002380335931.jpg

Kneel Before Wall-E

The Weekly Box Office Round-Up / Brian Prisco & TK

Box Office Round-Ups | June 30, 2008 | Comments (71)


It’s a long, hard road out of hell, people. The power struggle at Pajiba continues, and the New Jacks have struck another blow. It was a bloody battle, but once again Grand High Alligator Rowles has been toppled from his fancy-pants throne. What’s that? You didn’t think he had a throne? Oh, people. Open your eyes . This isn’t a movie website — it’s a tyrannical fiefdom. But for now, we have control of the ship and we are headed to fucking flavor country. Let’s boogie.

We’re gonna just come out and say it — both as critics and more importantly as movie fans — it’s a good fucking summer. As ambivalent as we are about most of the releases, we’re finding that we don’t have to suffer the lash of the bad stuff for long, before we’re able to languish in the cool waters of the good stuff. Yes, yes, we had to endure the doubly dreadful douchetastic duet of The Love Guru (note: can we all collectively make a pact to never mention this movie again, ever?) and Get Smart last weekend; but it was only to clear the way for the all-out awesomeness that was this week’s releases: Wall-E and Wanted.

We see this as the clarion call of great things ahead. Even the films that might not be as good as we hope, like Hancock, or stuff that might be a stunning surprise (Hellboy II — maybe please maybe, come on Guillermo, no whammies, no whammies, big monsters, STOP!) to even the little indie darlings (American Teen, please hear our Hughesian prayer); they all help to keep us afloat weekend to weekend.

What boggles the mind is we’re seeing actors popping up in multiple movies in multiple roles, as if in some sort of divine fantasy football league, and there’s nary a Walken nor Jonah Hill to be found. Though there was an unfortunate appearance by Sir Ben Kinglsey, whom we’re putting on the injured reserve list until his obvious head injury clears up — when last seen, Sir B-Kings was contemplating the role of the Evil Sorcerer in Uwe Boll’s alternative-universe remake of Tootsie — clearly the man needs help. This weekend featured an intriguing showdown: Lara Croft vs. General Zod vs. a sad-eyed robot. Angelina Jolie and Terence Stamp make their marks on two of the top five this week, with one movie featuring the seemingly unstoppable combination of both. It’s like trying to track the stock market. On to the round-up (now with points!):

5. The Incredible Hulk ($9.2 million, $115.5 million): While the presence of Edward Norton is enough to brighten anyone’s day (+3), his rampant on-set douchebaggery (-2) and blurry, muscley-armed CGI battle sequences (-2), lose him some points. Despite the coolness factor of having Tim Roth (+2) and a favela chase sequence (+1), our big green meanie suffers for a distinct lack of Jolie/Stamp. However, even two minutes of RDJ will give them the nudge needed to surpass The Love Guhuhuhuhhhhh. (+2 points)

4. Kung Fu Panda ($11.7 million, $179.3 million): Expect portly Po to have people coming back for seconds as the sold out lines for Wall-E have parents pandering to the panda. It cannot hold a pan-dle (Ed. note — ‘pan’ jokes are 100% Prisco’s fault) to the luminous little rolling toaster, but it’s got enough heart and plenty of slow parts for you to sit and pan-der who’s voicing which weird animal. Jack Black, Angelina Jolie. Good. Dustin Hoffman. Strange. Lucy Liu, Jackie Chan. Good, but awkward. David Cross, awesome, but as a crane? Really? Seth Rogen, you have officially oversaturated your welcome, good luck with Pineapple Express, it may be your saving grace. Michael Clarke Duncan, okay, good — also, don’t hurt me. Uh, oh. Dan Fogler?! How will you ever survive this? Oh, Ian McShane, you cocksucker — does Swearengen’s awesomeness outbalance the suckitude of Fogler? It’s tipping, it’s…wait! The Panda’s father is who? James Hong? David fucking Lo Pan?! You have redeemed yourself, noble Panda. (+3 points)

3. Get Smart ($20 million, $77.2 million): Ouch. Well. Fortunately, this little turd will soon be flushed. Steve Carrell is great and all, but seriously, it’s like watching an improv by slack-jawed morons. And who let Anne Hathaway in this movie?! Get the fuck out of here! You do not belong — and fire that dipshit agent of yours, would you? Verily, Terence Stamp does grace us with his presence, but his sidekick is Borat’s taint facial. We’re ashamed to say it, but we do not smell what the Rock is cooking in this movie. And a direct to DVD spinoff the same weekend? Are you fucking kidding me? (-3 points — and we’re being generous)

2. Wanted ($51.1 million, $51.1 million): This lost, only because it’s an R-rated buffet of delight, and the whining power of young children will ever-ever outweigh the force of curving bullets. It’s got not just Jolie looking luscious, but Stamp as a rogue bullet-making monk. McAvoy puts forth a surprisingly effective performance, and it’s nice to see Morgan Freeman doing something other than playing the Knowledgeable Negro™. But the Loom of Fate? Oh, Timur. Timur, Timur, Timur. Bad Russian, no borscht! (+4 points)

1. Wall-E ($62.5 million, $62.5 million): What disturbs us most about Wall-E is that no one is nervous about a movie that is completely digitally created, features very little dialogue, has almost no humans, and is, in part, about the destruction of our planet. Wake up, people. This is a harbinger of things to come. The machines will rise, and they won’t look like The Governator, or Robert Patrick, or that brick house from BloodRayne. No, it’ll start with your goddamn blenders and George Foreman grills, and the next thing you know, the fucking robot uprising will be upon us. And you will have done nothing!

Kneel before Wall-E! (+1,000,000 points)









WALL-E | Michael Palin's New Europe













Comments

I have spent the entire weekend making "loom of fate" jokes. It will never, ever get old.

Posted by: courtney at June 30, 2008 8:43 AM

Loom of Fate > Chalk of Destiny

Posted by: twig at June 30, 2008 8:51 AM

So I saw both Sex and the City and Wanted this past week. (Don't blame me for the first one. The boy had to go see a movie in a very specific, awesome, old theater and this was the only one playing we hadn't seen. It was his idea. I do not joke.)

I honestly can't say which I liked least.

While in Sex and the City you do have:

"Will I ever laugh again?" ...which has made me burst out, well, laughing from states of half sleep for the last three nights...

in Wanted you can't escape "The Loom of Fate" which they didn't even try to make sound less ridiculous.

If forced to watch one again, if would probably be the former, for the simple fact that it had just so many more obvious things to make fun of (the wedding planning, the cast, the dialogue...the plot....) And it creeps me out to see my Angie at that level of boney-no-ass-ness.

Posted by: Kate at June 30, 2008 8:59 AM

Bow and kneel humans... bow and kneel.... Our time has come... Our time has come...

Join us at w a l l - e r u l e s a l l.com

Posted by: Spaminator X at June 30, 2008 9:01 AM

You can't really blame the director for the Loom of Fate. Afterall, it WAS based on a comic book, no?

I had great ol' time at this flick. I do have hot pants big time for Mr McAvoy but I thought it was good fun, all disbelief suspended.

Posted by: amanda at June 30, 2008 9:03 AM

Hey!

its not Knowledgeable Negro™

It's Morgan Freeman Redeems the White Man™

Posted by: thaf at June 30, 2008 9:12 AM

You can't really blame the director for the Loom of Fate. Afterall, it WAS based on a comic book, no?

Not to mention 2,000+ years of mythology and metaphor. Looms as we know them may not have been invented until later, but those three Greek babes were still weaving our destinies with threads and a spindle.

The big question: does the chalk of destiny have any grounds in actual (perhaps Eastern) myth? Until I hear that it does, I'm with twig.

Posted by: Ranylt at June 30, 2008 9:17 AM

Coming soon to a theater near you:

The Onion of Portents!
The Toasted Cheese Sandwich of Prophecy!
The Thermos of Doom!

Posted by: Tabula Swift at June 30, 2008 9:38 AM

Loom of Fate does not trump Chalk of Destiny...because every time they said Chalk of Destiny it was in Russian...making it instantly cooler!



Also...Timor = County, Timur = Kazakhstani director



Love Luck and Lollipops...I'm with you all on the no whammies....

Posted by: Luke at June 30, 2008 9:48 AM

Stamp as a rogue bullet-making monk

Jesus, Rowles.

You'd think it'd be worth mentioning that WILSON is in a movie. I mean, I'm still not gonna see it but...come ON.

-Pay attention, Jay. Not Rowles this time. -TK

Posted by: Jay at June 30, 2008 9:48 AM

...Well that post looks stupid...and completely NOT like the preview button...sorry about the random page breaks there....

Posted by: Luke at June 30, 2008 9:49 AM

Wow, I can't wiat for the Thermos of Doom and it's inevitbale follow up "The Canteen of Happenstance"

Posted by: Colombo at June 30, 2008 9:53 AM

Since we're on the whole "Some Object of Some Quality," how about:

The Penguin of Giddiness
The Grackle of Weltschmerz

Or we restrict ourselves to the inanimate:

The Paperclip of Persuasion
The Dixie Cup of Randomicity

Posted by: The Wanderer at June 30, 2008 10:03 AM

The Paper Bag of Possibilities
The Eggshel of Eventuality
The Igloo of Inevitability
&
The Apple of Alliteration

Posted by: Brian at June 30, 2008 10:06 AM

Umm...dare I admit that if asked to choose which of the top 5 I'd rather watch, I'd pick Get Smart? A thousand apologies, but I'm a sucker for goofy comedy, and +100 points for Steve Carrell. Although, I am deducting -75 for The Rock....

Whoa, I feel like I'm at a strange and lonely place in the Pajibaverse this morning....

Posted by: MO(meaux) at June 30, 2008 10:07 AM

You can't really blame the director for the Loom of Fate. Afterall, it WAS based on a comic book, no?

You can blame the Director, as the loom of fate wasn't in the comic. The comic was approximately infinited times more awesome than the movie is, and was about a world in which the Supervillains killed all the Superheroes in the 80's, then modified reality to suit their needs.

The only person in that who can do the curvey bullet thing is Killer (Wesley) and that's because his superpower is killing things.

I'm not usually a comic book fan, but I do watch alot of movies, read many, many books, and follow many TV shows and anime. I can easily say that the original story of Wanted is probably in the top 2 or 3 stories I've ever read/watched.

Posted by: Chugga at June 30, 2008 10:10 AM

Ranylt,

were those babies spinning in binary code?

Posted by: courtney at June 30, 2008 10:16 AM

Babes, not babies. That was a typo, not actual stupidity.

Posted by: courtney at June 30, 2008 10:17 AM

So...what you're saying is...Wall-E is...over nine thousand?

Oh god.

*hits self* No! Musn't be tempted! Mustn't see it! Bad, evil Disney/Pixar, trying to steal my soul by placating me with adorable robots. I will not give in!

Why did Pixar have to sell out? Everything is ruined forever...

Posted by: Cookie at June 30, 2008 10:27 AM

Wow! I'm gone for a week to a national weaving convention and I come home to "Loom of Fate" jokes.

Ranylt: Looms have been around for thousands of years, more than 6000 years at least. I can build a loom with a couple of sticks and some string in about five minutes and weave you a belt in a day to prove it.

However, binary code in the cloth. BWA-HAHAHHA. The loom has heddles that go up and down and can be controlled with binary code, but the cloth doesn't. If you tried to put the up threads and the down threads to weave some sort of binary message, the cloth would just fall apart. It would make more sense to KNIT and PURL a scarf with a binary message. Oh, wait. That's already been done. They must have stolen that idea and decided to up it one, without knowing how weaving actually works.

The loom of fate.
The knitting needles of dispair.
The crochet hook of hookers.
The glue gun of stickyness.

Posted by: BWeaves at June 30, 2008 10:33 AM

all that i ever got from The Onion of Portents,
The Toasted Cheese Sandwich of Prophecy,
The Thermos of Doom, The Apple of Alliteration, or any of the others, was a trip to The Latrine of Lament and a bad case of The Collywobbles of Contrition.

Posted by: causaubon at June 30, 2008 10:37 AM

Why did Pixar have to sell out? Everything is ruined forever...

What are you talking about? Disney practically begged Pixar to renew after their contract was over. Pixar has control of the entire animation department. Pixar reinstated the 2-D department! Pixar practically is Disney at this point.

Posted by: twig at June 30, 2008 10:40 AM

BWeaves- us latvians do use weaving to tell stories, especially in our woven belts, although not binary, more hieroglyphic/rune type symbols (like the swastika).

Posted by: causaubon at June 30, 2008 10:43 AM

twig, it's not the quality of the animated movies that Pixar/Disney produces, I have no doubt about their films being superb. I simply can't bring myself to go see them because I can't bear the thought of Disney getting /any/ of my money. I have no problem with the films, just Disney.

Same goes for Tom Cruise and now Will Smith movies because of Scientology. I'm like a movie-vegeterian or something.

Posted by: Cookie at June 30, 2008 10:54 AM

I hear you on the anti-Disney sentiment there, Cookie. Though I've seen most of the Pixar films to date (all but Cars; NASCAR kind of annoys me), I wouldn't consider paying to see them in theatre. I can happily wait 'til they come out on the dish. Also, I'm (admittedly, obnoxiously) proud that I have never in my life had any desire to go to Disney-land. Ugh! The crowds! The cloying cuteness! What's the appeal? Magic, schmagic.

Not a strict movie-vegetarian, though. I'm not ready to give up Will Smith, dammit. Actually quite looking forward to Hancock; hope it doesn't disappoint.

Posted by: MO(meaux) at June 30, 2008 11:03 AM

It was The Princess Bride which raised this to high art. The Cliffs of Insanity! The Dread Pirate Roberts!

Posted by: DD at June 30, 2008 11:07 AM

Well I for one will be prepared. When the Robot Apocolypse comes, I plan to hole up in my cabin with Army-surplus MREs and my shotgun. You fuckers will provide welcome fodder for the flesh hungry spawnbots whilst I make a nimble getaway in my A*Team-inspired Conversion Van of Destruction.

I'm packing a cyanide tablet in the unlikely event of my capture though, just in case.

Posted by: Mella at June 30, 2008 11:09 AM

Pay attention, Jay. Not Rowles this time. -TK

You misunderstand. I was yelling at Dustin and his incomplete review, assuming he's reading, not you two fine, informative gentlemen.

Argh! Pay attention, TK!
-TK

Posted by: Jay at June 30, 2008 11:11 AM

Also, and I don't know which came first because I can't be arsed to consult the Wikipedia right now, but there was a sort of loom of destiny in The Red Prophet by Orson Scott Card, only it was non-lame.

You see, it was woven by a Native American mystic, and it did not contain binary code, and of course Orson Scott Card wrote it, so in sum it was the utter shit.

Posted by: Mella at June 30, 2008 11:15 AM

I'm with MO regarding Hancock, in that I really hope it delivers. The previews look exceptional, but I haven't read much anticipatory news about it, here or anywhere else, so that's got me kinda worried.

Fortunately, we haven't got long to wait.

Posted by: TMax at June 30, 2008 11:21 AM

Don't shoot the messenger, but so far reviews of Hancock have not been very favourable.

I'm just...going to back away and not say anything about it again (unless an opportunity arises where I can be a total asshole and yell "I told you so!" in the near future).

Posted by: Cookie at June 30, 2008 11:25 AM

Cookie: Might I recommend that you pull a reverse on the tried and true methods employed by the under-17s of this country and simply purchase a ticket to a movie whose production company you like and sneak into the theater playing Wall-E? It seems like a win-win to me...

Posted by: elizabeth at June 30, 2008 11:29 AM

"BWeaves- us latvians do use weaving to tell stories, especially in our woven belts, although not binary, more hieroglyphic/rune type symbols (like the swastika)."

Posted by: causaubon at June 30, 2008 10:43 AM

Oh yeah! I weave my name and images into all kinds of cloth, but not in binary. What's the point? It's really a shame the Nazi's ruined the swastika. It's a neat design, but now a horrible symbol.

I mean, "the loom of fate" telling you who to kill next? A society of weavers? We're all cuddly grandmas, for pete's sake (well, not me personally, but I'm old enough to be one). What kind of weavers are they dreaming about?

Posted by: BWeaves at June 30, 2008 11:32 AM

Don't shoot the messenger, but so far reviews of Hancock have not been very favourable.

31% on Rotten Tomatoes. Urgh. How? Who wrote...

Two people with no real credits that I've never heard of. Ok.

Still, the pertinent question - can it possibly be worse than Wild Wild West?

Posted by: twig at June 30, 2008 11:36 AM

I was just going to download it and watch it while sitting in a puddle of guilt in a few months. That way I can support piracy at the same time!

Yarrr!

Posted by: Cookie at June 30, 2008 11:38 AM

The Loom of Destiny?
I didn't realize it was a Greek epic.

Oh man the spoof possibilities are endless but I suggest:
The spinning wheel of fortune

DD just opened a can of worms...Must resist quoting.

Posted by: Amanda47 at June 30, 2008 11:38 AM

I know this is completely off topic, but...a problem with my boyfriend of a year and a half has recently come to my attention. I was surprised when he informed me that he had never seen Animal House. I was worried when I discovered that he had never watched the Terminator, but when I found out that he had never seen Aliens, I was in an all out panic. How could it be that this person I had known and loved all this time could be hiding such a terrible secret. I knew when we met that he had been home schooled the first few years of his childhood, but I never imagined this. I've been trying to introduce him to to the classic movies that I remember from my youth, but I'm only one person. And so, in this time of my need, I humbly turn to you, my wise and knowledgeable Pajiba, who helped me to find that perfect beer, who prepared me for the impending zombie invasion. I call upon you, in this, my hour of need.

Posted by: Carmen Sandiego at June 30, 2008 11:40 AM

I don't have a problem with Pixar/Disney especially as there have been reports that John Lasseter et al are getting rid of a lot of the 'direct-to video' cartoon pap that Disney had been into. And as Twig said, reinstating the 2D department.

I've watched the history of Pixar documentary a couple of times on Starz, and in his early days as an animator Lasseter was fired by Disney. They just didn't get 'this crazy CGI' stuff. He, on the other hand, was extremely respectful of their classic animation artists. I guess the current situation must feel rather satisfying to him.

Posted by: StephanieS at June 30, 2008 11:47 AM

twig, it may turn out to be just as bad, if not worse, than Wild Wild West.

This coming from someone who actually was mildly amused by said movie. What? That giant spider was pure hardcore steampunk goodness.

...What I mean is, you should be prepared for disappointment, just in case.

Posted by: Cookie at June 30, 2008 11:49 AM

I think I'm most amused by the fact that we have an actual weaver in our midst to set us straight on this absurd conversation. Go BWeaves!

Posted by: katy at June 30, 2008 12:08 PM

Oh god, oh god, Help me out! There was something about that giant spider in Wild Wild West...how originally it was meant to be in another movie because he (director?) was obsessed with giant spiders. what was it?

Posted by: Kate at June 30, 2008 12:11 PM

Ahh, that was easy. Thank you, wiki.


"In an interview with Kevin Smith, the writer-director of Clerks., Smith talked about working on the fifth potential Superman in 1997. The film was being produced by Jon Peters, and Peters had three initial demands about the script. One was that Superman could not be seen in his iconic suit, Superman could not be seen flying, and Superman had to fight a giant spider in the third act. Although Smith didn't agree with the ideas, and the studio knew of these demands, Smith wrote a draft anyways including the three demands. Though after Tim Burton came on board the film, Smith's script was tossed away, but the film never was never produced anyway. Smith claimed that although it was a thrill to work on a Superman script, he did not want to be reminded how bad it was. Then, a year later, he was reminded when he saw Wild Wild West in the theaters. Wild Wild West was produced by John Peters, and included a giant mechanical spider in the final act. [3]

Neil Gaiman has said that Jon Peters insisted a giant mechanical spider be included in a film adaptation of The Sandman."

Posted by: Kate at June 30, 2008 12:13 PM

Looms have been around for thousands of years

Eh, frames to hand-weave on have been, but not the kind I was thinking of--I imagine the film shows something a little more "mechanized" and independent? But you nicely reinforced my point, Bweaves. Threads...binary code...put on your metaphorical hats, dammit, and embrace your mythological traditions!

(The power of Orpheus compels you.)

Posted by: Ranylt at June 30, 2008 12:17 PM

Carmen Sandiego, I feel your pain. My Italian boyfriend had never seen THE GODFATHER before me, for Godtopus' sake! We must fight the good fight and teach them how to earn our love. With movies.

Posted by: KatSings at June 30, 2008 12:53 PM

Is it like the Spinning Jenny Of Fate?

Posted by: Jay at June 30, 2008 12:54 PM

BWeaves- come to think of it, the way that latvians use weaving to create these swastika patterns (btw- our swastika, like the hindu swastika, spins in the opposite direction from the Nazi one and, quite often, has many branches coming off the main 4 arms and can be so intricate and confusing that you really have to pay attention to see that it is based on a swastika. but i digress) is like a grid, where some of the "squares" are the neutral/b.ground colour and the squares that create the symbol are a different colour. And I seem to remember, i think it was a french computer scientist (but i'm probably wrong) who came up with an automated loom that used old-timey 50's punch-cards to tell the loom what to do. isn't this a type of binary code (the punch cards, i mean)? wouldn't it then be possible, in a reverse process, to have the loom create a simple pattern of coloured squares that can be "read" the same way that those old-timey punch-cards were "read"?

Posted by: causaubon at June 30, 2008 1:16 PM

I call upon you, in this, my hour of need.
Start him off with Repo Man.
Then, before he has time to recover, hit him with Fight Club.
After that he should be putty in your hands, and you can mold him as you see fit.

Posted by: Jerce at June 30, 2008 1:20 PM

Kate, giant spider discussion available here on YouTube. With spanish subtitles, apparantly.

It joins Bendis' "Fortune and Glory" and Patton Oswalt's Death Bed in the list of reasons I think Hollywood would kill me if I tried to get work there.

I admire anyone who can endure it.

Posted by: twig at June 30, 2008 1:20 PM

Kate I believe the Kevin Smith Video is also available in one of the videos. Keeping with a theme discussed here about a month ago, the second one was called ....Evening Harder (or something like that).

Posted by: Brian at June 30, 2008 1:41 PM

Looms have been around for thousands of years

Eh, frames to hand-weave on have been, but not the kind I was thinking of--I imagine the film shows something a little more "mechanized" and independent? But you nicely reinforced my point, Bweaves. Threads...binary code...put on your metaphorical hats, dammit, and embrace your mythological traditions!

(The power of Orpheus compels you.)

Posted by: Ranylt at June 30, 2008 12:17 PM

Um, no, ancient people were not weaving on frame looms. Looms with heddles and shafts that automatically go up and down when tied to different lamms have been around for thousands of years. A frame loom is the kind you wove potholders on when you were 4. Perhaps you are thinking of the jackard loom which used wooden punch cards (and thus was the first computer), although it still required a human to operate it and actually weave the cloth. Any, I think we both agree that the movie doesn't make sense, and that was both our points.

Posted by: BWeaves at June 30, 2008 1:57 PM

OK, first, Giant spiders are awesome.

Second, is it bad that I haven't seen a single one of the movies in the top five this weekend?

Posted by: the_wakeful at June 30, 2008 2:12 PM

Bweaves, I think what we can agree on is that hand-weaving using "sticks" as you put them in your initial post (which creates temporary frames) has been around for ever...going by my Homer, anyway. I think we're going in circles? (Looms have been around forever, you say, but frames haven't? You can have a loom without a frame? This is a revelation to a non-weaver like myself, I admit).

And my point, actually, was that "loom of fate" isn't as silly as it sounds, given weaving/fate as an ancient metaphor.

The movie itself? Haven't seen it, but "silly" seems to fit the bill. Si si.

Posted by: Ranylt at June 30, 2008 3:22 PM

What's scarier? A clown-sized spider or a spider-sized clown?

Posted by: Loob at June 30, 2008 3:22 PM

It's just past 5:30 in the morning in Australia and I was about to go to bed, thinking that I should just check the comments before I go in case someone said something funny.

Thank you, Loob. No, really, thank you for putting the mental image of clown-sized spiders in my head just before I go sleep. You should get a medal. A freaking medal.

Posted by: Cookie at June 30, 2008 3:42 PM

Ahahaha!! I'm sorry Cookie, truly I am!
Hey I just woke up, at like 4am! I'll take over your Pajiba shift then, while you catch a nap. :)

Posted by: Loob at June 30, 2008 3:54 PM

and of course Orson Scott Card wrote it, so in sum it was the utter shit.

When I first read Ender's Game
I thought it was the best sf book I ever read. Then when I read Speaker for the Dead I thought, no, thats the sf best book I ever read. Then I read Xenocide, threw up and had emergency surgey to stop the eye bleeding.

Even the god of beauty has to take a dump, and when Aphrodite squeezes one out, it doesn't matter the source, it's still a steaming pile of shit. Saying Card wrote something doesn't mean it's good. He can squeeze one out with the best of them.

Posted by: EricD at June 30, 2008 4:37 PM

Oh btw, after many rereadings Ender's Game is the better book.

Xenocide is still a stinking pile of Uwe Boll.

Posted by: EricD at June 30, 2008 4:45 PM

I simply can't bring myself to go see them because I can't bear the thought of Disney getting /any/ of my money. I have no problem with the films, just Disney.

Same goes for Tom Cruise and now Will Smith movies because of Scientology. I'm like a movie-vegeterian or something.

I am completely with you on Tom Cruise. He has turned in to a smarmy douche that I have no interest in seeing on screen. It's hard to stay inside the movie when its stars is so annoying. When it comes to Pixar though, I don't care if they team up with Colombian crack lords, I am going to see their movies. Hmmm... that could explain how addicting Toy Story and Finding Nemo are.

Will Smith... I don't know. He seems so likeable that I can ignore the scientology stuff. If he wants to belong to a nutball cult that's his business. So long as he isn't trying to push it on me like the midget. On the other hand look at a list of his movies. A lot has been made lately of what a bankable star he is and that he has had something like eight blockbusters in a row. But how many of these are you glad you saw?
I am Crap
The Pursuit of Crappyness
Hitch okay wasn't so bad and couldn't fit crap in there.
Shark Crap or the European title Crap Tale
I, Robot not crap. was worth seeing once.
Crap Boys II
Crap in Black II was crap compared to my expectations
Ali movie was so/so. But The Greatest has been one of my heroes since youth so it gets a pass. Also, no where to put the word crap.
The Legend of Bagger Vance eh. nice movie
Wild Wild Crap the monster load of crap that started all the crap.

That's at most three and a half decent movies out of 10. And none of them being "oh my god i am ready for the buttsechs" great. You have to go back to 1993 through 1998 to get Enemy of the State, Men in Black, Independence Day , Bad Boys and Six Degrees of Separation. Honestly, Will Smith has turned into the new Eddie Murphy.

Posted by: EricD at June 30, 2008 5:20 PM

Okay, so I was bored and having lunch in front of my computer. Also... I have no life.

Posted by: EricD at June 30, 2008 5:23 PM

It was a bloody battle, but once again Grand High Alligator Rowles has been toppled from his fancy-pants throne. What's that? You didn't think he had a throne? Oh, people. Open your eyes . This isn't a movie website -- it's a tyrannical fiefdom.

What have you two done with Dustin? Wait. Is that duct tape?

Will Smith is dead to me. I forgave so many bad movies, bad songs, bad videos and cheesy tv. But his little Scientology affair with Tommy Girl is too much. He no longer exists.

Posted by: greer at June 30, 2008 6:46 PM

When I first read Ender's Game
I thought it was the best sf book I ever read. Then when I read Speaker for the Dead I thought, no, thats the sf best book I ever read. Then I read Xenocide, threw up and had emergency surgey to stop the eye bleeding.

Even the god of beauty has to take a dump, and when Aphrodite squeezes one out, it doesn't matter the source, it's still a steaming pile of shit. Saying Card wrote something doesn't mean it's good. He can squeeze one out with the best of them.

Posted by: EricD at June 30, 2008 4:37 PM

My point wasn't that the book was awesome because Card wrote it, but that the application of a loom of fate was awesome because Card wrote it. And I stand by that assertion. Card wrote the ever-loving shit out of that loom of fate, and it was awesome because he wrote it. In less-capable hands (like, say, the writer(s) of Wanted) a loom of fate is just wacky.

And I will say this: Ender's Game is quite literally the greatest SF book of all time that has ever been written or will ever be written, even once the robot apocolypse begins and we all stare into the true face of science FACTion. No hyperbole.


Also, Xenocide sucked the big one.

Posted by: Mella at June 30, 2008 7:09 PM

oh. and that case nm.

Posted by: EricD at June 30, 2008 8:36 PM

Shouldn't it really be The Thermos of DOOM? I though caps would be key here...

Posted by: llp at July 1, 2008 12:58 AM

RE Coming soon to a theater near you:
The Onion of Portents!
The Toasted Cheese Sandwich of Prophecy!
The Thermos of Doom!
Posted by: Tabula Swift at June 30, 2008 9:38 AM

Fucking hilarious. Sounds like a kick-ass trilogy.

Moop! (I promised I would work that into my regular vocabulary.)

Posted by: Slash at July 1, 2008 1:49 AM

BWeaves/Ranylt- so i was waaaay off on the 1950's but it was a french dude:

The key idea behind Jacquard's loom was to control the action of the weaving process by interfacing the behaviour of the loom to an encoding of the pattern to be reproduced. In order to do this Jacquard arranged for the pattern to be depicted as a groups of holes `punched' into a sequence of pasteboard card. Each card contained the same number of rows and columns, the presence or absence of a hole was detected mechanically and used to determine the actions of the loom. By combining a `tape' of cards together the Jacquard loom was able to weave (and reproduce) patterns of great complexity, e.g. a surviving example is a black and white silk portrait of Jacquard woven under the control of a 10,000 card `program'.... Jacquard's invention of the punched card is now recognised as important largely because of the influence it had on other developers of computing machinery utilizing his punch card concept.

so the Loom of Fate, which, granted, is super silly, is not really that far-fetched. if the loom produces a "print out" similar to a punch card, could that not be read?

Posted by: causaubon at July 1, 2008 6:47 AM

Causaubon: that is, in a word, awesome.

That totally belongs as a footnote in Foucault's Pendulum (lattices etc).

Posted by: Ranylt at July 1, 2008 8:37 AM

happy Canada Day Ranylt.

Posted by: causaubon at July 1, 2008 12:32 PM

You, too, C. And to all our other Canucky readers. The Snowbirds just flew over my house. It must be July 1.

Posted by: Ranylt at July 1, 2008 12:57 PM

" . . .so the Loom of Fate, which, granted, is super silly, is not really that far-fetched. if the loom produces a "print out" similar to a punch card, could that not be read?

Posted by: causaubon at July 1, 2008 6:47 AM "

The thing is, the "print out" is the cloth, and it's NOT binary. The original punch cards that create the cloth ARE binary. You don't read the cloth / printout. You read the original punch cards. It's all backwards. And someone has to create the punch cards. The loom doesn't create them. The whole thing is just bass ackwards stupid.

Posted by: BWeaves at July 2, 2008 11:58 AM

For a second I thought "Oh Timur. Timur. Timur..."
was a reference to the movie Rad. Holler if ya feel me!

Posted by: RichieRich at July 2, 2008 4:19 PM

The BMX movie?

Posted by: llp at July 4, 2008 7:08 PM


















Viral Hits

>> Pajiba Movie Posters

>> Pop Culture's 20 Greatest Dancing GIFs

>> Mindhole Blowers

>> The 100 Greatest Insults of All Time

>> The "Other" 100 Greatest Movie Quotes

>> The 100 Greatest Movie Threats of All Time

>> The Sean Bean Death Reel

>> Chicks Dig Beards: It's Science

>> The Coolest TV Show Title Sequences

>> The Most Rewatchable Movies

>> The Most Expensive Movies of All Time