reddsun1

Love those T/A Challengers and Cudas. Marcos announces a new model [finally], the TSO GT2. It's a marked departure from the Mantis design, which has remained fundamentally unchanged--as least visually--for over 20 years. They finally design an all new car, and what does it look like? They made it look just like the bloody TVR! The distinctive "trademark" rear deck design remains though. Projected performance numbers look impressive: weight: 1150 kg wt. dist.: 50/50 HP: 475 0-60: 4 sec 0-100: 9 sec 50-70: 2 sec top speed: 185 For those that like different--dare I say eccentric--designs, the Marcos is definitely one that'll set it's owner apart. Usually a crowd drawer at the tracks, the Marcos' were pretty cool, even if they were a bit hard on the eyes...

Jesus, could they have at least sent this chick to a gym/health club for about 6-8 wks to tone up before production began? She looks more like a half-drunk college freshman than a comic book heroine...

Hot dayum, this one's nice! Too bad the E-bodies suffered from a little weight problem. Weighing in at about 3800lbs, they're pretty portly for pony cars...still damn hot though. This one's a real winner. Eclipse my arse! If I had the disposable dough, I'd go for a classic like this one any day.

I like old Mopars; from back before the styling got too butt fugly. Nicely done--nice wide meats at all four corners, but they recognized that you've got to work within the constraints of the original body design's wheel arches. It just looks so tacky when guys go and stick big arse wagon wheel 20+ inchers on these old horses...

I think that is one of the best looking Mustangs ever (69 fastback still my favorite). The black ground trim really help slim the fat styling. They should do this for all the new Mustangs. I would almost be tempted to get one myself someday but they sound expensive. The extimated $39k sounds too cheap compared to what the old Cobra's would cost. Given the high demand for normal GT's and the collectible Shelby name, I doubt you will get one for less than $45k if you can find one at all. Yup, keep going up on those estimates. I don't know if it's that demand is that high, or if Ford is creating artificial demand with short supply of the GT's. My local Ford dealer has only gotten two GT Mustangs in stock since the model's introduction, and those were whisked away by waiting buyers who'd ordered them well beforehand, before they could ever even grace the showroom floor. They've already started selling GT "clones," putting driving lights, LeMans stripes, and wheel packages on some of their V6 models [had a red/white one that looked an awful lot like the Shelby display car, some weeks before that car's announcement].

What? Doesn't anyone else want to eventually see a male power armor from DYRL? C'mon, give the baddies some love! Those Valk's have got to have something to blow up. But I do want more Valks, too...

I like the new Mustangs. A nice combination of the classic styling cues of the originals combined with the reliability/convenience [at least, they should have that] of modern auto building tech. But that comparison pic is like looking at a side by side of the young Elvis vs. the old Elvis. Sure, they're pretty much the same; but it definitely looks bigger, fatter, the increase in girth is really pronounced.

Don't know if this has been posted before--a quick search didn't turn up anything. Here's an, um, interesting short featuring Batman. I think this Bartram guy's been brought up here before. If you like crossovers this'll be right up your alley. Couldn't be any worse than that AVP crap [i still refuse to see that one, just on principal]. Not bad, for a home-made flick... Batman: Dead End http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2474406

Well, there are those that would argue "George Lucas owns the rights/franchise, he can do whatever he pleases with it..." Well George, you DID do just what you wanted with it--the original films as well as the direction of the new stories--and now they ALL SUCK! For what it's worth, I know it's wishful thinking, but I hope Batman and War of The Worlds kick the sh-t out of ep. III at the box office this summer...meh, what does it matter? G.L.'s financial future is well secured, thanks to legions of fans who'll accept sh-tty story telling and over hyped CGI as the norm...

The pace is picking up at LeMans in the practice sessions. Some teams have had shunts, including the Spyker team (bummer). Team Flying Lizard looks to be the pace-setter in the GT2 field, while Team Corvette has still not shown their hand--if they have an ace to pull. Russian Age Racing 550 Maranello holds pole for the "big" GT's so far...

Looks good. Mighty good. Nice eye candy. Group IV Pantera, Ford GT (the REAL one) in a game; what more could you ask for? Hope the sound FX are better than the Gran Turismo games. Don't get me wrong, I like those classic games--but the creators didn't know from sh-t about what a V8 sounds like...

Hmm, was surprised to see this one, considering how well this movie's being received so far. Only 2 out of 4 stars. --oh yeah, so have they finally decided what fuggin' decade this is going to be set in? I know it's difficult to pigeon-hole a character/franchise like that, especially since it's been around for what, 50-something years? But still, it got a little friggin annoying: the '89 movie looked like it hovered somewhere in the early 80's; the cartoon wasn't even on the radar [there were jets, helicopters and such, but people still wore derby hats and drove what looked like Packards and Hudsons]; those god awful Shumacher films looked like "Metropolis" on steroids and acid at the same time. Now we're supposed to be going back, "before" all the previous films. So has Bruce Wayne got a gadget for time-travel too? Bale Gives Us Dark Evolution of 'Batman' Wednesday, June 15, 2005 10:30 AM EDT The Associated Press By CHRISTY LEMIRE "Your anger gives you great power _ but if you let it, it will destroy you." Advice from the manipulative Chancellor Palpatine to malleable Anakin Skywalker, as the young Jedi teeters on the edge of becoming Darth Vader in the most recent "Star Wars" prequel? Close. Those words of warning actually come from the mysterious mentor to Bruce Wayne, the industrial heir on the verge of embracing his own dark side for the sake of good and transforming himself into Batman in "Batman Begins." Although we all know which came first in this chicken-and-egg scenario, comparisons between these summer blockbusters are inevitable, as both reveal the back stories of iconic pop-culture figures. Some of the same sorts of revelations that give "Revenge of the Sith" a sense of geeky adolescent wonder surface here, too: the joy of discovering how Bruce (Christian Bale) develops the Batcave, the Batsuit and the Batmobile (rendered here like a gas-guzzling Hummer, nothing like the sleek Corvette-style Batmobile in which Michael Keaton tooled around the streets of Gotham back in 1989). But except for a few quips from the formidable supporting cast _ including Michael Caine as an ideal Alfred the butler and Morgan Freeman as Bruce's equivalent of Q from the James Bond films _ "Batman Begins" is suffocatingly self-serious. And to continue the comparison, that only makes "Sith" look superior. Yes, the Dark Knight is supposed to be a tormented soul, having witnessed his parents' murder and used that guilt and anger as the inspiration for his nighttime forays into vigilante justice. You won't find any nipples in the Batsuit here, which should appease the purists who were appalled by the Joel Schumacherization of the franchise with "Batman Forever" and "Batman & Robin" in the mid-1990s. But at least Schumacher (and Tim Burton more successfully before him) put their own directorial stamps on their films. It's hard to tell that "Batman Begins" began with Christopher Nolan, the mastermind behind "Memento," one of the most inventive films in recent memory. As director and co-writer (with David S. Goyer, who also wrote the "Blade" movies based on the comic books), Nolan takes an admirable stab at developing a character-driven drama, only to give in to generic action-movie conventions with a blinding, deafening, explosion-laden finale that could have capped off any number of interchangeable Jerry Bruckheimer flicks. There are also some surprising inconsistencies throughout the script, such as the jarring morning-after-the-destruction scene, and the fact that Bruce is presumed dead for seven years while secretly training to become Batman (Liam Neeson plays his mentor, yet another "Star Wars" reminder), and no one is shocked to see him alive and well when he returns to save Gotham from crime and corruption. Then again, this Batman isn't exactly a live wire himself. While Bale is beautiful, chiseled and self-possessed, he has a steely detachment behind his eyes _ a quality that served him well in the starring role in "American Psycho," but renders him almost passionless here. But the weakest link of all is Katie Holmes as Bruce's childhood friend and vague love interest, Rachel Dawes. Part of the problem is that this is a man's world _ at least it will be until Catwoman shows up in a couple of episodes _ so her role is underdeveloped, and part of the problem is the casting itself. It is simply too difficult to accept the former "Dawson's Creek" star, with her exceedingly youthful good looks and little-girl voice, as a tough-as-nails assistant district attorney who represents one of the last bastions of morality in this decaying urban cesspool. Speaking of Nolan's Gotham, with help from cinematographer Wally Pfister (who also shot "Memento" and Nolan's "Insomnia"), it is a visually striking mixture of images. It's almost Chicago, only a little slicker and a little grittier at the same time. But another of the film's attempts at relevance _ a threat of foreign terrorists spreading poison through the city's water supply to create massive communal panic _ comes off as a clunky reflection of real-life homeland security concerns. It's a little too tabloid- and cable-news-ready for a character, and a story, that are timeless. "Batman Begins," a Warner Bros. Pictures release, is rated PG-13 for intense action violence, disturbing images and some thematic element. Running time: 137 minutes. Two stars out of four.

What is the "Thunderchild" sequence I read mention of? Forgive my ignorance, if you will. I'll put a little faith in Spielberg to come through on this one. His movies--although they all seem to follow basically the same strict narrative format/layout--do tell good stories.

Metahuman? What's that? I'll admit, I'm looking forward to getting a chance to see this one--that, and WoTW. And I can't remember the last movie I paid to see in the theater [been spoiled by cable]. Like Loner, Liam Neeson will always be Darkman to me...LOL, that, and one of the band of thieves in Krull

Those giant "fingers" [in the 2nd and last pics] look like those on the hands of the Martians in the original George Pal ver. of WoTW. A little nod to the original film on the part of Spielberg et. al? Is it just me, or is the finger picking up that dude in the last pic slightly transparent?

I hate to admit it, but I've never read the book yet. I know, I know; how hard is it to get a library card, right? I'm no masachist, but I'm almost tempted to paruse the Wal Mart aisles for a copy of this Pendragon ver. of WoTW. I consider myself a B-movie fan, and according to the review linked above, this film could set some sort of new precedent for cheesy suckiness. Why willingly subject myself to such a potentially harmful assault on the senses and good taste? I don't know--I just think they're good for some laughs, depending on the mood. I don't know which ones are more amusing: the B-movies that suck donkey's balls and [whose creators/producers] have the nerve to take themselves seriously, or the ones whose casts/crews know [seemingly from the start] that they've got a lame duck on their hands, and just roll with the punches, so to speak... Too bad Mystery Science Theater 3000 isn't still on the air [meh, it just wasn't as funny after Joel left, anyway]. This WoTW sounds like perfect fodder, from what I've read so far...

Kelsey Grammer? WTF?

Ah yes, Impalas are sweet. They're like making French Toast: you almost havta like, consciously try to make one of those come out bad/ugly. You still see one or two '63s or '64s sittin in the weeds by the road every now and then, but the owner usually thinks you ought to pay an arm and a leg for the otherwise rusting pile, 'cause they know it's a hot ticket.

ooooh! You gonna geeettttt it! This particularly crappy looking movie--and it's not so subtle similarities to Mac Plus--has come up quite a few times; so much so in fact, it incurs the wrath and profanities of many a MW member...

Thanks for the input, Js. The AK would definitely be for Raptor size (Utah, movie, whichever school of thought applies) or smaller beasties. For a T-Rex? Oh, I'd definitely be doing my best Road Runner impersonation. *meep meep* How heavy/cumbersome would a .50 cal be for use by one or two men? Probably so heavy it'd have to be mounted on something like a truck turret, right? Hey wait, what about a .30 cal? --Nah, did some research; .30 cal = 7.62mm, that's too small for what we want to bust up. Gun weighs 41 lbs too. Nah, fu-- dat. A minigun a la Predator or Terminator 2 is definitely "movie magic" isn't it? I seem to remember reading a debate (wasn't it a thread here at MW?) that discussed how carrying ammo would be impractical--definitely not enough room in a backpack--and the "recoil" would likely push a guy over on his back like a turtle? Funny thing is, back in '94, when this movie was still wowing movie goers and "cutting edge," we had a fellow do a lecture at my college my freshman yr. on the subject of the feasability of extracting DNA from these "frozen" specimens in amber. Can't remember if he was an archaeologist, paleontologist(sp?) or whatever, but I remember he explained about how the technique shown in the movie wasn't all that far from reality. His estimation was that "in about 10-15 years, science would actually allow the extraction/sampling of DNA from sources like amber fossils." Among the most promising specimens they thought they'd get results from? Allosaurus was one of the species he mentioned that sticks in my memory. I remember being a bit frightened that this guy was so excited about the prospect of getting workable DNA of a creature like that. Well, that was about 10 years ago; I hope he was being overly optimistic about their chances...

Hey how about one of these for the Batmobile? These look the part...

Well, I suppose if I had to limit myself to just what I could carry on short notice, i.e. "hey, the dinos are out! We got to raise the fu-- up outta here!" then I'd probably want to go with: AK-47: supposed to be legendary for it's ruggedness and ease of maintenance. Had a H.S. ROTC instructor who told us about how some G.I.s managed to sneak one back from Vietnam (himself included), and these things could shoot through a 14" thick block of solid wood. Good to have something that can put a lot of lead in a dino's arse real quick... 12 gauge: for up close & dirty, probably would want a 9-shot military/police type shotgun, a Mossberg, Remington or the like... Colt 45: supposed to have been designed from the outset for stopping/downing power with one shot? I imagine with a good supply of b/up clips, reloading on the run would be quicker and easier than with a revovler?

Okay, I've only got one major issue w/the '89 Batmobile. You've got the "jet intake" at the front of the car; you've got the flaming "exhaust nozzle" at the tail of the car; and you've got the fuggin' cockpit, RIGHT SMACK IN BETWEEN! WTF? Shouldn't that make for a big honkin' a$$ jet exhaust pipe running right through the driver's compartment? Even if you explain this away with "the exhaust is re-directed around the cockpit," that makes for a lot of unnecessary nozzling don't it? Where is it routed: around the sides? underneath? Either way, that ought to make it real dang hard to keep that interior air-conditioned..."by the way Robin, don't touch that footwell," *aaarrrgghhh!* "well, I told ya so..."

Oh yeah, doin some S&D in gerwalk mode, with a full load out of missiles. Would be quite effective against T-Rex. Ability to follow terrain at high speed, then elevate to safe alt. quikly, and unload a salvo from hover. Ooh, nasty...

Yeah, runnin 'em over would work. But then you gotta worry about guts and muscle and shredded bone and crap mucking up the tracks--and some poor ba---rd's gotta hose all that crap off when all's said and done. No thanks. Talk about sh-t detail... But seriously (is it possible to be that here?) I thought we were working w/in the constraints of the settings, i.e. theme park with limited personnel. Hammond's not going to want small tanks and other military surplus lying around a "family theme park/resort island," much less foot the bill for all this stuff. Also, what about the personnel's ability to make use of it? They ought to be highly trained, I'll give you that, but not COMBAT trained. But hell, if this is a no-holds-barred-what-would-you-bring-to-the-rumble what if session, then I say go for it! You come to a knife fight, ya bring a gun! He sends one of yours to tha hospital, you send one a his to tha morgue!