Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kamikaze on January 14, 2003, 12:56:59 am

Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Kamikaze on January 14, 2003, 12:56:59 am
http://www.factnet.org/halt.htm
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Styxx on January 14, 2003, 05:22:01 am
Erm... riiight...
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Fineus on January 14, 2003, 05:29:51 am
Religion... bleurgh...
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Fetty on January 14, 2003, 06:46:00 am
oh them again
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: vyper on January 14, 2003, 06:57:27 am
You think maybe Shivans did this to Carl when he played fs2?

Hmm, bad idea. Um, I find this both disturbing yet difficult to believe. Seeing as I never intend to watch the tripe anyway its not an issue.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Sandwich on January 14, 2003, 12:59:24 pm
Certainly was the worst movie I ever saw. And that Sceintolgy stuff is scary... :nervous:
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Stealth on January 14, 2003, 01:06:08 pm
yeah, definately the top 10 worst movies i've seen.

i don't get all that's being said in that URL you posted... too much to read :( :(

could someone summarize please? :D :D
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Razor on January 14, 2003, 01:39:37 pm
It wasn't really too good. I have to agree. Did you see Time Machine? UURGH! That one was awefull. :ick
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: 01010 on January 14, 2003, 01:45:32 pm
Ok so, the fact that Battlfield:Earth is based on a book by Ron. L. Hubbard might have something to do with the slight Scientology bent. In fact, it's his depiction of what IS going to happen to the human race without scientology. The guy's a ****ing nutcase.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Stunaep on January 14, 2003, 01:56:04 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Sandwich
Certainly was the worst movie I ever saw. And that Sceintolgy stuff is scary... :nervous:

the more the shame that it was based on (read: names of some characters were from) an excellent book
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: ZylonBane on January 14, 2003, 02:14:58 pm
Quote
Originally posted by 01010
The guy's a ****ing nutcase.
The guy WAS a ****ing nutcase. Died in 1986.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Ulundel on January 14, 2003, 02:23:06 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Razor
It wasn't really too good. I have to agree. Did you see Time Machine? UURGH! That one was awefull. :ick


The movie itself was good but it was waaaay too short.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Stryke 9 on January 14, 2003, 02:42:11 pm
I just can't wait for the Christian fundamentalist propaganda counterstrike.

Now THAT would make a cool-ass SF movie. I can see it now... "Smite Wars".:D
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: 01010 on January 14, 2003, 02:56:03 pm
Quote
Originally posted by ZylonBane
The guy WAS a ****ing nutcase. Died in 1986.


Is, was, it's all the same to me. The main point was that he was cracked severely in the mental department.

Actually, the people that pay to join the CULT of SCIENTOLOGY are far more cracked than I...um, he, sorry.

::Goes back to playing GunValkyrie (also known as the ****ing hardest game since, some game that was pretty damn hard)::
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Kamikaze on January 14, 2003, 06:21:05 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Stealth
yeah, definately the top 10 worst movies i've seen.

i don't get all that's being said in that URL you posted... too much to read :( :(

could someone summarize please? :D :D


sure

basically it's saying that Battlefield Earth supposedly has subliminal messages planted in it so it's not distributed anymore, what I'm not sure about is if it's about part 1 or 2 or both.

The subliminal messages are suspected to be scientology stuff as the movie is made by Scientologists (of whom John Travolta is according to sources, one of the actors in the movie).

Additionally if you buy any BFE stuff or send postcards/mail/whatever your info (email/address/name) gets put in a scientology possible recruit database...

scary stuff :blah:
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Stryke 9 on January 14, 2003, 06:33:29 pm
I don't know about THAT. Using subliminals to brainwash everyone who watches the movie? That's crazy talk! If anything, the movie made everything clearer- I certainly understand how our genes hold their own memories and we are all telepathic energy beings now. Makes perfect sense. And BFE was so good, I bought 11 copies. Those people who call L. Ron Hubbard a hack are just hereti- er, jealous!
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: wEvil on January 14, 2003, 08:56:12 pm
*gets out razorblades and nylon rope*

Stryke...come over here - i have something to show you :devil:
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Martinus on January 15, 2003, 01:10:29 pm
[color=66ff00]Actually the book was pretty excellent IMHO.

Where did you get the idea that the book was his depiction of what would happen to the world if scientology didn't exist 01010?
I can't see how the book is about that at all.

Still, all the scientology that's been spawned from it is a little wacky. The guy who I used to work for had a scientologist as a father, weird old man, had absolutely no common sense. Lets hope they recruit more like him :nod:

[/color]
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: 01010 on January 15, 2003, 01:12:57 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]Actually the book was pretty excellent IMHO.

Where did you get the idea that the book was his depiction of what would happen to the world if scientology didn't exist 01010?
I can't see how the book is about that at all.

Still, all the scientology that's been spawned from it is a little wacky. The guy who I used to work for had a scientologist as a father, weird old man, had absolutely no common sense. Lets hope they recruit more like him :nod:

[/color]


I can't really remember where I read it but it was some place. As vague as you like :)
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Martinus on January 15, 2003, 01:28:26 pm
[color=66ff00]Actually there may well be some kind of subliminal messaging in the book but I took it for face value and found that it had some good ideas and some nice twists, the characters were a bit two dimensional but I think he just overdid the whole 'back to our roots' thing and tried to make them look uncomplicated. I guess that you can almost draw any conclusion you can imagine from almost any book.

When LOTR was first published a lot of critics thought Tolkien was talking about the war (axis and allies) but he denied it.
I might be flat out wrong though, perhaps BFE was a vehicle for scientology, I think I missed the subliminal messaging though. :D

[/color]
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Thorn on January 15, 2003, 02:08:57 pm
That was the first goddamn movie I ever walked out on...
Didnt do the book justice...
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Carl on January 15, 2003, 05:05:40 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Razor
Did you see Time Machine? UURGH! That one was awefull. :ick


*shoots Razor 300 times with a BFRed, bringing him back to life after every shot*

*puts a flesh eating virus into Razor's anus*

*straps Razor to a chair and drips acid on his nipples for 16 hours*
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: delta_7890 on January 15, 2003, 06:15:10 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Carl


*shoots Razor 300 times with a BFRed, bringing him back to life after every shot*

*puts a flesh eating virus into Razor's anus*

*straps Razor to a chair and drips acid on his nipples for 16 hours*


*Twitches and cringes*
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: ZylonBane on January 15, 2003, 08:19:42 pm
But Carl, he's right. The Time Machine remake was a laughably braindead affair. The best scene was the Naked-Gun-esque second death of Emma.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Carl on January 15, 2003, 10:57:04 pm
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,9956.0.html
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: wEvil on January 15, 2003, 11:18:43 pm
I loved it

the SFX and the direction behind it were  top-notch

the soundtrack left little to be desired.

get your head out of your own arse and form your own opinions
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Nobilis Draco on January 16, 2003, 12:04:36 am
Seen BFE about... a trillion times. still think think scientologists are a few rounds short of a full magazine.

you know who's worse?  RAELIANS!!!! (http://www.rael.org/int/english/index.html)
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Bobboau on January 16, 2003, 12:30:33 am
no scientologist have more power that makes them more dangerus
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Sandwich on January 16, 2003, 05:34:57 am
Quote
Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]
I might be flat out wrong though, perhaps BFE was a vehicle for scientology, I think I missed the subliminal messaging though. :D

[/color]


You know what the main problem with deception is? You don't know you're decieved. :shaking:
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Zeronet on January 16, 2003, 09:19:01 am
Is this a real article? I,ve heard of Scientology before, but forgotton what it actually is.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Stryke 9 on January 16, 2003, 11:55:00 am
Take all the new-age nuttiness and concentrate it into cult form. There's your scientology.



The Time Machine's plot and concept of time and physics were ludicrous. This didn't necessarily make it a bad movie, but I can't be objective about that, because movies that try to explain the most improbable crap away by equating science with magic, where you can do anything by sticking a whojimawa and a whatsisname together and running a current through it, are automatically brain-killingly mindless in my book.


Plus, it raped the original book, whose premise made it the first anti-nuke book in the world, before they'd even been invented. Turning a brilliant piece of prognostication and political statement into a sappy romance-cum-action movie is bad.

The graphics WERE cool, though.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Stealth on January 16, 2003, 11:55:52 am
a very sweet movie:

THE TRANSPORTER
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Martinus on January 16, 2003, 12:55:01 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Sandwich


You know what the main problem with deception is? You don't know you're decieved. :shaking:


[color=66ff00]Unfortunately for them I still see scientology as a quirky bunch of nonsense so maybe I'm too dumb to influence. ;)
[/color]
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: ZylonBane on January 16, 2003, 01:45:10 pm
Quote
Originally posted by wEvil
get your head out of your own arse and form your own opinions
Umm, to whom was this comment directed?

As far as I can tell, all observations of The Time Machine's suckiness have been arrived at independently.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Zeronet on January 16, 2003, 02:06:42 pm
Time Machine was ub3r l33t.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: kode on January 16, 2003, 03:10:31 pm
I liked the new time machine movie. I have the old one recorded, so I'm gonna watch it when I get the time.
the book, however, is truly the owner of the movie.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Stryke 9 on January 16, 2003, 03:28:49 pm
Book's always better.

With the exception of Dune and LOTR, I guess. But that's a pretty low bar to set, whether you like either book or not.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: kode on January 16, 2003, 03:31:27 pm
:wtf:

you favor the Dune movie over the book? that's like Lynch's low mark. still see-worthy, tho. but uncomparable to the book.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Martinus on January 16, 2003, 03:42:33 pm
[color=66ff00]I got a new version of Dune on DVD, it looked interesting due to the fact that it had extra footage. Unfortunately it had nothing but filler that treated the viewer like  a kid (unnecessary description by american male voiceover), no princess Irulan intro and a lot of very confusing, poor, badly timed background music. I'll stick to the original version, still one of my all time favourite films.

The only thing I liked about it over the book though was the weirding modules, cool idea.

The books really are ace though. :nod:

[/color]
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Stryke 9 on January 16, 2003, 03:44:02 pm
I dunno, I just couldn't stand Herbert's compulsion to explain anything and everything, even when it meant putting the plot on hold for a few dozen pages, or the fact that you essentially need a glossary to know what he's talking about anyway. I have the nasty habit of writing SF the same way, so I can understand how he wants to do it, but it makes for a terrible narrative. In my book, SF universes are one thing, and good SF stories another. A little realism or detail can be sacrificed to just get the goddamn story going- and you can invariably work in the important details anyway. Gibson managed. Bester managed. Most of the true science fiction greats did.

I liked the Dune universe, I more or less liked the Dune plot. But the book was by no means a good piece of writing, and the movie, while mediocre, was still better. IT explained what needed to be explained, working it into the narrative rather than interrupting it.


Maeg: You saw the uncut version, which was, indeed, terrible. Saw it on TV once- you know, there's really a reason movies are edited.:D
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: kode on January 16, 2003, 03:48:11 pm
I think that the film was focusing to much on the fall of the atreides, and not so much on the rise of the kwizatz haderach.

oh, and I've been told that the book is kind of metaphoric. I'd guess it's some middle eastern oil thing.
Title: Rather Disturbing for Movie Watchers
Post by: Stryke 9 on January 16, 2003, 03:52:55 pm
I think that's reading a bit much into it. The culture in Dune was almost entirely based on the modern Middle East, with the feudal system, the names, and the militant Messiah. And, of course, the Spiceoil. Much of everything else, too. But I don't know about allegoric... bit of a (huge) stretch, near as I can tell.