Movie Trailers

[Dog Pants]

That looks none too shabby. Not sure I like the idea of a trailer for a trailer though.

THIS SUNDAY, PREPARE FOR THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF WHEN WE WILL ANNOUNCE THE RELEASE DATE FOR THE TRAILER FOR THE RELEASE DATE OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT TRAILER!

Agreed, but then I realised that I don't really give a shit about trailers or trailers for trailers. Total Recall could be awesome if remade a little less cheesier (not that it isn't awesome cheesy, but they couldn't beat Arnie's performance) and with better effects. Was that Colin Farrell?

[Dog Pants]

Oh yeah, and I notice that now that Apple are involved (I deduced this from the URL) the bad guy clone troopers look like iPhones.

[Roman Totale]

Total Recall (proper trailer this time)

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GljhR5rk5eY[/media]

Yeah, I like the look of this.

[spoodie]

What's the point of remaking that? Oh yeah, money, never mind.

I found this when looking at horror films for that other thread: Chernobyl Diaries.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7ZTLckhg_g[/media]

Doesn't look very good, but could be bearable.

[Roman Totale]

From the creator of Family Guy!

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMrlFLZFdnQ[/media]



I think I preferred the new Twilight trailer...

[Mr. Johnson]

Is it me or does that fucking bear sound like peter griffin? Because now I want to claw out my eyes and stick knives in my ears.

[buzzmong]

Is it me or does that fucking bear sound like peter griffin? Because now I want to claw out my eyes and stick knives in my ears.

Yes, but that's because Seth MacFarlane voices them both.
As an aside: Mila Kunis

[Mr. Johnson]

Is it me or does that fucking bear sound like peter griffin? Because now I want to claw out my eyes and stick knives in my ears.

Yes, but that's because Seth MacFarlane voices them both.

That explains so much.

[HereComesPete]

Well I laughed. But that's because I like family guy.

[FatherJack]

Total Recall (proper trailer this time)

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GljhR5rk5eY[/media]

Yeah, I like the look of this.

I'm admiring its looks, too. While I enjoyed the original, it was the story that I liked, so I don't hold the adaptation sacrosanct, as to me it was blighted my too many set-piece special effects which look horribly plasticene now.

I'm particularly liking his balcony view, which looks like a Neo-Shanghai in the vein of the best bits from Deus Ex.

[Roman Totale]

Guy Pierce: Action Hero

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmAbEgayExs[/media]

[spoodie]

Fortress + Escape from New York = Lockout

[Roman Totale]

One of the YouTube comments did make me chuckle

One man can get her out? Oh my... Wait, he's the _best_ there is? That's fortunate! Oh, but he's a loose cannon? What a twist!

[spoodie]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCNKahG1ksg[/media]

Nice

[Joose]

I like the look of that. Im not sure I would instantly recognise my own older face though, I think if I were in that situation I would have shot him whilst thinking "heh, that guy looked a bit like my dad".

[FatherJack]

I like time travel stories, but that seems a bit contrived. Easier to send people back 30 years in time and have a special arrangement with people to kill them at that exact time and place than to just kill them yourself? Leave the bag off the head of a guy who they must know used to be one of the assassins?

I supposed it's only trailer and they might explain a bit better in the film.

[Pnut]

Surely if your sent back in time to be killed by yourself, then you would remember attempting to kill your older self when you were younger, you would remember all the shit that happens and probably what you were sent back for, therefore you wouldn't do it. Hang on, would that not create a paradox?

[spoodie]

Hang on, would that not create a paradox?

Just throw in some parallel universes, paradox resolved. Time travel is a nonsense anyway, you just gotta roll with it.

[Joose]

Yeah, it depends on which theory of time you are using. There's a bunch, and no one so far has given solid proof which one of them being the correct one. You could have the Back to the Future theory, where things get slowly rewritten/erased if you go back and change things (only makes sense if you also have some sort of "super time" that all these changes are taking place in, which is fairly obviously bullshit. Good for stories though), or you have the branching universes style of thing, where changing stuff makes the universe kind of split off into a new alternative reality (more believable, but still sounds might unlikely to me), or there is the deterministic view where you cant go back and change things because you were already there the first time around (most scientifically likely but makes people uncomfortable because it is totally incompatible with free will). Only that last one would give you the problem of paradoxes. There's probably a whole bunch of others too, but afaik most of them are slight variations on those three.

I think I might read too much scifi.

[buzzmong]

Surely if your sent back in time to be killed by yourself, then you would remember attempting to kill your older self when you were younger, you would remember all the shit that happens and probably what you were sent back for, therefore you wouldn't do it. Hang on, would that not create a paradox?

Actually, if you get sent back in time so your younger self can kill you, it's pretty obvious your younger self never did otherwise you wouldn't actually be around to be send back in the first place.

Of course, this is assuming Trousers of Time isn't applied.