JsARCLIGHT

If I remember right quite a few people get ripped to pieces in Romero Zombie movies... I clearly remember a lot of dismemberment at least and of course the well deserved pull in half that that ass pipe in Day of the Dead gets (shown by Ladic). The human body is suprisingly weak when it comes to several people doing damage to it. I can't say it makes scientific sense but in the few spots in Romero's movies that the Zombies do pull people to pieces it always plays out the same: person is surrouned, goes down to the floor, is "set upon" by the Zombie horde and they all pull and tear and grab and yank on the poor victim until eventually parts just... come off. Grizly but it happened. Edit: if anything the best defense against Zombies (from the Romero school of Zombie tactics) is a two part system of teamwork and mobility. A fast vehicle that is protected on all sides and very stable (think heavy truck or tank) but that allows the occupants to keep the Zombies from piling up on it is ideal. When you don't have a vehicle, teamwork is the best. Moving in squads or pairs at the least gives you two sets of eyes and two brains to get out a jam.

Decking the heroes out in armor would be smart... but since when are horror movies smart? If anything the main cast of horror movies suffer from the largest case of worst judgement ever I have seen. Zombies! Quick! Barracade ourselves in somewhere were we are sitting ducks! Monsters! Eeek! Run down into the basement to "get away"! Axe Murderer! Argh! Hide in the closet, the one place they would never look!

In regaurds to Romero it should be pointed out that for the bulk of the '80s he spent most of this time on his Tales from the Dark Side TV Show... which was worlds better than the lame Tales from the Crypt. He also supposedly has remained in the realm of B-movies by choice, I guess he just feels comfortable there. As for his work history it should also be noted that he is a meniacal control freak who either gets his way or he takes his toys and goes home... a big reason he has been kicked off more projects than he has finished in recent years. All one has to do is look at his fight against the MPAA and his simple "F you guys" response by independantly releasing Dawn of the Dead unedited and unrated just to spite them. The man has (from what most people say) a tremendous ego and an even larger need to dominate his creative efforts and see them released in their "true form". To me he is sort of a one trick pony in that about all he can do well is horror, Zombie horror in particular. Then again the same can be said for George Lucas and Star Wars. When you create (or in this case drastically reinvent) a genre of movie you can pretty much sit back and do what you want... poor or not, working or not.... and Romero seems to revel in that.

Another thing to point out is that Romero's "Zombie Movies" are not at their core about Zombies but rather the downfall of humanity. The Zombies are just a backdrop for the human decline into insanity that is the meat of his stories. All of Romero's movies, especially his over the top treatment in the original Dawn of the Dead, are morality plays made to make us question our own habits and mindsets. Very few, if any, non-Romero movies featuring Zombies do that at all. Most non-Romero Zombie movies are just about the Zombies and how they show up, kill people and then get killed by the uber elite heroes... cough cough residentevil cough cough... The true monster in Romero's movies is man, the living one that is.

JsARCLIGHT (135 results) versus Agent ONE (25,800,000 results) The winner is: Agent ONE I just can't win!

If by despirate measures you mean making our own toys because Toynami sucks then I'm behind you. The only problem is behind Toynazi is HG and behind HG is a flock of lawyers just itching to burn down that retainer.

But at least there is no way this movie can be worse than the Assault on Precinct 13 "remake". Hell, if they just showed footage from the original game it would be better than House of the Dead.

SCOOP! A High Res screenshot has been discovered of pre-production! In this very defined and heavily post-produced image we see Uwe Boll discovering his script for Alone in the Dark in his writing room.

I was stupid to pay for this toy in the first place, if someone wants to PAY for the box they can have it. If I simply wanted it out of my house it would have gone in the trash. I want to recoup some of the outrageous cost I paid for this piece of crap. Edit: I would rather BEAT my money out of Toynazi with my bare hands but that isn't going to happen any time soon. I'd rather someone get something positive out of my shame than me just crumple it up and toss it. If someone wants the package and is willing to pay for it then they can have it and I'll be happy that at least part of this thing is out of my house and part of my money has come back from it. Buying one of these toys is a crapshoot at best and a horrid mistake at worst. I just saw one of the "Rook" toys that a guy in my office bought and it is just as crappy as mine is. Toynazi should be lined up against the wall and shot. This is abuse of the fanbase, not capitalism anymore.

Not Tom Baker, the other poofy haired Doctor. The one who took over after the guy who took over for Tom Baker. I forget his name but he was a complete buttpipe... I think he had the noteriety of being the "shortest" Doctor (time wise). THIS Tool: EDIT: and just for comparisson this is the BBC mini Ford Prefect:

Oh well... anyone else want the box? I'd really like to loose this feeling of complete ripoff that I still have from this ass-tastic toy. You'd think my ire would go down after so many months but every now and again I see it up in the closet and I'm angry all over again.

If all you want is the box then shoot I'll sell you mine. If nothing more than to recoup some of the money I spent on this darn thing. Mine is a Stick (Scott) box, like new shape with everything but the toy. Even have the white cardboard overbox. I had to have my toy "replaced" ( ) so the box actually has a different serial number than my toy so it's sort of pointless to keep the box if the numbers don't match anyway. Let me know if you or anyone else is interested. I still feel dirty for spending so much money on this pile of crap... I'd do anything to make some money back on it. But I will not sell the toy as I wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing I foisted this piece of crap on someone else.

I guess I'm all alone liking Mos Def as Ford Prefect. To me right now it is all about the look of the piece. In that jacket with his rucksack and towel around his neck Mos Def looks to be a very nice Ford in my eyes. Now when it comes to his mannerisms, speech and way of carrying himself he cannot and (I really hope) will not be a "rapper". He will be Ford Prefect, the straight laced yet outgoing and tricky alien posing as a Human. As for Zaphod the books only gave us the impression that he was a pompus, flashy man. I always imagined him boarderline rockstar-ish... not "whimsical" in any way. The extra arm and head were a fashion statement for him, sort of a "I've got more than you got" sort of thing. Even in the BBC mini he was a flashy, exhuberant celebrity sort. The hair, the coat, the five-o-clock shadow and that sly smile certanly (to me at least) read Zaphod Beeblebrox. I do wholeheartedly admit that the lack of the third arm and second head don't make him the full-on Zaphod that we should be getting but the look, the "Wardrobe" if you will, is dead on. The big thing, make that the thing, that will make these people the characters is how they act out their roles. Yes Marvin is a huge ping pong ball with a body attached but if they make that work then bitchin!... same goes for a black Ford Prefect. If Mos Def can pull it off then bitchin'! again. I still have my doubts about how this whole thing can come together and "work" like the BBC mini did but for some reason seeing those cast shots makes me have hope.

At least you can see why the new Marvin is so depressed... shorty tubby sawn-off little big headed thing he is. HEAD! MUUVE! Marvin is all about his voice though. What "sold" the Marvin on the radio show and on the BBC mini was his voice... this slow, lolling, depressive monotone british drone. When he says "Life... don't talk to me about life..." you just know bang that is Marvin. This little billiard ball headed guy will be all about the voice. Nail the voice and the body movements and the package will come together.

The really depressed looking one only exsists as press stills I think. I have only seen three pics of it. From what I have been told it was used for pictures for the books. Outside of that I have seen that version nowhere else.

It also seems the "new" Marvin is quite vertically challenged.

The extra head up his nose is somehow... fitting... for Zaphod. I guess hiding it up his nose makes his scoring Trillian away from Arthur even more plausable at that infamous "Flat Party". As for Marvin the Paranoid Android here are two versions of him that exsist: Neither of which really capture the "feel" of Marvin from the books... although the top one certainlly has the depression working for him. I think the big "character design" angle of Marvin has always been that he is first encountered on the Heart of Gold ship... a ship so new that the pastic is still on the seats. A lot of people have assumed that Marvin was built and supplied with the Heart of Gold and thus is as new and shiny as that ship. But the books don't say that.

If you are a Hitchhiker's fan and you like shows like Dr Who for their campiness then the BBC mini is a must have. It's been out on DVD for a few years now but is getting harder to find. I love my copy... all the bad costumes, bad sets and terribly brittish acting. Add to that the Supertramp-ish musical score and it's comedy gold.

The only reason I think they might be "hard" is that the BBC mini uses heavy, if not omnipresent, narration to convey most of the unspoken content of the books. American directors seem to have this almost distaste for narration in their movies, some even going so far as to call it a "cinematic crutch". I'm just worried that the lion's share of the descriptive humor from the books will be "lost in translation" if the american director chooses to omit large chunks of narration.

Interesting. I might be alone in this but I like them making Ford Prefect black. The kooky white guy they got to play him in the BBC show reminded me too much of that frizzy haired Doctor Who actor. Zaphod looks spot on... but missing his extra head and arm. Trillian does not look quite right but then again I feel that the bubbly blonde they had playing her in the BBC mini was spot on. And Arthur Dent looks perfect. Totally confused goofy looking guy. My interest in this movie is rising.

Of all the books in the world that are "difficult" to translate to film I still think Hitchhiker's Guide is at the top. Mostly because a good deal of the humor comes from the writing about things in the books, not necessarily the things themselves or what they do. That is why I liked the BBC mini so much because it was just topheavy with narration to capture all that unspoken, unacted humor that the books are chock full of. Hearing that Adams himself had something to do with the new movie is more comforting. Then again I am more of a Dirk Gently fan than a Arthur Dent fan. Holistic Detective movie all the way.

Being a fan of the books I'd be interested in the movie IF they did not take a bunch of liberties with it and start changing things around. I love the campy '80s BBC miniseries and for some reason it just feels "right" for Hitchhiker's Guide. Plus the books really needed the context of a miniseries or series of movies as there is just so much material to be covered from the first three books. Even the 3 hour long BBC miniseries felt rushed with several things "missing". For those not in the know Hitchhiker's Guide is about an Earthling, Arthur Dent, his alien companion who looks like an Earthling, Ford Prefect, and their kooky misadventures across the galaxy. It all starts when Earth is destroyed to make way for an intergalactic expressway and just goes from there. The titular tome, the "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" is sort of a super guidebook (of which Ford Prefect was working on his part of, writing about Earth in two words or less) for intergalactic vagabonds and travellers. The book is a constant aid to Arthur as he learns who's who in the known (but unknown to him) universe. The books are fantastic if you love that quirky "not right" humor. That being said the sort of deadpan descriptive humor of the books is hard to translate to film and the BBC miniseries did a respectable job but it came at the price of being very, very narration heavy... which is generally a theatrical no-no to modern film makers.

Gamespot Story I've seen video of these suits and they are damn impressive. The people inside are total nutcases but their armor is damn impressive. I'd like to see a fistfight between a fanboy in a Stormtrooper costume and one of these guys in a Master Chief suit. My money is on the Chief... those Halo guys just want it more.

It's funny but the more "spoiler" pics I see in this thread the more I actually want to watch this movie. I was stoked to hell and back to see Phantom Menace but when I saw it I was disappointed... I was only mildly interested in Clones due to my reaction to PM... and until looking at all these pics my overall feeling about this movie was one of "meh". My hopes for a darker film seem to be coming true. Sure everyone "said" this one was going to be the darkest since Empire but I didn't really believe it. Then again King George has to tackle not only the rise of Vader but the total obliteration of the Jedi order in one movie... how it cannot skew dark seems impossible.

I myself am more afraid of the guys making Halo Master Cheif outfits and running around in the woods.