Red Letter Media

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Favorite recurring character? (Select 4)

  • Jack / AIDSMobdy

    Votes: 257 24.0%

  • Josh / the Wizard

    Votes: 77 7.2%

  • Colin (Canadian #1)

    Votes: 460 42.9%

  • Jim (Canadian #2)

    Votes: 230 21.4%

  • Tim

    Votes: 386 36.0%

  • Len Kabasinski

    Votes: 208 19.4%

  • Freddie Williams

    Votes: 274 25.5%

  • Patton Oswalt

    Votes: 27 2.5%

  • Macaulay Culkin

    Votes: 541 50.4%

  • Max Landis

    Votes: 64 6.0%
  • Total voters
    1,073
Of course Mike has weird Star Trek opinions: it's where his autism really shines. No hating here, he's clearly autistic as fuck when it comes to science fiction especially Star Trek and has made up his mind about what the series is (see his negative opinion on Deep Space 9).

Speaking of autism examples, I think he spent waaaaaay to long over analyzing the use of the word conjuring in the ROS. I just thought it was some flowery way of saying "construct" and left it at that. Same with that clone thing. It's just bad writing.
 
I think the DS9 thing has something to do with showing the Federation as anything other than what Gene wanted the Federation to be iirc.

Which is weird since if being a bit out of character is whats wrong with DS9, then JJ's first foray with Trek should of been all negative.
 
frozenrunner said:
I wouldn't agree with you... but I can't explain Jay's distaste with Blade Runner, so...
Click to expand...

I never liked Blade Runner either. Amazing production values and cinematography. I love the opening scene. Rutger Hauer is amazing. Everything else falls flat. I liked 2049 much more even though that suffered from being over-long.

Edit: the anime was awesome too. I look forward to the anime series because the last anime I enjoyed was Devilman Crybaby.
 
Last edited:
ZMOT said:
"cerebral"
Click to expand...

I have no idea what the fuck is happening after this post, but I am going to stomp this point straight into the ground once and for all.

You know how they said The Cage was "too cerebral"?

I love TMP. But. It is too cerebral though. That does not mean its smarter than you are or other people than you are smarter for liking it.

Because all great movies have two elements: cerebral and the visceral, Everyone's favorite (and mine too) Wrath of Khan has them both.

TMP just has the cerebral. Oh sure, there are some fucking nightmarishly visceral scenes ("Enterprise, what we got back, didn't live long, fortunately.") But they are few and far between. You need to really think when that movie is playing to get it and its like subtitles. Sometimes you don't want to read while you're watching a movie. Its a fair position. But its not a question of the movie being "smart" or whatever. Alien has the exact same problem versus Aliens.

Terminator weirdly has the precise opposite issue but whatever.
 
Last edited:
BrunoMattei said:
I never liked Blade Runner either. Amazing production values and cinematography. I love the opening scene. Rutger Hauer is amazing. Everything else falls flat. I liked 2049 much more even though that suffered from being over-long.

Edit: the anime was awesome too. I look forward to the anime series because the last anime I enjoyed was Devilman Crybaby.
Click to expand...

Wait there was a Blade Runner anime?
 
You know I had a friend who was seriously a huge fan of red letter media. Wouldnt shut up about it. Tried to get me into it, but it really wasn't my thing. They are a niche I had filled already I guess? I'm not sure, I just cant seem to enjoy them.
 
Megaroad 2012 said:
I think the DS9 thing has something to do with showing the Federation as anything other than what Gene wanted the Federation to be iirc.

Which is weird since if being a bit out of character is whats wrong with DS9, then JJ's first foray with Trek should of been all negative.
Click to expand...
If that's Mike's honest belief then that would make him a pretty big hypocrite. DS9 actually showed you that there was more to the world besides the federation and is still the most unique series of them all (and my favorite)

Him saying DS9 is bad for being different, then they go around and say that Star Wars is too limited is laughable.
 
Cyril Sneer said:
It's gonna be a looooooong wait till Hasbro starts shipping full cases of the Mandalorian figure in February...😐

Of all the current Star Wars shot-callers at Disney, only Favreau seems like a relatively well-adjusted human being, as opposed to a backstabbing cold fish (Iger), bitter old cunt (Kennedy), spiteful soyboy (Johnson) or Dunning-Kruger case-study (Abrams).

If memory serves, he swore off directing further Iron Man films as a result of how frustrated he was at having to make the story of 2 hit certain beats to help set up future Marvel movies.
Click to expand...
It probably also helps that he’s got some experience acting as well as directing (Chef is fucking great if you haven’t seen it), isn’t overtly tempermental (Ruin and KK) or a hack (Abrams), and is involved in SW beyond managerial shit (he voices a recurring Mandolorian in the animated shows and the guy with the minigun blaster in the Mandolorian).
 
Cpl. Long Dong Silver said:
For me I enjoy RLM when they aren't talking Star Wars or Trek. They do a good job of analyzing new films with humor, shout out to Baguul, but the franchises they nerd out on dont get the same level of critical thought.

But that's like my opinion man.
Click to expand...
Personally I mainly come for BOTW, since there's not way in hell I'll be watching any of that shit. HITB is good too since I rarely go to the movies these days.

I almost never watch Re:View anymore. It's either Josh and Jay talking about degenerate sex movies or just some movie they want to jerk off, and every time they bring it up most of their points and info is just so wrong that you're better off just listening to the commentary track (The Warriors).
 
Dr. Geronimo said:
If that's Mike's honest belief then that would make him a pretty big hypocrite. DS9 actually showed you that there was more to the world besides the federation and is still the most unique series of them all (and my favorite)

Him saying DS9 is bad for being different, then they go around and say that Star Wars is too limited is laughable.
Click to expand...

Mike is just expressing the standard opinion of DS9 prior to 2005. It wasn't until this last decade or so that DS9's reputation changed from the worst Star Trek show to being in running for the best.
 
Stab You in the Back said:
Mike is just expressing the standard opinion of DS9 prior to 2005. It wasn't until this last decade or so that DS9's reputation changed from the worst Star Trek show to being in running for the best.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't know honestly since I only got into Trek around 2014. I guess DS9 suffered from Sonic CD syndrome, where so few people actually experienced it that so many years later when the internet became a thing the opinion shifted.
 
Dr. Geronimo said:
I wouldn't know honestly since I only got into Trek around 2014. I guess DS9 suffered from Sonic CD syndrome, where so few people actually experienced it that so many years later when the internet became a thing the opinion shifted.
Click to expand...

Usenet topics from the time still exist. They're a great resource.



Google Groups

Google Groups allows you to create and participate in online forums and email-based groups with a rich experience for community conversations.
groups.google.com groups.google.com

Let me point out that the acclaim of critics is hardly a guarantee of
popular success for any artistic endeavor (in some cases, it!s the kiss
of death), and that!s what spurred my initial posting. Critics like
certain things--variety, subtlety, idiosyncrasy, etc.--which all too
often are lost on the majority of the watching public. It's a tough
balance, and I don't think that Deep Space Nine is doing it right.

Clearly, they need to get rid of some of the TOS/TNG baggage, and go in
some new directions. But I think they're getting rid of the wrong stuff,
while still keeping other aspects of the Star Trek legacy which have
needed to be nailed into a coffin for a long time (more on this to
follow).
Click to expand...
 
Ihavetinyweewee said:
Why?

Despite the fact that Tarantino wouldn't touch it with a 100 ft pole...

He would either conform his style for it. So, it would be loyal to the series(painstakingly so). It was like he wasn't even directing it..

He wouldn't conform and it would be this insane mess...

Signature directors don't really work for Star Wars. It's really the perfect vehicle for journeymen...

Though, someone like James Cameron(not too distinct)would fit right in. Ron Howard would have been better not cleaning up someone's mess...

If I had to pick franchise for Tarantino? Bond, he would be fantastic for a retro Bond...
Click to expand...

He makes tight scripts, understands character motivations and arcs, knows how to tie shit together without it being either over-the-top telegraphed or pointless and understands the point of scholck is to entertain. He knows how to get the most out of actors and the best ways to use music to amplify emotional moments. He's not a guy who makes blockbusters. He makes intimate stories that stay interesting, smart dialog that builds backstory without shitting it all down your throat in exposition and most of all, he understands the beauty of having every character's flaws be the foundation of how they interact with one another.

That said, he'd be a great choice for a Bond movie that doesn't rely on explosions to build mood for sure.

James Cameron would make for a better "Big" Star Wars movie that handled the newest Skywalker family drama, but right now I think they should stay the fuck away from those stories and focus more on the underbelly of that particular universe and work more on low budget character focused shorter stories like Mandolorian, which is itself another reason why I think Faverau and Tarintino would be the guys I'd pick in a fantasy scenario where Disney wasn't as stupid as it is greedy
 
Stab You in the Back said:
Mike is just expressing the standard opinion of DS9 prior to 2005. It wasn't until this last decade or so that DS9's reputation changed from the worst Star Trek show to being in running for the best.
Click to expand...
Voyager premiered in 1995 and Enterprise in 2001 and they both immediately caught flack and took that title. I remember a lot of autistic fighting over whether or not DS9 was "true" Star Trek but everyone knew VOY and ENT kind of sucked right off the bat.
 
Standardized Profile said:
Foster even wrote it into the novelization. Kirk reminisces about his "love instructor," and the Enterprise has observation lounges specifically for crew members to fuck under the stars.

Or nothing more.
Click to expand...
The novelization was written by Gene Roddenberry (supposedly) and includes a bit about how Kirk and Spock totally weren't gay for each other. In later years he said he would have written them gay for each other if he could have, so idk what the Great Bird of the Galaxy actually did, besides lie a lot about everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom