Showing posts with label predators. Show all posts
Showing posts with label predators. Show all posts

Thursday, 22 July 2010

HERP DERP

Last week I wrote a post about rubbishy shitspasm Predators, in which I briefly mentioned a scene from the trailer that was heavily altered (and in fact made much less interesting) for the finished film, and in which I implied that I might sue the director and producer for providing such a shabby, sub-standard product that I could have paid £13 for if it hadn't been Orange Wednesday.

It seems redundant to say it but I wasn't actually planning on suing anyone.

Anyway, I linked to the post on the IMDb forums here and received an avalanche of helpful comments from several members of the "online community" who hinted that pursuing a legal case against a movie studio might not be a sensible course of action.

Here are just a few choice nuggets:


Hmm. You're suggesting this case might be a waste of time?


By this point I'm seriously considering not suing a multinational conglomerate for £6.50 if people think it might be 'frivolous'.


There's no denying it: that would definitely show me how dumb I am.

I had to severely edit the next one because this guy went on for pages. In his defence he did summarise his concerns at the end.


I don't know what "HERP DERP" means but those are now my absolute favourite two words ever.


Back atcha.


That would appear to be the general consensus.


To call me a dumbass, click here

*UPDATE!*
I annoyed people so much on the IMDb forums that somebody went crying to an administrator and most of my posts have now been deleted. Sorry if you went there looking for an enlightening discourse on the nature of cinema as an art form; freedom of speech is no longer tolerated at the IMDb.

Thursday, 15 July 2010

Predators


There's a lot of (quite justified) interwebfussery at the moment about the big difference between the Predators trailer and the actual film, which can pretty much be described like this:


I'm reasonably sure this is a contravention of the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 which, according to Wikipedia, "prevents manufacturers, retailers or service industry providers from misleading consumers as to what they are spending their money on", although as we all know the Trade Descriptions Act was heavily amended as a result of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

What's probably more appropriate in this instance might be the Sale Of Goods Act 1979, which states that "the goods sold must be of satisfactory quality, taking into account the price, description and any other relevant factors".

So when you could feasibly shell out £13 to watch Predators (described by Fox as "a bold new chapter in the Predator universe"), and what you get is a piffly puddle of piddle which takes the central premise of the original film but removes all the wit, originality, fun and what little motivation there was for the story to take place, surely I can expect to see director and surefire dirty anagram Nimród Antal, as well as producer and most overrated person in movies Robert Rodriguez in the small claims court on as soon a date as is convenient to all parties?

The Lesson I Never Learn:
DON'T BOTHER WATCHING THE FILM.
JUST STICK WITH THE TRAILER.

Final thought: Running around the jungle evading slobbery-mandibled mentaliens can be disorientating. To avoid misplacing essential items such as TV remotes, simply glue them to your gun to prevent future disappointment and frustration.


To comment on this post, click here

Friday, 19 March 2010

Predators Trailer

A trailer has been squeezed out for the forthcoming Predators, the (yawn) reboot of the overrated Predator franchise which itself was only really memorable for some mind-boggling brilliantly awful dialogue delivery by Arnold Schwarzenegger. I'm thinking in particular of his suggestion to a young lady that she should make her way towards the helicopter without haste.

Anyway the Twitterverse has shot its collective load over the trailer this morning, with such considered observations as "bad-ass" (Empire), "amazing" (Sky Movies), "really freaking cool" (Total Film), "f***ing great" (F*** Off Film, obviously), and "awesome... I think I have to change my pants" (Screen Rant). Well, incontinence can be a terrible thing.

Here it is:



I've said it before and I'll say it again. 2010: Worst Year For Movies, Like, Ever (© The Incredible Suit).



To comment on this post, click here