "When will mankind learn that [insert message]..."

In The Happening, I felt Night tried to do the same thing, with things like the billboard saying "You DESERVE This!" or the tv news guy talking about how the planet is warning us about our destructive ways.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Unbreakable888 on July 14, 2010, 11:37:47 AM
Yes, I'm aware of all this and by 'first three films', I was talking about his first three thrillers. I wasn't crazy about Praying With Anger and Wide Awake. I found them very forgettable. Why would you assume that people who only like his first three thrillers are casual fans?? You do realize that those movies are the reason he had such a loyal following, right? In other words, those first three movies brought in the hardcore fans. Those movies also didn't have a manipulative marketing campaign. They respected the audience and trusted them to make the decision to show up base on trust. Just look at the Signs special features -- there he talked about this very thing; the trust of the audience. Don't know what happened since, unfortunately.

People who only like M. Night Shyamalan's popular movies can only be considered casual fans. He might have gotten a "loyal following" because of these movies, but I think that's what makes you a casual fan in the first place; that you are part of a "loyal following". But if you've seen more than just what the critics want you to see from him, then you are more than just a part of a, "loyal following", you're part of real inner circle of M. Night Shyamalan fans. I'm not saying you have to see every M. Night movie to be more than just this, "loyal following", but I think you have to at least enjoy the movies you've seen from him and have to see more than just The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, and Signs to get a scope of who he really is and what his movies are about.

Those movies didn't have a "manipulative marketing campaign"? Didn't M. Night and fans of Unbreakable complain that the teaser trailer to Unbreakable was trying to market it as something close to, "The Sixth Sense 2", and that the trailer had no tie-ins with super-heroes, which is a major, a massive part of the movie?

I think they did a good job marketing The Happening. I think the whole, "It's his first R rated film!" smelt of bull#@!*, because you could have edited five minutes out and it would have easily been PG-13 (actually I think it should have been a PG-13 regardless). But besides that, I thought it was good for his attempt at a horror film. I don't think it was supposed to be a comedy and they didn't market it like that. The reason why M. Night said it was a B-film was because it was cheaper than his other movies, it was a 57 million dollar production and his other movies were much more expensive.
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on July 15, 2010, 03:11:56 PM
Yeah, I was "wary" of the whole R rated thing. It should have been a comedy though. The audience was roaring with laughter, and not the "this is crap and I'm making fun of it" kind, but the "OMG You're not serious!" kind.

I thought the gag reel on the DVD was kind of bland though. Nothing like the one on Lady...were there gag reels on the other DVDs? Some reason I don't remember...
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Unbreakable888 on August 01, 2010, 01:58:47 AM
Yeah, I was "wary" of the whole R rated thing. It should have been a comedy though. The audience was roaring with laughter, and not the "this is crap and I'm making fun of it" kind, but the "OMG You're not serious!" kind.

I thought the gag reel on the DVD was kind of bland though. Nothing like the one on Lady...were there gag reels on the other DVDs? Some reason I don't remember...

EDIT: #@!*! The strike thing doesn't work. Well, pretend there is a strike there.

It should have been a comedy? No, no, no! The only attempt M. Night Shyamalan had to comedy was Wide Awake and I think that was he weakest film. I just saw it on DVD, and ... well, it wasn't weak because of the comedy, although it should have been a more serious film for such a subject matter (a boy trying to find God), I thought it was weak because I already had my "God" moment when I started believing in omnitheism in around middle school. [strike] My concept is simple: mass is god, because mass can do anything. Different masses are different gods, because I am a pluralist. Energy, or mass in motion, is the means to nirvana. The reason why we exist is to someday reach that nirvana after many reincarnations (I believe people reincarnate into the same thing, only possibly more evolved over their environment over time). The only thing I can't prove of my theory is the reincarnation part. But think about the god part. Tell me something mass cannot do given consciousness, time, and energy. There is nothing mass can't do with those three things. It's impossible to think up of the impossible as long as you have those three components. I've spent many nights thinking about this, and the only thing I can think up of that you cannot do is always using the word can't in the sentence. Which makes your argument completely mute. "You can't fly without motorized transportation." Then you make a part of history null by completely removing a part of it. Therefore, reality starts to collapse within itself.

It really is basic.

As for the reincarnation theory? Well, other than first-hand testaments to reincarnation to whom who never believed in it before unlocking the secret of it, how do you explain instinct? It's simple: instinct is develop, as a sub-conscious identity of the soul, that happens over time as you begin to live many lives. You can't remember English from life to life, but how about sex? I've heard of stories of babies still inside the woman actually pleasuring themselves. How is this possible? Instinct. And how does instinct happen? Reincarnation. And I think some people have stronger reincarnation genes than others; I had no instinct to masturbate. I didn't remember my wet dreams when I was twelve and I didn't know you had jerk your penis inside and outside of the vagina to actually have orgasm. When I was young I thought you stuck it in there and like magic, it comes out. I was never taught by anyone how to masturbate. In fact, I had erections watching erotic anime and I thought I was coming when I was in fact peeing. That's how bad it got. One day, when I was thirteen, I realized that putting your hand on the penis stimulates it, so I stimulate it until I reached orgasm. But, in my surprise, my semen was not white. When it came out, it was yellow. It was dying. I did a little research on this. I used an old cup and put my semen in it. It turns from white, to yellow, to brown, and then eventually to black. See, the only reason why I could stimulate my penis just from touching it was because I hadn't had a sex dream in awhile. And I never understood why people thought that masturbating turns you into a sex addict. It doesn't. It does completely the opposite, at least for me. Before I masturbated, I used to picture girls naked at school and completely stare at their developing breasts. I was, indeed, a pervert. And I couldn't help myself because all I kept thinking about was sex when I was in seventh grade. Now, after learning how to masturbate, I still think about sex, but whenever I look at a woman and I'm not trying to get aroused, I can fully look at her face and never at her breasts, even if they are particularly uncovered in some way.

Wow, I have completely gotten off topic.

Anyways, that's not the real reason why I believe in reincarnation. My real reason is because it is the most noble thing to believe in. To me, Heaven is like, "well, I want to die." With reincarnation, dying is a bad thing because you'll most likely end up in a third-world country at their birth rates. Plus, you forget everything, or depending on your soul imprints and DNA almost everything you learned before hand. Not trying to be racist here, would you rather have all the people die in Africa and have them reincarnated in America, or visa versa? I think you know the answer. People in America have more fulfilling lives. We live longer. If everybody just suddenly died in Africa, would we honestly care? I don't think so. Most of us blink our eyes on a third-world genocide. But, to me, that's what is so Ducked up about us. The rich. Even the poor here can eat. It's been proven by the television show 30 Days that you can still survive on near-minimum wage incomes. Not that any of us should live like that, I hope that eventually their will be a government department dependent on getting rid of unskill workers. Not that I'm a socialist, because actually I consider myself a neo-objectivist which is, in Randism terms, "capitalist", but I wouldn't mind paying a portion of my money for a free college education for everybody. I think it should at least be required in the future. I hope robots can just replace jobs with no future, but then again I do believe robots have souls, although we are their masters so I don't think there would be too many, "save the robots" protesters. Anyways, my point is: people would care a LOT more about the third world if they were forced to deal with the fact that there is reincarnation, and you keep coming back as the same being. It's something people should care about, but they don't. The latest Ponsi-scheme guy was on the major news networks and they were laughing about all the billions of dollars he stole. Like it was some Ducking joke. People who have ruined thousands of lives. And they laugh about it. What the Duck is wrong about our news? I think it's almost as bad as killing people, because you are usually caught in the first or second act, whereas this guy was lying to and ruining hundreds of thousands of lives. Sure, you can recover from it, but that doesn't make it right in the first place. I wouldn't mind if they gave him the death penalty, but they never will. If you aren't directly involved in killing someone, you can't get the death penalty. Which is complete bull#@!* anyways. How do we even know that dying is such a bad thing in the first place? It's possible we go to Heaven or Hell. It's possible we just rot in the ground. But the only real bad thing about it is that you won't be able to see that person again. It's almost, in a way, selfish to say the murder and the death penalty is the worst crime. Because at least with other crimes and punishes we absolutely know what has happened to those people. Yes, I think death is bad. You forget pretty much everything you once learned. And then all those people around you will miss you. But everybody dies. The only point it will be a real crime to kill someone is when you make the human body of itself immortal and that person was going to live until someone killed that person directly and it couldn't be by some mistake. By this argument, you might think I'm pro-choice, but I'm entirely pro-life. At least in the United States. I don't care what you say about the United States, it is one of the best nations in the world. We have rights and dreams most people couldn't dare fathom. To kill an innocent infant because, what, it is inconvenient for you, to me, is completely selfish! If the entire world was like the United States, and you lived in the scummiest of places in that conceived world, then, maybe, I'd be pro-choice. But I'm hoping by the time the politicians get their heads out of their asses and become the right neo-conservatives they ought to be and start making puppet governments to dictatorships and third world countries, that possibly America itself will be a place without ghettos. That maybe we can rise above that bull#@!* and have good role-models rather than the stupid, infamous ones we have in the media. Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, and Lindsey Lohan are not good role models, yet thousands of pre and teenage girls think so highly of them it makes me want to vomit. [/strike]

But anyways, getting back to my point about M. Night Shyamalan. I don't think he does very well in comedy. His good jokes are subtle. And a movie of subtle comedy is not a good one. I think he does best in thrillers, like most of his movies. I, like he, thinks his best movie was Unbreakable. The Happening shouldn't have been a comedy. Then nobody would take his next movies seriously. No, it should have been a neurotoxin that tried to kill people instead of making people kill themselves. That itself is mind control. Which, I think is almost impossible for a plant to do, seeing as they don't have the complexity of the human brain nor can they even fathom it right now that they would need to understand in order to actually cause temporary mind control. But there are known neurotoxins that already do bad things, like paralysis that it wouldn't be unfathomable to think up of a neurotoxin that simply makes people suffocate. It could simply replace the oxygen in the air, and there you go you could be dead in minutes. While plants having the ability to have people kill themselves is a funny idea, and a ridiculous one, this doesn't mean it should be exploited so as they change the entire movie around and make it a comedy. It wouldn't be like Shyamalan to do that. The only way I could see The Green Effect or The Happening being a comedy is if they had a lecture from Al Gore talking about how cutting down trees causes global warming and thus killing the people on the planet. That would be funny, but not Shyamalan. Frankly, even though it is ridiculous, I am happy with the end result he made. Just like with all his movies. They are his movies, and I think he should be able to do what he wants to do with them, even if it is not the most popular decision. I wouldn't want him to change the movie just because I said it would be better this or that way. That would make me respect him less as a writer and director. It's a good thing he stands up to critics and fans alike and does things his way. It shows courage and passion in an otherwise untalented market, I believe.

Now, if only M. Night Shyamalan had gone on and did Mark Wahlberg's other recent movie, Max Payne. What a Ducking disaster that movie was. I could have made a better movie than that. For a movie, it was average. In fact it would be kind of good had it not been based on a video game. But the video game, the video game is so much better in every aspect I just wished they split the game to three parts like the video game and did the exact same scene-by-scene scenario that the video game did. It's almost sad that a video game with such an awesome idea was completely wrecked by the movie like that. And the music. Oh my god the music in the video game is SO much better than the movie. I think they must have hired some #@!*ty temp or something because it was awful! It's horrendously sad when you can't even surpass the video game in the music department.

I wish I had the talent to make six machinima movies on the Max Payne franchise. I would show it how it is. If anyone is interested in helping me make six machinima movies, three machinima's on each game like each part of Max Payne one and two, please contact me. I will do almost ANYTHING to have that on my big screen. I would pay one-hundred dollars for all six films, if anyone has done it.

(And actually, luckily we got something like that on YouTube. But I would have removed the HUD and basically not have Max Payne shot during the entire filming process.)  
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on August 01, 2010, 10:58:48 AM
...Sorry...you totally lost me. What were you talking about?
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: shinchan on August 02, 2010, 12:18:47 AM
what is R rated films?
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on August 02, 2010, 10:25:52 AM
There are ratings for movies that grade them on levels of "maturity," for lack of a better word. A kiddy movie would be G, for example, which stands for General Audiences, so anyone could go see it. There are several ratings, but R, the one in question, stands for Restricted, which means you have to be a certain age to see it in the theatre without a legal adult.

A little bit more about ratings:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_of_America_film_rating_system
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: shinchan on August 03, 2010, 01:15:27 AM
oohhh...i see......
Title: Re: Bradly Cooper's Character.
Post by: Imalshen on August 03, 2010, 01:35:14 AM
Yeah, it's kind of complicated, and doesn't really work, in my opinion. Ratings are, after all, subjective.