Munkie

Soil?! Nutrients?! We were raised on dirt! The stuff snobs like you tossed away like trash once you'd absorbed all that you could!

I agree that's probably true, but I just can't imagine how they'd justify 2 wounds T4 for, and crazy fast movement for 10 points. I can't imagine jetbikes losing a wound or a toughness, or getting much slower. Their stats already aren't amazing so I don't think they could get worse. I'm hoping Hellions become more useful, they've never been good. They were usable in 5th when the Baron made them troops, but otherwise they're just faster wyches for a whole lot more and they aren't troops.

Pretty sure there's a mistake in the Drukhari book. Our reaver jetbikes went for 20 to 10 points, but Hellions went from 15 (way overpriced) to 17 (worst unit in the codex, don't even look at them). The prevailing theory is hellions were supposed to go to 10, jetbikes to 17 which makes way more sense. Mv 18", auto 8" advance, 2 wounds T4, 4+ armor, 2 Str 4, AP -1, D1 attacks for 10 points? Or Mv 14", 1 wound, T3, 5+ save, 2 str 4, AP 0, D2 for 17? There isn't a debate to be had. Reaver jetbikes are absolutely insane for 10 points! 360 points for 3 squads of 12, all that have nearly guaranteed 1st turn charges? Gonna wait to see the corrected version before I get too excited.

Apparently there's a movie called Love and Monsters and it's coming out on blu-ray (no, I'm not in the wrong thread). The hook line of the commercial is "When the monster uprising happened, I lost everyone." A decent hook, though I'd cut monster. It's vagueness makes it hookier. But what an absurd thing for an in-universe person to say! Who's he talking to, and what are the chances they aren't thinking "yeah, we all did, asshole"? Read the room, bro. Everyone's everyone is dead!

Famous line "Ttommm Crooozz"

Now we were too poor, and we had to eat all our Xs, we had nothing but Os! And that's how we invented the game of checkers.

Well, if you read the title of the book in the bottom right, it starts to make a little more sense. Or maybe less...because the POV player certainly doesn't need a book to beat this rube.

I own it. ...still in its shrink wrap.

My mom was a big Wonder Woman fan too. She wanted to be Linda Carter when she grew up. She love, love, LOVED the first movie and watches it all the time. She's a big Chris Pine fan too. By the end of the first act, she said "well at least we're watching this for free." By the end of the second "free might be too much." By the end of the movie "this shouldn't have been made." Part of my frustration with the movie is how much it let her down.

The 80s aesthetic was about the only part the movie got right. It was an 80s nostalgia movie. Oh and also it's a Wonder Woman movie too. That felt like the approach by the filmmakers. Start with the look, then, if there's time, construct a story to fit within that look. Thematically, it tries to draw elements of 80s movies like a wish-granting artifact ala "Big." Except it does a really bad job about setting up the rules. It grants everybody 1 wish, unless your name is Kristen Wiig, then you get 2 wishes for some reason. They had a whole scene about Pascal's son not wasting his one wish, but considering there are unspecified exceptions to the 1 wish policy, the stakes of "wasting a wish" are nonexistent. You can't waste a wish, because the script will provide more as needed. Physical contact was required for the first 2 acts, then suddenly no longer required for act 3. What does Pascal get by granting wishes aside from mild wind generation and blood leaking from his head? It's implied that he's becoming more powerful but he never uses that power. Again, the rules are just super loose and ambiguous. It also borrows the body-swap concept from the 80s too. Chris Pine's ghost possesses another man, and there absolutely no consequences for that. One hot guy is possessed by a different hot guy. Then unpossesses him and the hot guy goes right back to his previous life which has not been impacted in any way. Again, no stakes whatsoever. Not only that, but his character serves very little narrative purpose. In the first movie, WW is the fish out of water. Incredibly powerful but unfamiliar with the world Pine is an expert in. In this one, Pine is a fish out of water AND powerless. He has nothing to add to the story as a character. No way to really help, and no clue how to try. Their dynamic made them both relatable in the first one because one was flawed and the other was human. In this one, Wonderwoman no longer has any flaws, and Pine is a pretty useless ghost. However! My family realized the perfect fix for Chris Pine's pointless inclusion. They should have had Adam Davine as the possessed body rather than some other generic hot guy. The 80s dressing montage and childlike amazement at 80s technology would've been so much better if they could've juxtaposed Pine's smoldering good looks with a doughy, beady-eyed imp. There was nothing remotely interesting about the "she sees him as a hot guy, but the rest of the world sees him as a different hot guy" dynamic. As for the Pascal being the living embodiment of the ME Generation, I just didn't feel that at all. Sure, he's doing his best Wolf of Wallstreet impression, but he's very clearly an allegory for Trump and it isn't subtle about that. "Reagan" was in the movie, but there was no attempt whatsoever to satirize him or even portray him as Reagan. He's just a generic "Mr President" the movie needed to again advance the story line. It wasn't really a satire of Me Generation greedy execs, so much as a thinly veiled comparison between Trump and those greedy execs (which is easy, because he got famous by being one). It pulled every punch when it came to actually criticizing the 80s, redirecting those observations to modern times with a sloppy wink and a sharp jab to the ribs. It's supposed to be escapist, but tries too hard to have current political commentary for it to pull off either. It's not escapist, nor is it satire. It's a confusing mix of both. Escaping to the 80s to do a satire of 2020. Why? The soundtrack might've been over the top if they did a Guardians of the Galaxy style nostalgia romp. But I really liked the score in the first one. Those discordant electric cellos. They dialed that back too. Remember when we found out Diana can turn things invisible if she wants but she only used that power on a jet that she doesn't need because she can fly AND lasso both clouds and lightning bolts?! Why include the jet? Just so they could do the magic carpet ride from Aladin? So many ideas picked up and dropped with no payoff or clear purpose.

Merry Holidays!

I'm sorry. You deserve better.

Wonderwoman 1984: This is a very, very bad movie. There is very little action and none of it is good. The emotional punch of the movie is almost entirely reliant on child actors who are not good. The plot is incoherent. Pedro Pascal (who is usually great) plays an absurd, entirely over the top character. Chris Pine is back for no reason whatsoever. Bad script, poor acting, and boring as all get out. Kristen Wigg turns into Rum Tum Tugger for some reason and that's supposed to be scary. I'd tell you not to bother, be we both know you will anyway. It's bad.

The pacing is bad, the characters are boring, and the action scenes frustrate me beyond compare. I love well imagined and executed action sequences because the timing, coordination, and real legitimate danger of it all, I find fascinating. But the first 3 in that movie feature all of the things that drive me nuts. They definitely had cool concepts (like the rope fight in the museum) but the execution is cheap and lazy. No shot that last longer than 1 second, shaking the camera to create artificial intensity, and shots that are way too close to the action to capture it. It's a really handy way of avoiding hiring a good choreography team and the expense of coordinating a setpiece action sequence. It also makes editing much easier. Rather than obsessing over making every frame perfect, you go in knowing none of them are. But to the action buff, it looks cheap and lazy. The Bourne movies are a good example. The fight sequences in Bourne Identity are great--well choreographed with the actors' faces actually seen occasionally, etc. But the subsequent two cash grab sequels, the fights are quick-cut, choppy nonsense. They also do the same in every batman movie ever made (even the good ones) because having a long, wide shot of batman in a 70lb rubber suit trying to administer roundhouse kicks will just look clumsy and awkward. No way around it. The best rubber suit choreography I've seen, is the original Ninja Turtles movie. Raphael's fight sequences are legitimately impressive if you go back and watch.

I actually feel the same way about the Daniel Craig movies. Casino Royale was great, but Quantum of Solace was an unintelligible mess (written during one of the large writers' strikes). Skyfall was mostly good for the first 2/3rds, but the 3rd act features some of the worst script writing around. Using the 60s Aston Martin to sneak M off the grid and hide her at his parents' manor was a great idea! Then he called the bad guy, told him where he hid M, bad guy shows up, kills M, Bond kills him, gets promoted for failing his mission to protect M. Credits. He should have been thrown out of MI-6 in shame! Spectre was pretty good though.

GEICO Insurance, I declare thee enemy! Their commercials are equal parts relentless and unfunny. Typically, they have 3 concurrent commercial series, which is just absurd. There's always the gecko ones, and then there's usually 2 different campaigns whose approach is best described as "betcha didn't see that one coming." Like they write jokes the same way people play Cards Against Humanity--thinking that randomness for the sake of randomness is an interesting form of comedy. Well now their relentlessness and unfunniness has reached a fever pitch. Not only have they invaded the podcast realm, but their "your house is talking to you" themed commercials are just incoherent. Granted, being a joke writer for commercials barely qualifies one as a professional, but the fact that someone was paid money after writing the line (again from the house to the home owner): "...and one more thing: when you read your murder mysteries, would you mind reading them outloud? But...not the murder parts, those scare me." How does the house know the murder parts scare it if it has not yet heard the books?!? I know they want us to be asking "why is the house asking to hear a murder mystery if it's scared of murders?" To which, their crack writers' room would inevitably reply "I know, right?!" With expectant looks on their faces. But we can't get to the knockoff Family Guy jokes until you start adhering to basic joke structure. Here's how you properly execute that joke (if you must). It's classic setup/punchline. Setup: House asks "hey, would you mind reading your murder mysteries outloud?" [Break with commercial info] Punchline (implying time has passed): "On second thought, could you keep the murder parts to yourself? They scare me." Still not a great joke, but it at least makes sense that way. Why can't you be more like Progressive?! ... Note to self: cancel GEICO insurance soon.

Have they not read the book it's based on?? It is generally described as "good"!

The other problem with successive sequels is the diminishing returns of revisiting the same essential time paradox: killing the Connor lineage to win the future war or destroy Skynet to prevent the future war. With each sequel you further illustrate the point that it does not matter what the characters do. Either they are stuck in a paradoxical loop forever or there multiple realities being visited. In either case, you win some you lose some, but the circle keeps going around. I haven't gotten around to Dark Fate yet but I probably will. The only one I liked since Judgement Day was Salvation. But mostly because Christian Bale does a good job (and it spawned his famous rant!), and it's more an exploration of the post-apoc world than a paradoxical loop.

Well, I almost finished Raised by Wolves on HBO. I mostly liked it up until about 2/3rds of the way through the final episode. The androids in Ridley Scott's greater Alieniverse have always grossed me out. That thick, milky blood. He reeaaaaaalllly leaned into it this time. I won't paint the picture or spoil it, but there were squishy noises, a LOT of gurgling, and no small amount of gagging and retching. I tried looking away, it was not enough. I have never watched something so gross it made me puke, but at 33 years, that streak has come to an end. A few things have made me nauseous, but nothing has pushed me over the edge before. I made it into the bathroom, but not to the sink... Ridley Scott, you have ruined my night, my bathroom, my slippers, this show, and quite possibly tomato bisque soup too. You absolute bastard.

I wonder how much money sign makers have made making "must wear mask" signs for businesses/gov'ts year. That's got to be eery for sign makers--how much of their business has become about that.

Back when YouTube was brand new and nobody knew what to do but make random videos, I was shown this (warning, NSFW): Still one of my favorites. There goes an American legend.

I would say the message was supposed to be one of fidelity. "If you give into lustful temptation, you will bring ruin to the home and family you built". Not saying the message was delivered effectively, but I think that was the point he was trying to make. After they do the dirty deed, the girls go around and defile the symbols that would suggest this is a loving and stable household. After all, how meaningful are all the symbols of love if that love can be be so easily betrayed just because a brace of rain-soaked hotties show up at your door? His faithfulness lasted all of one laundry cycle. Since the girls are the villains, it's easy to see women as villainized in its messaging, but I think they were more representative of the chaos that ensues when a married man lusts after women. They're the villains for him, but he's the villain of his family.

Or Ana De Armas' boobs! Goes sharply downhill after the threesome scene and all the related boobs and butts disappear.

What time does Sean Connery go to Wimbledon? ... Tenish.

I will never forgive League of Extraordinary Gentlemen for being the movie that convinced him to stop acting. What a terrible note to end your career on...