Shorty Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 ...just go to the cinema man, rather than watching some crappy cam rip. Also learn to google :/
Paj! Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 Ugh, watching films online... Do you want the film industry to die? [i know your lone choice to not pay to see it won't affect anything on it's own, but it's the principle. Not to mention a SHITTY viewing experience. And just a bit of an insult to all the years/months of hard work by hundreds of individuals put into films.] [i also know people can throw 'downloading comics' in my face, but I barely do that and I buy graphic novels so deal. And obviously filmmaking is closer to home.]
Daft Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 I don't really have a problem with pirating. I think it's a completely fair response to absolutely ludicrous cinema ticket prices. I would rather see a film in the cinema, of course. If prices weren't ridiculous I'd almost definitely spend more overall because I'd go a lot more. I do find pirating comics bizarre. It's definitely a much less secure industry financially than the film industry.
chairdriver Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 (Orange Wednesdays are good value / not when you go to see Something Borrowed / it was jokes)
Daft Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 I know no one on Orange, sadly. Literally no one. My sister used to be but then she joined the real world/Vodafone.
DomJcg Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 I don't really have a problem with pirating. I think it's a completely fair response to absolutely ludicrous cinema ticket prices. I would rather see a film in the cinema, of course. If prices weren't ridiculous I'd almost definitely spend more overall because I'd go a lot more. I do find pirating comics bizarre. It's definitely a much less secure industry financially than the film industry. Oh you say that and it is true for any company that isn't the big two, but those two (more marvel than DC) can survive a large decline in sales. Hey, I love comics, but i am a student and I can't afford to pay hundreds a year for comics, but I still want to read them. Give me more money and I will buy comics with it
Paj! Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 Yeah, comics are incredibly expensive for the time spent actually reading them/what you get. Graphic novels (trade paperbacks collecting the individual issues together) are much more satisfying, and though usually overpriced-feeling too (in highstreet shops anyway), at least it feels like a "thing"/experience to take in. Cinema prices are expensive in the big ones, but then it's such a thing to do. I'm over £7.something for a good cinema experience. Just don't go watch obviously bad films and it's money well-spent.
Ramar Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 Oh you say that and it is true for any company that isn't the big two, but those two (more marvel than DC) can survive a large decline in sales. Hey, I love comics, but i am a student and I can't afford to pay hundreds a year for comics, but I still want to read them. Give me more money and I will buy comics with it Bad argument is bad.
The Mad Monkey Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 ...just go to the cinema man, rather than watching You paying? Because with only two days work a week, and a small disability cheque once a month I'm struggling to afford luxuries. And a cinema trip more than twice a year is something I can't afford. It's not like it's going to make any difference to anybody, I'll wait to watch it on TV before I'll pay for it.
Shorty Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 You paying?Because with only two days work a week, and a small disability cheque once a month I'm struggling to afford luxuries. And a cinema trip more than twice a year is something I can't afford. It's not like it's going to make any difference to anybody, I'll wait to watch it on TV before I'll pay for it. I went to watch this film at a big Cineworld for £6.10, that's nothing really. I had a Burger King the same day which was more expensive. Magazines are at the £5.99 mark now, video games set us back £30-£40. £6.10 for a huge screen, high quality image, top of the range surround sound is worth it. Admittedly at my local Cineworld you can add a couple quid to that, but at my local Odeon you can take one off. I'm not talking about the morals of it here, just the level of experience. If you can't afford the cinema wait til you can rent it or something. At the very least wait for a DVD rip :/
The Mad Monkey Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 I'm not that bothered about the experience, can usually find a decent enough copy, which I have now judging from the sample.
Wesley Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 My ticket cost me 5.20 I think. Don't know what you mugs are complaining about. Come up north and you'd buy the cinema for a tenner. Anyway, it was good. A bit janky at times, but good.
Mundi Posted June 7, 2011 Posted June 7, 2011 Really enjoyed it, best X-men film in my opinion, despite the incredibly lazy writing. Shaws helmet, so the Russians made a telepathy blocking helmet, without hinting that the Russians had an access to a telepathic person (would have affected that possible war quite a bit) so they could design something telepathy proof. Right... And Emma does not count because she had no idea about the helmet, but would have made sense. Beast creates the stealth jet, alright I can believe that, boy geniuses are surprise in films. Beast creates Cerebro prior to meeting Xavier. What the fuck. They establish that the CIA has no access to a telepath and yet they made a device to enhance their powers, just for shits and giggles. Unless someone told Beast about Xavier beforehand and he made it without meeting him and just guessed how Xavier's power works. Which would have made him the greatest mind in human history. And tailor, seeing as he apparently made his suit overnight, while dealing with his shapechange. Just having Xavier work with him on Cerebro would have made sense. This is important stuff that could have been fixed easily... Also, Russians make beds out of stuff that can crack diamonds, got a laugh out of that one. Everything else I loved, especially the characters. Made me really want to get every comic labelled X-men and read it.
Shorty Posted June 8, 2011 Posted June 8, 2011 Really enjoyed it, best X-men film in my opinion, despite the incredibly lazy writing. Beast creates Cerebro prior to meeting Xavier. What the fuck. They establish that the CIA has no access to a telepath and yet they made a device to enhance their powers, just for shits and giggles. Unless someone told Beast about Xavier beforehand and he made it without meeting him and just guessed how Xavier's power works. Which would have made him the greatest mind in human history. And tailor, seeing as he apparently made his suit overnight, while dealing with his shapechange. Just having Xavier work with him on Cerebro would have made sense. I can't remember exactly, but couldn't there have been a big time gap (even weeks/months) between them meeting Xavier and creating Cerebro? One thing that did bother me is, in X2 they made a point that Magneto helped him build it (which makes sense, since the big one was made of metal). I suppose that a big, enhanced version could still be created during an off-screen mutual friendship in between the two time periods.
The Mad Monkey Posted June 8, 2011 Posted June 8, 2011 I suppose that a big, enhanced version could still be created during an off-screen mutual friendship in between the two time periods. Easily, Magneto and Beast were staying at the mansion for what could have been more than enough time to construct the chamber and rebuild the equipment, I'm thinking the training montage could easily have covered weeks, if not months. Anyways, enjoyed the film, a nice mix of story and action. Was a bit weird seeing someone else wearing Magnetos helmet though.
Mundi Posted June 8, 2011 Posted June 8, 2011 I can't remember exactly, but couldn't there have been a big time gap (even weeks/months) between them meeting Xavier and creating Cerebro? Could be, but they never establish that.
Paj! Posted June 8, 2011 Posted June 8, 2011 Didn't they just say that Cerebro was a device designed to 'enhance brainwaves' or something generic like that? And then it just happened to work better with a telepath/they enhanced it for Xavier? I can't remember.
Ramar Posted June 8, 2011 Posted June 8, 2011 Didn't they just say that Cerebro was a device designed to 'enhance brainwaves' or something generic like that? And then it just happened to work better with a telepath/they enhanced it for Xavier? I can't remember. That's what I thought.
McPhee Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 (edited) I thought most of the mutant cast were really underwhelming/badly written/badly chosen. Xavier, Erik and Raven were bang on the money. Ms Frost wasn't too bad either. Beast, on the other hand, was appalling. To skinny, too emo and the make-up was dire. He didn't look fierce or intimidating, he just looked angsty - like he needed a good slap. The rest of them were completely 'meh' and uninspiring either way. I enjoyed the film, and it's probably my favourite X-Men film to date, but it could (and should) have been so much better. James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender were fantastic as Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr. IMO they should have cut the cast down and focussed more on those two. Edited June 9, 2011 by McPhee
Paj! Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 I'm suprised at the amount of people saying it was their favourite to date...X-Men 2 (and the first too) is far and away a better whole film.
Slaggis Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 I loved the last half an hour or so, but the rest wasn't anything spectacular like I had hoped.
Mundi Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Didn't they just say that Cerebro was a device designed to 'enhance brainwaves' or something generic like that? And then it just happened to work better with a telepath/they enhanced it for Xavier? I can't remember. Most likely that and it fits with the CIA spending millions on researching mental powers during that time. Just could have handled better.
Hamishmash Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 People who watch pirate films "because it's too expensive at the cinema" are clearly forgetting why they've had to keep on increasing the price of cinema tickets over the past decade. Also - here's a fun pork-based fact from IMDb for all you pork-based-fact-fans! "This is the second time that January Jones has been cast in 1962 opposite an actor with a pork based name. The first was in “Mad Men” (2007) opposite John Hamm and then this alongside Kevin Bacon."
Daft Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 (edited) People who watch pirate films "because it's too expensive at the cinema" are clearly forgetting why they've had to keep on increasing the price of cinema tickets over the past decade. Cinema prices are much much cheaper in most other parts of the world so that argument is pretty lame. I believe it's the same argument the music industry used to raise the price of CDs. This source is pretty old but it still hold true. WHAT YOU PAY IN... Leicester Square, Odeon £17.50 Putney, Odeon £8.50 Copenhagen, Vester Vov Vov£6.32 Stockholm, Filmstaden Sergel£5.82 Athens, Trianon £4.70 Berlin, Imax £4.52 Brussels, Kinepolis £4.05 Rome, Warner Village £3.70 Lisbon, Lusomundo Vasco de Gama £3.37 Madrid, Circulo de Bellas Artes £2.70 Here's a better more up to date article. Who are the film industry's real pirates? Fancy seeing Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides? It's on at the Empire Leicester Square in London, where a couple of seats in the circle for you and your beloved will set you back £35.30. Edited June 9, 2011 by Daft
Hamishmash Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Cinema prices are much much cheaper in most other parts of the world so that argument is pretty lame. I believe it's the same argument the music industry used to raise the price of CDs. This source is pretty old but it still hold true. I've been to cinemas in Berlin, Paris and The Haag in Holland and they were packed. Seriously. We went to see Sherlock Holmes about 2 or 3 weeks after it was out and the cinema was chocka-blocked. I rarely see films in the UK at the cinema and it's that packed. Cinemas in Rome can afford to have cheaper prices, because the number of cinema goers is larger.
Recommended Posts