Howard's a crazy pedo, but his character doesn't act like it. It's the end of the world but only after she escapes.
Nothing points to him being a pedophile specifically, it seems more likely that he snapped when his daughter moved away with her mother and he forced a girl to play the role of a daughter with him.
It is the end of the world from the start of the film when she crashes. While they are underground the events of the first film are happening and the major cities fall. What we see when she escapes is the invasion spreading to more rural areas. Howard basically explains this is a theory of his earlier in the film.
Not true, the clues were:
1. he designated the female protagonist as a girl/princess/etc rather than a woman
2. Emmet tells the story of how the girl in the photo wasn't his daughter but a kidnapped girl at his school
3. She finds an earring that the disappeared girl had with blood on it next to that "help" scratched up
So again, we have conflicting evidence... This is what I disliked about the movie.
We at Wizards of the Coast have no idea what we're actually doing. We made some promises, we hired a cookie man with a lisp and developed several philosophies, none of which were good for the player base at large. We thought that after a train wreck of several years, we would announce to you more bad news probably based on poor sales. Of course, this is all your fault for not purchasing our overpriced piles of cartons that are underpowered and irrelevant to any other format than standard. Hopefully, you will forget about it next week after we announce more cards you will buy blindly. But don't worry, none of the cards we will print will be in demand and will continue to be weaker versions of previous iterations to avoid the power creep. Remember, the power creep is bad, but please keep buying bad products!
Our first bad news is that we will no longer hold modern PTs because of how badly we handled the last one. We fired the one responsible and now we had to make cuts so nobody else is dealing with this. Our second bad news is that we will make more cuts to pro players, whom have been a net benefit for our community and general advertisement campaign for the last decade or so.
Yours truly,
AF"
That's pretty much how I read it. Guess I'll start shoveling my money towards another company that knows what they are doing...
The relationship between judges and WotC is that they volunteer. If they do not attend events and such, no punishment is given. They do not sign any form of engagement contract, nor are they eligible to compensation or vacation days and so forth.
The funniest part is that the judges have more control over this since they can simply boycott WotC and tournaments. WotC will take action and fast and may institute this in the future. You just have to cut your losses. To mull over the past when nothing indicates they are employees, is a waste of time and money.
Started getting into it.
First impressions: Starter decks are quite complete. The game is a great mix between everything that makes Magic/YGO great/Highlander games great.
The way to play the game appears to be similar to Commander:
- top down: pick a ruler and make the most of that ruler
- bottom up: pick a theme, find a ruler that helps that theme (Re/Re unfortunately)
- synergy: pick a strategy that mixes well with another/Ruler
- thematic: kinda like tribal (musketeers, fairies, etc).
I hope that they ban Re/Re as he is very degenerate.
Slowly starting to build around Machina Ramp and so far it's pretty cute and works.
Also, big bonus: no trash cards in sets. That is a big big plus! No garbage vanillas or bad cards. At least most of the boosters won't be 9/10 trash and maybe a 0.10$ rare.
I think they did a good job so far with how they implement Legendary super types. I cannot think of any type that hasn't received its dutiful legend. You can complain on legendary werewolves, but remember you got a planeswalker instead. How is this not better than a creature?!
I would love for more legendary zombies. The one corpse to rule them all type.
Even though Alliances doesn't have many valuable cards, I'm always surprised how Thawing Glaciers is one of the set's most valuable. In my world view, a valuable card is very often a powerful or useful card. So what makes Thawing Glaciers good enough to deserve that value?
On the surface, it appears to be an engine which churns out basic lands of your choice. But I see Thawing Glaciers playing out in this way:
Turn 1 - Play Glaciers tapped. No mana open.
Turn 2 - Play a land. Activate Glaciers. Get a land, tapped. No mana open. Bounce Glaciers.
Turn 3 - Play Glaciers tapped. Finally have two mana open.
Turn 4 - Play a land. Activate Glaciers. Get a land, tapped. Still only have two mana open. Bounce Glaciers.
Turn 5 - Play Glaciers tapped. Finally have three mana open.
Trying to use Glaciers to churn out lands seems to set you way behind. Sure, you could use Amulet of Vigor which breaks everything, but Glaciers was still valuable even before the Amulet was printed.
So, what makes Thawing Glaciers worth what it's worth?
How is this better than just straight up ramp or fetching lands? Let's take a deck that wants to do what this card does: scapeshift. Why would scapeshift want this over any of the other ramp cards it already has? That being said, why would this also trump that same ramp in a control build? You seem to sacrifice your first few turns when control matters most and maybe lategame this may be useful but wouldn't you rather have gas than land fetching?
From a practical point of view, I am fairly unsure how this is better than ramp or cantripping.
For your question on valuable, I think the reason it costs as much is purely out of either speculation, flavor or the lines of text on it. I am fairly sure there was a spike at some point in time and it hasn't gone down ever since.
This is the first time I even hear about this card.
13 nails in the barrel
13 logs in the oven
13 stones around the oven
13 blood drips
13 cutleries
13 broken pieces of a plate
13 wooden planks for the ceiling
13 wooden planks for the 2 walls
This story made me ask more questions than anything else.
So how does the Helvault work in imprisoning Avacyn???
Liliana forced Thalia to break it... Sorin did nothing and still welcomes Liliana in his realm???
Nahiri just... goes from ":D" to ">:(" because he didn't return her call???
Sorin, when weakened, decides to pick a fight with her???
Olivia treats Sorin like crap and other vampires do too... yet Sorin is more powerful than any of them... and some neonates try to harm him? Did his reputation just vanish?
Sorin doesn't know what is going on with Avacyn??? He can track anyone that comes to his plane but doesn't know where his own creation is?
The difference with Marvel and DC is their formulas.
Marvel caught on with DC in terms of origin stories and they started introducing small clips at the end to try to sneak in a test feel for an avengers movie. Guess what, people love it and people wanted that movie. They worked with the creators of Marvel, they made the movies a fun experience and also kept their characters true to their nature. Not only that, they pushed their franchise and made movies that introduced several villains, several stakes and situations. We have been to Asgard, Earth, some dude's head in the Galaxy, etc. DC has been to... krypton and Gotham... over and over again in the same neighborhoods mind you. Additionally, most Marvel films focused on specific themes. They didn't try to cram in 3/4/5 stories in 2 hours.
Before someone makes it sound like I am some Marvel fan, they did make bad movies, that is a given. However, it seems that unlike DC, they learned from their mistakes and improved.
Finally, they also seem to give the keys to people who know what they are doing. Look at the latest Deadpool for instance.
DC has only been doing origin stories and for some god awful reason, keep doing it and handing the keys to random folks. The Dark Knight trilogy was great because we had the origin story that brought you more than just parents-died-i-saw-a-bat-batman! trash we keep being hit with every goddamn batman movie. Superman from the 80s/90s was very campy and a great success regardless of how bad superman 3 was. But instead of expanding those stories on heroes we have known for decades, we get more and more origin stories. Then those stories bomb and we wait a few years and get yet another origin story. This is DC's problem: they are stalling at the starting point and people will get bored of it. It is boring to see the same thing over and over again.
I didn't mind Batman. I thought Batman, Alfred and Morpheus were the highlights of the movie. I do however hate the new batman origin. I mean his parent essentially killed themselves. Also I had no clue who this "Jack" was in the building.
I thought he said "Dad". I really did not get that part either.
Well, the movie changed Wonder Woman's backstory quite a bit. In most continuities she's fairly young and has only been in "Man's World" for about as long as the other superheroes have been active. But she's still been training all her life in an ancient warrior tradition, and is demonstrably the best at it out of all the Amazons. I can't recall a time she sparred with Batman, but even without her powers I would give her good odds. Also she has a sword forged by the gods themselves that can cut through literally anything. That doesn't hurt. Er, does hurt. You know what I mean.
And I would be inclined to say that the Amazon backstory she had been portrayed as in the animated series Justice League was very good in both character development and backstory and everything else. Heck I loved her in it because they were at least consistent in that portrayal. I especially loved Lex Luthor regardless of his physical portrayal, because they were true to his character.
What I did not like in this movie about it, was simply the fact she had no business in it. If you weren't a DC fan, you wouldn't understand much about her character. There really wasn't much back story or reason for her to show up. What I meant by her being sprinkled was quite literal. Check how many scenes and how many minutes she has and tell me she wasn't an after thought or shoe in at the end.
Now why would you say that Bale was worst than Ben?!?! That I cannot understand. I found Bale's character and portrayal to be quite good. The movies suffered but he wasn't emotionless and did actually act. The "Look at his eyes" argument is a terrible one. If all you needed was eyes, anyone else would have been a better actor based on eyes alone. Here's a challenge for you: watch Dare Devil and his acting and then immediately watch this movie. There is little change in terms of acting or any of the bad points I mentioned.
If you actually look at his film career as an actor, almost all his films average at around 5.5/10 according to IMDB http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000255/#actor
In the last 10 years he finally broke into an average of 6.5 but most of his movies are misses. So again, I don't know where most of this "cutting him some slack" attitude comes from.
Really surprised you didn't like it and didn't understand so much of it. Also don't understand why you think I'm incorrect about anything, I just quickly explained the premise...?
At the risk of going in for what looks like low quality bait I'll try to explain some of this to you;
1, 2, 3, 4. It's left ambiguous as is most of the story. In real life, you wouldn't know, so here, you don't know. Essentially the point of the first half of the movie is exactly that, not knowing: not knowing what's outside, not knowing if Howard is a nut or not, not knowing if he's committed these serious crimes or not, not knowing if Emmet or Howards stories are true, and not knowing really anything about Emmett. There's no telling who's providing genuine facts and who's providing misinformation, so she's trying to piece together the mysteries and just like real life, sometimes you don't get to find all the pieces and have a big "a-ha!" moment; I can see how not getting a big convenient all-loose-ends-tied payoff might frustrate some people though.
5. Most people are under the impression that Howard killed Megan/Brittany and he used the shelter as sort of a "dungeon" or something before the attack. Thus, Megan/Brittany would have been in the shelter before the attack and Howard would have been fine to drag the body to his truck. Other theories suggest she was killed while Emmett and Howard were locked in and they used the acid to get rid of her. Once again, as you said "I am really not sure what went on" - that's the point, they don't spoon fed you and you have to make your own connections. Similar to Cloverfield (2008), they just show you what a human being would see/perceive and it's up to you to figure out what you can.
As for 10CL having "nothing to do with Cloverfield at all" and "Abrams ripping off the brand name" I'm really surprised you didn't just go to Google really quickly:
J.J. Abrams' intention with Cloverfield and 10CL is to make an anthology of sci-fi films that he says will have an over-arching connection (honestly unsure of that myself) but the general gist is to just use the phrase "Cloverfield" in the title of these unrelated independent sci-fi movies that he produces. Kind of like a movie version of Twilight Zone. Thus, there's not going to be a Cloverfield sequel or prequel about the big monster or what happened to New York and there won't be a 10CL 2 about her helping stave off the aliens, it's just scripts that Abrams likes that would otherwise not get made, now getting big actors like Goodman and MEW and budgets over 10M, in exchange for him changing the story slightly to create the "overstory" he claims is going to be in there.
For the J.J. point, I cannot see this as anything else than riding the franchise name. This has nothing to do with Cloverfield at all in terms of story, monsters, or anything for that matter. The most promising of evidence for this is the total lack of congruity with the original film.
But I guess in J.J.'s world, Star wars and LotR take place in the same universe but different galaxies... This is how absurd this is.
Finally,
this is what I didn't like about this film: there is too much evidence scattered in every direction. There is no discernible story to grab onto. Howard's a crazy pedo, but his character doesn't act like it. It's the end of the world but only after she escapes. Michelle is a coward apparently but has the ability to make a lance out of a crutch and try to impale her savior. He rescues her but ties her up...
I understand twists very well. But this isn't a twist in the sense of Fight Club or The Others where for the majority of the movie, we had clues as to what was going on and it ends in a big reveal. Here we had conflicting clues about everyone and everything. The only thing that was certain was that aliens invaded. Nothing else...
On the flip side, the constant crying of sexist man-children complaining that the main character of this movie is a woman is grating.
I will say it like many of the "sexist man-children" say it and clearly so you can also understand:
We don't care if the main protagonist is a woman or not. We don't like Mary Sue's being thrusted down our throats and especially in a good franchise. Why can't we get good movies with good characters without having this crap being jammed down our throats?
Let me repeat it:
We don't care what sex the main protagonist is. Just make a good movie for the sake of the movie and not the politics.
Contrast this with Leia from the original star wars trilogy: she was an important part of the story plot and a compelling character without being a Mary Sue.
Now about the trailer: looks great. I am glad that this will finally revolve around the star wars universe rather than the Skywalkers.
My biggest worry about this movie, Sue aside, is that Gary Whitta and Gareth Edwards are involved in the making of the movie. They haven't been renowned for any great films that I liked so far. I hope this will be Offset by Lucas and John Knoll. Some of the movies where Gary and Gareth got involved in had a LOT of talking and not a lot of actual doing anything or were directed at a younger audience.
Ben Affleck was terrible. He did the exact same thing he did in DareDevil: slack jaw, no emotions, poor acting. The writers didn't help at all with how badly the character was created including but not limited to: conflicting attitudes towards criminals, sudden shifts in motives over a word, conflicting attitudes towards any other person in the movie. Compare this to all the other Batmans we had. I don't understand the propensity of people to excuse Ben's poor performance. Why cut him some slack?? Didn't he even say he helped create this Batman???
Superman was full blown PMSing in the movie with tones and emotions scattered all over the place. The part that really killed him was his relationship with Lois. My goodness, he loves her, but doesn't, but does, but doesn't, then does and finally doesn't. I agree with you on how he handled it in MoS,
Wonderwoman, the Mary Sue of the movie, was literally added at the end of making the movie. She has almost no scenes and even the ones she does, they are either solo scenes or bare minutes with Ben Affleck. I know how you guys feel about me calling her a Mary Sue but come on: she can hack, she can outsteal and outwit Batman, has unlimited Monies and is pretty much the only one that puts a dent in Doomsday...
Lex was such a phenomenal failure and I agree with you. What were they thinking...
There's a found footage movie called Cloverfield (2008) that you really ought to watch before this - 10CL isn't really a sequel but it is related, hard to explain without ruining the story. Basically both movies have a similar approach in that we're shown little bits of a huge narrative, through the eyes of people who are only really bystanders seeing the end product of what's actually going on. (The first Cloverfield had a huge viral marketing campaign that didn't let me sleep for weeks) so if you enjoy peeping for clues and multiple watches and taking note of little details, but also want a really solid couple of movies for just watching, I'd really recommend both.
That said, the ending to 10CL can hit you over the head pretty hard if you haven't been picking up the clues along the way - my movie buddy left the theatre totally pissed about it "coming out of nowhere" but I thought it was a great payoff after the setup the rest of the movie provided, so there's the range of feelings you might have on it.
10CL is a smaller-scale show so you might catch it cheap at an indie theatre (I got my tickets for 3$ on Tuesday) and if you're still unsure I suggest going that route. A less fancy theatre won't dampen the experience because it's not a blinged out blockbuster
I just saw the movie today and I can say with full confidence that this movie has nothing to do with Cloverfield at all and if anything, it is J.J. Abrams ripping off the brand name. Most of what you mentioned is pretty wrong since all we see is Michelle's POV and her interpretation of the events. We never see either Emmett's nor Howard's side of the story.
About the ending, the movie had me leaning both ways: Howard is insane AND there is some BS happening outside. I was quite delighted to see both were true. However, a lot of issues came up:
1. Why did Howard let Emmett in?
2. Is Howard a pedophile???
3. Who the hell was that girl??? Was it Brittany or Megan?
4. Was Emmett lying?
5. Assuming Emmett murdered Megan and blocked the hatch to the air filtration unit, where did the body go?
6. Why is the hatch blocked and why didn't Michelle unblock it?
The main issues with the movie are the conflicting motives of all the characters and the evidence towards all theories. I am really not sure what went on.
1. he designated the female protagonist as a girl/princess/etc rather than a woman
2. Emmet tells the story of how the girl in the photo wasn't his daughter but a kidnapped girl at his school
3. She finds an earring that the disappeared girl had with blood on it next to that "help" scratched up
So again, we have conflicting evidence... This is what I disliked about the movie.
Highroller gets it.
We at Wizards of the Coast have no idea what we're actually doing. We made some promises, we hired a cookie man with a lisp and developed several philosophies, none of which were good for the player base at large. We thought that after a train wreck of several years, we would announce to you more bad news probably based on poor sales. Of course, this is all your fault for not purchasing our overpriced piles of cartons that are underpowered and irrelevant to any other format than standard. Hopefully, you will forget about it next week after we announce more cards you will buy blindly. But don't worry, none of the cards we will print will be in demand and will continue to be weaker versions of previous iterations to avoid the power creep. Remember, the power creep is bad, but please keep buying bad products!
Our first bad news is that we will no longer hold modern PTs because of how badly we handled the last one. We fired the one responsible and now we had to make cuts so nobody else is dealing with this. Our second bad news is that we will make more cuts to pro players, whom have been a net benefit for our community and general advertisement campaign for the last decade or so.
Yours truly,
AF"
That's pretty much how I read it. Guess I'll start shoveling my money towards another company that knows what they are doing...
The relationship between judges and WotC is that they volunteer. If they do not attend events and such, no punishment is given. They do not sign any form of engagement contract, nor are they eligible to compensation or vacation days and so forth.
The funniest part is that the judges have more control over this since they can simply boycott WotC and tournaments. WotC will take action and fast and may institute this in the future. You just have to cut your losses. To mull over the past when nothing indicates they are employees, is a waste of time and money.
First impressions: Starter decks are quite complete. The game is a great mix between everything that makes Magic/YGO great/Highlander games great.
The way to play the game appears to be similar to Commander:
- top down: pick a ruler and make the most of that ruler
- bottom up: pick a theme, find a ruler that helps that theme (Re/Re unfortunately)
- synergy: pick a strategy that mixes well with another/Ruler
- thematic: kinda like tribal (musketeers, fairies, etc).
I hope that they ban Re/Re as he is very degenerate.
Slowly starting to build around Machina Ramp and so far it's pretty cute and works.
Also, big bonus: no trash cards in sets. That is a big big plus! No garbage vanillas or bad cards. At least most of the boosters won't be 9/10 trash and maybe a 0.10$ rare.
I would love for more legendary zombies. The one corpse to rule them all type.
Where are you getting this? If this game goes to Egypt without resolving anything in the storyline, I'm out...
From a practical point of view, I am fairly unsure how this is better than ramp or cantripping.
For your question on valuable, I think the reason it costs as much is purely out of either speculation, flavor or the lines of text on it. I am fairly sure there was a spike at some point in time and it hasn't gone down ever since.
This is the first time I even hear about this card.
There you go.
I did not even read the card...
13 logs in the oven
13 stones around the oven
13 blood drips
13 cutleries
13 broken pieces of a plate
13 wooden planks for the ceiling
13 wooden planks for the 2 walls
All i got.
So how does the Helvault work in imprisoning Avacyn???
Liliana forced Thalia to break it... Sorin did nothing and still welcomes Liliana in his realm???
Nahiri just... goes from ":D" to ">:(" because he didn't return her call???
Sorin, when weakened, decides to pick a fight with her???
Olivia treats Sorin like crap and other vampires do too... yet Sorin is more powerful than any of them... and some neonates try to harm him? Did his reputation just vanish?
Sorin doesn't know what is going on with Avacyn??? He can track anyone that comes to his plane but doesn't know where his own creation is?
I am awfully confused...
Marvel caught on with DC in terms of origin stories and they started introducing small clips at the end to try to sneak in a test feel for an avengers movie. Guess what, people love it and people wanted that movie. They worked with the creators of Marvel, they made the movies a fun experience and also kept their characters true to their nature. Not only that, they pushed their franchise and made movies that introduced several villains, several stakes and situations. We have been to Asgard, Earth, some dude's head in the Galaxy, etc. DC has been to... krypton and Gotham... over and over again in the same neighborhoods mind you. Additionally, most Marvel films focused on specific themes. They didn't try to cram in 3/4/5 stories in 2 hours.
Before someone makes it sound like I am some Marvel fan, they did make bad movies, that is a given. However, it seems that unlike DC, they learned from their mistakes and improved.
Finally, they also seem to give the keys to people who know what they are doing. Look at the latest Deadpool for instance.
DC has only been doing origin stories and for some god awful reason, keep doing it and handing the keys to random folks. The Dark Knight trilogy was great because we had the origin story that brought you more than just parents-died-i-saw-a-bat-batman! trash we keep being hit with every goddamn batman movie. Superman from the 80s/90s was very campy and a great success regardless of how bad superman 3 was. But instead of expanding those stories on heroes we have known for decades, we get more and more origin stories. Then those stories bomb and we wait a few years and get yet another origin story. This is DC's problem: they are stalling at the starting point and people will get bored of it. It is boring to see the same thing over and over again.
I thought he said "Dad". I really did not get that part either.
What I did not like in this movie about it, was simply the fact she had no business in it. If you weren't a DC fan, you wouldn't understand much about her character. There really wasn't much back story or reason for her to show up. What I meant by her being sprinkled was quite literal. Check how many scenes and how many minutes she has and tell me she wasn't an after thought or shoe in at the end.
Now why would you say that Bale was worst than Ben?!?! That I cannot understand. I found Bale's character and portrayal to be quite good. The movies suffered but he wasn't emotionless and did actually act. The "Look at his eyes" argument is a terrible one. If all you needed was eyes, anyone else would have been a better actor based on eyes alone. Here's a challenge for you: watch Dare Devil and his acting and then immediately watch this movie. There is little change in terms of acting or any of the bad points I mentioned.
If you actually look at his film career as an actor, almost all his films average at around 5.5/10 according to IMDB http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000255/#actor
In the last 10 years he finally broke into an average of 6.5 but most of his movies are misses. So again, I don't know where most of this "cutting him some slack" attitude comes from.
But I guess in J.J.'s world, Star wars and LotR take place in the same universe but different galaxies... This is how absurd this is.
Finally,
I understand twists very well. But this isn't a twist in the sense of Fight Club or The Others where for the majority of the movie, we had clues as to what was going on and it ends in a big reveal. Here we had conflicting clues about everyone and everything. The only thing that was certain was that aliens invaded. Nothing else...
We don't care if the main protagonist is a woman or not. We don't like Mary Sue's being thrusted down our throats and especially in a good franchise. Why can't we get good movies with good characters without having this crap being jammed down our throats?
Let me repeat it:
We don't care what sex the main protagonist is. Just make a good movie for the sake of the movie and not the politics.
Contrast this with Leia from the original star wars trilogy: she was an important part of the story plot and a compelling character without being a Mary Sue.
Now about the trailer: looks great. I am glad that this will finally revolve around the star wars universe rather than the Skywalkers.
My biggest worry about this movie, Sue aside, is that Gary Whitta and Gareth Edwards are involved in the making of the movie. They haven't been renowned for any great films that I liked so far. I hope this will be Offset by Lucas and John Knoll. Some of the movies where Gary and Gareth got involved in had a LOT of talking and not a lot of actual doing anything or were directed at a younger audience.
Superman was full blown PMSing in the movie with tones and emotions scattered all over the place. The part that really killed him was his relationship with Lois. My goodness, he loves her, but doesn't, but does, but doesn't, then does and finally doesn't. I agree with you on how he handled it in MoS,
Wonderwoman, the Mary Sue of the movie, was literally added at the end of making the movie. She has almost no scenes and even the ones she does, they are either solo scenes or bare minutes with Ben Affleck. I know how you guys feel about me calling her a Mary Sue but come on: she can hack, she can outsteal and outwit Batman, has unlimited Monies and is pretty much the only one that puts a dent in Doomsday...
Lex was such a phenomenal failure and I agree with you. What were they thinking...
I just saw the movie today and I can say with full confidence that this movie has nothing to do with Cloverfield at all and if anything, it is J.J. Abrams ripping off the brand name. Most of what you mentioned is pretty wrong since all we see is Michelle's POV and her interpretation of the events. We never see either Emmett's nor Howard's side of the story.
About the ending, the movie had me leaning both ways: Howard is insane AND there is some BS happening outside. I was quite delighted to see both were true. However, a lot of issues came up:
1. Why did Howard let Emmett in?
2. Is Howard a pedophile???
3. Who the hell was that girl??? Was it Brittany or Megan?
4. Was Emmett lying?
5. Assuming Emmett murdered Megan and blocked the hatch to the air filtration unit, where did the body go?
6. Why is the hatch blocked and why didn't Michelle unblock it?
The main issues with the movie are the conflicting motives of all the characters and the evidence towards all theories. I am really not sure what went on.