The off topic thread #2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

jd2010 said:
This minus the Star Wars and stand up for me. I watched sport and power rangers and that's it. Only Disney movies I remember watching as a kid are Aladdin and the lion king. Don't think I watched the rest. I was probably watching the Australian Golf Open on channel 7 as a 7 year old instead of beauty and the beast
Click to expand...
my summers was spent watching cricket and golf or going down the nets with my grandad. Winter was footy and rugby.

I too enjoyed power rangers
 
jd2010 said:
Only movie I've ever seen on the premiere date
Click to expand...

Sozabarus said:
Nice, I wish I still had mine.
Click to expand...
It definitely peaked in the first generation. As soon as they started going to space it turned to s**t. Was starting to get too old for it at that age so wasn't so bad.
 
OK, I've just come back from Beauty and Beast. Pretty good followup I'd say! However, it did feel like a game of two halves. They did fix some notable plot holes from the original (Like the one where the Beast is 11 when he commits his deed in the original. No, seriously), and actually made Maurice more likable with some story behind him. I'll also say Lefou, because he stole the show as well, (Gaston is Gaston, he's always awesome, I like how it somehwat gives us a workable timeframe with his further backstory).

However, the second half. Good visuals (Not going to lie, really like the maid-dove design, that was pretty cool,) but there is some... well, dodgy plot elements going on there.

*A magic book that takes you freakin' anywhere?! No explanation at all, it's just there to fill in the backstory of Belle's mother (Plague is the reason, though I have no idea what sort of plague she got in Paris in the Baroque period?) This becomes important later on to spur Maurice into action.

*How long did it take for you to fall in love? The original seemed to take weeks, maybe months, but here, it's stated to be 5 days... what?! The change in the beast is just so sudden. It was far more gradual in the original. This leads on to:

*The rose whittles away in just 5 days. It goes from half a rose to no rose at all in five days. At least it felt like there was a lot of time, here, it's just like... zoom! What the heck was the rose like before Belle got there? It's like its working on log time or something.

*How long is it from the castle to the town? The answer seems to vary between most of the day and a few minutes. This is especially bad at the end, where Belle is able to see her father getting ready to be loaded into the paddy wagon, yet manages to get there in just a few minutes. I get the connection between the castle and the town, but the time frame is horribly inconsistent.

*Wait, the enchantress is there, and it is her that dictated the fate of it all? The implication seems to be that she's the one that was responsible for releasing the spell, not through the actual magic of the moment. So that exercise seemed pointless in a way.

*She still doesn't know his name!

Still pretty good though. Got an applause at the end of the movie, and it did make the people laugh.

I'm going to give it to 1992, because well... Emma Watson was flat. I just felt like I was watching Hermione, and there were just scenes where things came off as either flat, or just unintentionally awakard (Like when she's heading back, she looks more disgusted at the Beast rather than genuinely sorry. She looked like she was giving the same face to Gaston, that was just awkward.)

She was very autotuned for her singing, like the changes to the songs, but I'll still stick with 1992.
 
Fryer Tuck said:
OK, I've just come back from Beauty and Beast. Pretty good followup I'd say! However, it did feel like a game of two halves. They did fix some notable plot holes from the original (Like the one where the Beast is 11 when he commits his deed in the original. No, seriously), and actually made Maurice more likable with some story behind him. I'll also say Lefou, because he stole the show as well, (Gaston is Gaston, he's always awesome, I like how it somehwat gives us a workable timeframe with his further backstory).

However, the second half. Good visuals (Not going to lie, really like the maid-dove design, that was pretty cool,) but there is some... well, dodgy plot elements going on there.

*A magic book that takes you freakin' anywhere?! No explanation at all, it's just there to fill in the backstory of Belle's mother (Plague is the reason, though I have no idea what sort of plague she got in Paris in the Baroque period?) This becomes important later on to spur Maurice into action.

*How long did it take for you to fall in love? The original seemed to take weeks, maybe months, but here, it's stated to be 5 days... what?! The change in the beast is just so sudden. It was far more gradual in the original. This leads on to:

*The rose whittles away in just 5 days. It goes from half a rose to no rose at all in five days. At least it felt like there was a lot of time, here, it's just like... zoom! What the heck was the rose like before Belle got there? It's like its working on log time or something.

*How long is it from the castle to the town? The answer seems to vary between most of the day and a few minutes. This is especially bad at the end, where Belle is able to see her father getting ready to be loaded into the paddy wagon, yet manages to get there in just a few minutes. I get the connection between the castle and the town, but the time frame is horribly inconsistent.

*Wait, the enchantress is there, and it is her that dictated the fate of it all? The implication seems to be that she's the one that was responsible for releasing the spell, not through the actual magic of the moment. So that exercise seemed pointless in a way.

*She still doesn't know his name!

Still pretty good though. Got an applause at the end of the movie, and it did make the people laugh.

I'm going to give it to 1992, because well... Emma Watson was flat. I just felt like I was watching Hermione, and there were just scenes where things came off as either flat, or just unintentionally awakard (Like when she's heading back, she looks more disgusted at the Beast rather than genuinely sorry. She looked like she was giving the same face to Gaston, that was just awkward.)

She was very autotuned for her singing, like the changes to the songs, but I'll still stick with 1992.
Click to expand...

Ha can't disagree with much of that, and the library scene did make me chuckle as she seemed very Hermione.
 
Bojan KantKick said:
my summers was spent watching cricket and golf or going down the nets with my grandad. Winter was footy and rugby.
Click to expand...
Kindred spirits.

Can't wait for April 3. Masters Channel all week, now to find an excuse to get the week off :p
 
Fryer Tuck said:
OK, I've just come back from Beauty and Beast. Pretty good followup I'd say! However, it did feel like a game of two halves. They did fix some notable plot holes from the original (Like the one where the Beast is 11 when he commits his deed in the original. No, seriously), and actually made Maurice more likable with some story behind him. I'll also say Lefou, because he stole the show as well, (Gaston is Gaston, he's always awesome, I like how it somehwat gives us a workable timeframe with his further backstory).

However, the second half. Good visuals (Not going to lie, really like the maid-dove design, that was pretty cool,) but there is some... well, dodgy plot elements going on there.

*A magic book that takes you freakin' anywhere?! No explanation at all, it's just there to fill in the backstory of Belle's mother (Plague is the reason, though I have no idea what sort of plague she got in Paris in the Baroque period?) This becomes important later on to spur Maurice into action.

*How long did it take for you to fall in love? The original seemed to take weeks, maybe months, but here, it's stated to be 5 days... what?! The change in the beast is just so sudden. It was far more gradual in the original. This leads on to:

*The rose whittles away in just 5 days. It goes from half a rose to no rose at all in five days. At least it felt like there was a lot of time, here, it's just like... zoom! What the heck was the rose like before Belle got there? It's like its working on log time or something.

*How long is it from the castle to the town? The answer seems to vary between most of the day and a few minutes. This is especially bad at the end, where Belle is able to see her father getting ready to be loaded into the paddy wagon, yet manages to get there in just a few minutes. I get the connection between the castle and the town, but the time frame is horribly inconsistent.

*Wait, the enchantress is there, and it is her that dictated the fate of it all? The implication seems to be that she's the one that was responsible for releasing the spell, not through the actual magic of the moment. So that exercise seemed pointless in a way.

*She still doesn't know his name!

Still pretty good though. Got an applause at the end of the movie, and it did make the people laugh.

I'm going to give it to 1992, because well... Emma Watson was flat. I just felt like I was watching Hermione, and there were just scenes where things came off as either flat, or just unintentionally awakard (Like when she's heading back, she looks more disgusted at the Beast rather than genuinely sorry. She looked like she was giving the same face to Gaston, that was just awkward.)

She was very autotuned for her singing, like the changes to the songs, but I'll still stick with 1992.
Click to expand...

Plague did hit Paris 16th and 17th century France so it fits

Thought the magic book was unnecessary
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Cooldude said:
Plague did hit Paris 16th and 17th century France so it fits

Thought the magic book was unnecessary
Click to expand...

Except that the film takes place in the 18th century, which I think only hit South France, and considering its still Baroque, so somewhere between 1730-1750, maybe a little further, which means Gaston was likely involved in potentially the Jacobite Rising.

That was just weird, bought up once, never bought up again. The film just decided to introduce a plothole for whatever reason (Just use the damn thing to get to the town! Never mind the drama!)
 
Latro said:
Is Emma Watson a good actor? I have only watched her in the Harry Potter movies.
Click to expand...

She does alright, though of course the stigma of being Hermione does hinder her a bit. At least she does her work to at least improve herself, and use her fame as just the starting point for more.

She's better than the other blank actresses there, but she does have a fair bit to overcome.
 
Fryer Tuck said:
Except that the film takes place in the 18th century, which I think only hit South France, and considering its still Baroque, so somewhere between 1730-1750, maybe a little further, which means Gaston was likely involved in potentially the Jacobite Rising.

That was just weird, bought up once, never bought up again. The film just decided to introduce a plothole for whatever reason (Just use the damn thing to get to the town! Never mind the drama!)
Click to expand...

Belle's backstory is unnecessary anyway, Beast on the other hand needed it, it was just a strange thing to add.

Evermore is a good number to add in the thing as well, always bugged me how the Beast only got one verse in the original
 
I get what Jod means about the trailer for power rangers looking awful. Looks way too high tech for me. Probably is a great movie but when you're replacing a childhood classic it's hard to accept any changes
 
jod23 said:
And that's fine. I have an excellent eye for movies. Seeing that trailer, you know it's gonna be awful.
Click to expand...
Lol, do you?

So I should trust your excellent eye over people who have seen the whole film?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Jatz
The on topic thread 4.0
193 194 195 196 197
Replies
5K
Views
132K
TheGreatBarryB
TheGreatBarryB
Zidane98
Official 2023/2024 Uber Eats Ligue 1 / French football thread (On Bein Sports)
2 3
Replies
69
Views
4K
Upstart Swan
Upstart Swan
giggler99
  • Locked
A-League A-Leagues Men and Women 2023/24 Off Season Thread
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
190
Views
10K
giggler99
giggler99
Bostonian
The Sportswashing mega thread.
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
224
Views
8K
Zidane98
Zidane98
chef
2023/24 Predictions Thread
2 3
Replies
66
Views
3K
Frank Bunn
F
JeffreyCC
Celtic FC - Follow the Bhoys Thread
Replies
9
Views
640
JeffreyCC
JeffreyCC
giggler99
  • Sticky
A-League 2023/24 A-League Women Thread
2 3
Replies
58
Views
3K
giggler99
giggler99

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top