http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=15824

Lack of returning characters... nationwide risk... McClane in the digital age... from the director of the Underworld films... Is this a good idea, or a bad one?

Hell, it's John "Yippie-ki-yay mother fucker" McClane! Who cares?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_Free_or_Die_Hard

Right now, the IMDB has Kevin Smith listed as playing "The Warlock" in the new Die Hard film. Hilarious. Some people have too much time on their hands.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0337978/

RETRACTION: Kevin Smith IS in it as The Warlock. I'll be damned.

QT kicked ass on Alias.

Kojjiro the Angry wrote:

Free internets to whoever makes a necrophilia porn called "Die Hard"

They did. It was called Clerks. Which was made by Kevin Smith... bringing us back to the beginning

Kojjiro the Angry wrote:

I dont know weather to ask if your post says clerks is a bad movie or if your retarded.

You obviously don't remember Clerks.

Murdar Machene wrote:

Tebor wrote: Kojjiro the Angry wrote: I dont know weather to ask if your post says clerks is a bad movie or if your retarded. You obviously don't remember Clerks. Uh excuse me Tebor, but I can't tell if you're just being retarded or if you hate Clerks??? You better shut up, before I fight you. I will fight you after school. I trained a lot harder than DarkMaze too so if he beat you I'll really beat you, so please stop being a retard and talking trash about my favorite movie, Chasing Amy (or I'll fight you).

I'm around pretentious cine-cocks all day and they never shut up about egos. I don't care whether a director casts themselves in a film or get their own acting gigs. It really doesn't matter. Sometimes, they're even good. Scorsese pulled off "Shark Tale", Cronenberg was awesome on "Alias" and in "Jason X", and Uwe Boll will knock "Postal" out of the part... just making sure you're paying attention .

M. Night is still a better actor than Stephan Baldwin. One might accuse him of writing himself good roles. The question is why wouldn't he? Or better yet, can we look past the ego? Do we bash Scorsese for casting his mother in "Goodfellas"? In fact, his mother was "so good" in that she's in "Godfather III"!? DarkMaze brings up "Signs" in a scene I don't quite remember, but from his character I can say to honest God truth if I saw the son of a bitch that murdered my wife and got off with light manslaughter, it'd be awkward as hell between us too. I have stopped moving when I see someone who's done me wrong, or even ex's I've run into. We're humans and sometimes we react a little crazy around people who have impacted our lives. DarkMaze also brings up that they don't explain his character till later; here's why: when I run into someone, I never say aloud: "That's the cunt that stole my girlfriend!" It's not something you'd want to talk about or even want to say, but you HAVE to acknowledge it - not because you want to, but because your body forces it. We did know his wife had died by that scene in the film and there's no fault in revealing it was M. Night later in the film. Maze's point is that it just looks like they're staring at the director, I disagree, because the film justifies it and the only other course of thinking comes from that individual's ego (no offense ).

Tarantino also gets much hate from these people for the stupidest reasons. I actually love the guy in interviews. He doesn't come off as a snob or a bullshitter. He sounds like a guy I'd hang out with on Saturday nights. He's the person I'd debate whether "Horror of the Zombies" was a good movie or not. I also find him a delight to listen to, especially on the "From Dusk Till Dawn" commentary, which is one of the best commentary tracks ever recorded. Speaking of which, QT did an amazing job in "From Dusk Till Dawn". Ritchie Gecko is actually scary. He comes off as a completely believable sociopath. Is the guy nuts? Of course, but he's my kind of nuts.

Murdar, QT has never told you to watch a movie, so quit acting offended. The truth is, film restoration is important. We never need to worry about "The Wizard of Oz" or "Star Wars" deteriorating, but there's tons of movies that would be lost if it weren't for people rereleasing them. You don't have to like them, but believe me, he's doing more good than harm. Tarantino's name is slapped on them, because there is a market of people who are interested in what the guy thinks. It's just marketing. Murdar, if you really were offended your case would not be with QT, it would be with some studio marketing department.

Now, I'm going to go punch the first ostentatious asstard I run into... Oh wait, I'm sitting in a room of them! Son of a bitch!!

[Disclaimer: At no point have I made the claim I am not a cine-snob. I totally am one. I'm even wearing a black, long sleeved shirt right now to prove it - grain of salt this, please ]

DarkMaze wrote:

To use my previous analogy, imagine if Hitchcock did the same thing. He walks by and the main characters stare at him, asking each other "is that him?" It'd be totally bizarre, even if he was shown to be a more important character later.

That would be the best thing ever! Actually, they needed that moment in "The Birds". He looks like such the village flamer.

PHYSICAL CHALLENGE:

Edit together a montage of Hitchcock cameos and splice in the Mel Gibson reaction shot between each one.


Edit: DarkMaze, you're right, I would not be able to separate O.J. Simpson from whatever he's acting in... except "The Towering Inferno". He saved a cat in that.

Live Free or Die Hard Trailer

DarkMaze wrote:

What am I, Kuleshov? </lame cinema joke>

*slaps self in the face*

I'm so sad I know that...

And the physical challenge is for anyone to partake in. I would if I owned more Hitchcock films.