I just caught that bit of text at the end about "the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". I might need to check that out considering how many TV spots it had a few weeks ago (which I completely forgot about until watching this).
I saw that in an episode of the X-files years ago even. And in Metal Gear Solid 4. It's pretty tropey...secretsantaone said:You know that part where he starts shooting with his fingers and a guy with a sniper rifle kills them? I SWEAR I've seen that before, I just can't remember the film.
Anyone give me a hand?
EDIT: Nevermind, it was Crank.
Bob's wants Robin in the movies because Robin is AWESOME. If "it will make more money" is what it takes to get the studio/filmmakers to do it, then so be itCK76 said:I am surprised Bob would want to introduce Robin on the basis "it will make you money" when part of Nolan's Batman films is they have integrity to the character and have not thrown in villains for merchandise, but to fit narratives.
hey, the first and second spiderman movies were good. its just that third one that sucked.wolf_isthebest said:Well 90% of the time i agree with Moviebob... But then there are this times, when he calls the recently deceased Spider-man franchise "good"
Which is why Nolan absolutely refuses to let him in and why he'll be wrapping up his Batman series with the third film as he knows he can't keep his storyline going on forever. Heck, he wasn't even sure he wanted to do a third film until him and his brother finally worked out the problems of the story. Plus I wonder if Warner is looking at how much of a mess Spider-Man turned into after Raimi had studio mandates shoved down his throat and decided that it's probably best to just let Nolan's team do their thing.ZZoMBiE13 said:I never said otherwise. I said remember the last time HOLLYWOOD got ahold of the character?SuperMse said:Hey. when done right, Robin can kick some serious ass.
Yes, he(or she) can be done well as B:TAS and Dark Knight Returns have proven. My point was that telling the suits who may be watching that adding ROBIN merely for the sake of turning more profit is a bad tightrope to walk, if you'll forgive the bad analogy considering the topic we're discussing.
All I'm saying is let it be Nolan and his creative team's decision. Don't tease the studios into doing something just for the sake of this weeks popular trend from KICK-ASS. That's what happened with O'Donnel and awful though they may be, Batman: Forever and Batman & Robin both made money. And that's all the studios care about. Development of characters should come from narrative, not a desire to sell action figures and badly made Halloween costumes for the underage set.
Avatar is better than Star Trek. I know hating on Avatar is popular, but the truth is Avatar is smarter, bigger, and better.mchoueiri said:well the losers looks like a fun time to spend with friends watch a action flick. the cats looks good enough but one thing in this review that troubled me. Avatar is not a better film the Star Trek. so yea just putting that out there avatar is a overhyped mess not saying is was awful but there better films out there but this is my opinion on the matter please do not bite my head off.
avatar was not smarter. just because it played the old "respect nature and dont displace natives" card does not mean its smart. and the impressive graphics do not make it better. they just make it prettier.Decabo said:Avatar is better than Star Trek. I know hating on Avatar is popular, but the truth is Avatar is smarter, bigger, and better.
Robin was added to the series in the 1940s mainly because someone at DC comics thought that having a kid the same age as most of the readers hanging out with Batman would appeal to them. Given that it's been SEVENTY years since then, and that there has been a Robin of one form or another in Batman books almost-constantly since, someone at DC comics seems to have been right about that. Just sayin'Nomanslander said:(On a serious note, I'm sorry Bob, you might like the guy but Robin stands for everything that's wrong with the series. The whole point of his existence was that parents were afraid Batman was too dark for kids so they decided to throw in a teenage clown to PG it up and instead substituted crime and grit with pedophilic and homo erotic innuendos almost ruining Batman FOREVER.)
not not smarter but looking yea but not smarter no were close to smart. now I don't hate on avatar because everyone does I dislike it because I do not think it is a good film but I am stating my own thoughts on the matter. doesn't mean you have to agree with me or disagree.Decabo said:Avatar is better than Star Trek. I know hating on Avatar is popular, but the truth is Avatar is smarter, bigger, and better.mchoueiri said:well the losers looks like a fun time to spend with friends watch a action flick. the cats looks good enough but one thing in this review that troubled me. Avatar is not a better film the Star Trek. so yea just putting that out there avatar is a overhyped mess not saying is was awful but there better films out there but this is my opinion on the matter please do not bite my head off.
Alright. I'm sorry if it seemed like I was offending you; I was actually trying to say that just because it had been done badly in the past does not mean that we should not consider it for future installments. But yes, I agree that this should only be done if that's what Nolan's team wants.ZZoMBiE13 said:I never said otherwise. I said remember the last time HOLLYWOOD got ahold of the character?SuperMse said:Hey. when done right, Robin can kick some serious ass.
Yes, he(or she) can be done well as B:TAS and Dark Knight Returns have proven. My point was that telling the suits who may be watching that adding ROBIN merely for the sake of turning more profit is a bad tightrope to walk, if you'll forgive the bad analogy considering the topic we're discussing.
All I'm saying is let it be Nolan and his creative team's decision. Don't tease the studios into doing something just for the sake of this weeks popular trend from KICK-ASS. That's what happened with O'Donnel and awful though they may be, Batman: Forever and Batman & Robin both made money. And that's all the studios care about. Development of characters should come from narrative, not a desire to sell action figures and badly made Halloween costumes for the underage set.