"Nell" with Liam Neeson (coincidentally) and Jodie Foster. Foster plays a woman raised in the reclusive wilderness with her twin sister; they develop their own language that Neeson discovers to be derivative of the broken English spoken by toddlers. Decent enough movie; I remember it mostly because you get to see Jodie Foster's boobs.
Lol, I have to watch this now. Any movie wherein Neeson isn't the "secret badass with a heart of gold" will be a breath of fresh air. ANY Neeson movie where I don't wish he was my dad will be a breath of fresh air.
Oh yeah! I forgot about that one! I actually never saw it, but I remember it got a lot of buzz. About how Jodie spoke. 'Taaaaay, in the wiiiiind!" I've seen like little clips here and there, but I don't think I've seen the whole thing.
Batman Begins (depending on your POV), Huntsman: Winter's War (in that he's the narrator), and he voices Aslan in the Narnia films. Aslan is supposed to be good, but comes across as really evil in the second film.
.....wow, I can't believe I forgot about that one. That's like my favorite batman film of all time, and I just blanked on him being in it.
Hm, that idea reminds me of of the Lucky Number Sleven film where they had Morgan Freeman and Ben Kingsley playing against type as opposing paranoid Mob bosses awaiting under a hinted sword of Damocles of which the viewer is kind of encouraged to judge upon.
But you notice how despite being technically the "bad guy," you still get the impression he's more misunderstood than overtly evil; there's still a part of him you feel is redeemable.
I saw Ladykillers with Hanks, yes, but while he is a bad guy, he's a likable bad guy, with extra sweetener on the part of being the southern gentleman.
Eh, to a degree I guess. I mean knowing what his character is, in the comics, and his clearly stated goals, he falls WAAAY down that "well he has a point maybe" chart in my book. When all your fancy moral arguments end with "so that's why it's ok for us to kill them all." You've lost any high ground in my opinion. That's not misunderstood to me, that's someone who is genuinely evil, who is trying to justify his actions to himself and others.
I don't disagree, just saying he's not played as a typical villain who's motives are purely selfish; he believes in the righteousness of what he's doing. Like Thanos in the MCU; he's not killing half the universal population simply because he wants multitudes dead; he believes he's doing the right thing.
Yeah, though it seems that ultimately it was an ego thing for him, given the way he's just going to "remake everything in his image" motivation he has in End Game (after seeing opposition to his Great Work). Plus his idea of "kill 50% and All Is Well", is really lame from an actual population control angle. Given how quickly species' repopulate, it would only net like 100 years or so, before you're right back where you were. But yes, they use the "the best villains are the ones who think they are the Hero of their own story" trope for both of them.
I'd say the problem with Prometheus is that it took what was brewing in the subconscious in Alien and put a very direct spotlight on it, robbing it of the audience's mind participating in the story. And not even just in regards to the horrifiying indifference of the universe, but also the relationship of the androids and their human masters. Ash in the first movie has this resentment toward humans, thinking they're idiots clouded by conscious, remorse, and morality. But because he's owned by humans there's little he can do about it; he still needs to follow their orders more or less. He's designed to be a slave after all. Then this creature comes along which is pretty much a machine itself - cold, calculated, and emotionless - and he sees it as the perfect organism, and a rightful master to serve. And he ends up bending the rules just enough to nurture it to its full potential.
I suppose he does still have that cartoonish charm to his character there, yup. Though personally, I'd still run if he were trying to sell me property or a "promising" job position, or even a hug.
wegotthiscovered.com
That doesn't surprise me honestly. I've always felt that The Rock, is actually something of a narcissistic egomaniac, based on some little behaviors I've seen of him in public and stuff. So I don't doubt at all, that he would demand he can never lose, I seem to recall another recent narcissist who hated losing. Don't really know Statham, but again, wouldn't really surprise me if it's true.I suppose he does still have that cartoonish charm to his character there, yup. Though personally, I'd still run if he were trying to sell me property or a "promising" job position, or even a hug.
Oh apple, oh corporate propaganda...ohhh capitalism you sly old poisonous cancer of a devil! That is news to me, but does entirely fit with the usual behaviour patterns rewarded by our infallible meritocratic system. To add to the new fact, did you know Jason Statham and Dwayne Johnson both have contracts about how they can't be beaten in a fight, while their hits taken and given are limited too? "What happens when an unstoppable contract meets an immovable...contract?"
Dwayne Johnson's Fast & Furious Contract Says He Can't Lose Any Fights
The contracts for Fast & Furious and Hobbs & Shaw action stars Vin Diesel, The Rock and Jason Statham say they can't lose a fight
Did not know about that. Sucks; especially with Statham. Which is odd because there's plenty of times where a character of his got his ass handed to him, though not completely, or was not exactly on the winning end of a fight. I don't keep up with either of their films much anymore. That, and I am preferring Scott Adkins now.I suppose he does still have that cartoonish charm to his character there, yup. Though personally, I'd still run if he were trying to sell me property or a "promising" job position, or even a hug.
Oh apple, oh corporate propaganda...ohhh capitalism you sly old poisonous cancer of a devil! That is news to me, but does entirely fit with the usual behaviour patterns rewarded by our infallible meritocratic system. To add to the new fact, did you know Jason Statham and Dwayne Johnson both have contracts about how they can't be beaten in a fight, while their hits taken and given are limited too? "What happens when an unstoppable contract meets an immovable...contract?"
Dwayne Johnson's Fast & Furious Contract Says He Can't Lose Any Fights
The contracts for Fast & Furious and Hobbs & Shaw action stars Vin Diesel, The Rock and Jason Statham say they can't lose a fight
Yeah, not seeing that myself. He was following orders/programming, not seeing any need to put active malice in there as well. Especially since later films establish synthetics being nice because they are programmed to be.
Yes. I'm amazed at the completely half-arsed crew, who basically seem to be a panicky and rash bunch of incompetent nitwits. I'm sure a high profile and expensive mission would have hired much more level-headed and thoughtful staff, but I guess it wouldn't make as much easy drama.
