User talk:Paul730/Archive 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Faith 2 ...The Revenge 2.1 Break 1 3 Here's the list 4 Faith (again) 5 Transformers 6 Do you want a new project? :D 7 Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays 8 Merge proposal 9 Festive 10 Angel 11 Printed source fetishist 12 I'm Back!!! 13 Why do they do it? 14 B,R,D 15 Brandeks 16 Jack = British Angel 16.1 DarkTalk 17 #3 18 Jack 19 Nightmare characters

Faith

Heh, and ironically both Faith and Giles are the most requested spin-offs of all time. Put them together, with an American network, and the world will watch. However, on a British network trying to do "Cracker with ghosts" I doubt it will work, shoving Slayers and wizards into it. I reckon Ripper, if it does ever happen - BBC budget cuts and WGA strike permitting - will probably just have Giles make passing references to these things. I think Joss would want to be very embracing of the fans that accepted his comic continuations with open arms, but at the same time he'd be careful not to alienate his fans who believe only the TV show counts, and who have possibly never heard of Season Eight. So I was imagining a Ripper pilot, after finishing the issue, where Giles jokes about the last Irishman or New York girl he met, or something along those lines. Then again, Joss clearly would not let a guest writer like Vaughn put his characters in a new direction if he hadn't been the one to plot it, so perhaps he has a greater plan for the both of them. Maybe he'll tease us with news about a Faith on the Road spin-off next Comic-Con.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

It would be very cool, were it ever made, but I could only see it being some sort of joint BBC Two/US or Canadian network production. It really needs a strong budget to work. Of course, would it be called Ripper or Faith or some sort of nice one-word title (although all Whedon's Buffy titles seem to be named after characters.) Also? I think Fray deserves a movie treatment. Screw Goners (although I'll probably love it.)~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The last page was so Infinite Crisis it's so unfunny. The Spectre tries to rid the DCU of magic, and kills Shazam, ending the Ninth Age of Magic. This One Year Later has given writers the excuse of introducing a "Tenth Age of Magic" which has all new rules and stuff, meaning demons can be more invincible or retcons can be more "Oh, it's a new age of magic, or something." I know it's just a coincidence. Joss has only done two things for DC, ghostwriting (I'm sure) not included, and that's the Identity Crisis hardback and a special Superman/Batman issue, so it's all... coincidency. ANYWAY! Yes, I was reading a review of #9 (yay Google News) and they said The Rock has been cast as Black Adam. Now, that's a damn good likeness. Better than Adam Brody being cast as Wally West, for sure. Oh, you may be right, I just remembered that Joss and Eliza are working together again... on Dollhouse, now.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Plus, she's no Elektra, I'm guessing? :P ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

It was a reference to Wonder Woman's DC ballsuckage.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I love Wonder Woman and most DC (being written by Geoff Johns, Grant Morrison or Gail Simone helps), I was second guessing your motives on that one. Nevermind. I like that you have Link down as a favourite character. Link? Is awesome. All of them. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

It has to be Butters for me. I think he's mentioned on my profile somewhere already. And it was Link's Awakening for me! Still the best game ever, quite possibly. Oh, and yes, that's because all the women in Marvel Comics are shallow fanboy services whereas the DC females are more 3-dimensional characters who manage to make Top 50 lists. Cases in point: Barbara Gordon (to the extreme), Black Canary, Huntress, Power Girl, (modern) Lois Lane and the whole Wonder Family. Marvel women? Storm, yes. Jean Grey, no. Spider-Woman, nooo. Ms. Marvel? NO! Storm and Mary Jane are the only women in Marvel who are real people. Well, Runways aside. On the flipside, Marvel treats its gays much better than DC does.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Renee Montoya is the only one treated right, but the fans hate her because she's not the Question they're used to. Gail Simone used to write a gay Russian guy (is that a stereotype these days?) called Creote in Birds of Prey (great, great book.) Batwoman was all set to be a major title, but the bigwigs bailed after a media backlash during 52. Obisidian. Where do I start. The last 10 years they've been implying he was gay, but when he's finally outed (by a gay writer, you see) in Manhunter it's condemned as a retcon by fans and industry heavyweights like Alex Ross (who despite being a wonderful painter, seems to be a hardline conservative wacko). Because Ross is the cover artist/co-writer for JSA (one of the best books, Geoff Johns writes it), he rarely appears as more than a shadow on the wall. He's had lines recently, but at the moement I choose to believe the gay guy being an insightful shadow on the wall is a metaphor of some sort. Terry Berg was set to be the first gay Green Lantern a while back, but nothing happened. It's actually a sort of plot hole, how he was given a GL ring and never heard from again. We can only assume he's like dead, everybody else seems to be in modern DC. And then of course there's the lesbian Holly Robinson (one-time Catwoman) who has a plot in Countdown, but nothing happens in it. Ever. Actually, Countdown also has Pied Piper (gay) in it, but he's stepped down from beind the social conscience of the DCU villain community/Flash family and is now just a big old gay joke. Countdown is possibly the gayest DC book ever though, what with Batwoman, Question and Piper all sharing panel space in one issue. Anyway, I'm all ranted out, night.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC) Oh, oh! There's also Triumph who doesn't exist, and Tommy Jagger who IS cool and IS awesome. But yeah, still not anything as cool as Karolina Dean, Hulkling, Wiccan or even Northstar.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:25, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Very true. Anole has super strength these days, right - he's Spider-Man-like? And they killed Hellion? I recall him being vaguely cool. They recently killed bisexual [Knockout (comics)|Knockout]]. Isn't everyone in the Marvel Comics Marvel Family apart from Marvel himself kinda gay? Alien genes, perhaps? I don't like the commentary that suggests. That article you showed me, reflects a lot of the DC fans. They're angry that Firestorm is suddenly black, that Atom is Asian or that Blue Beetle is Hispanic, or that the Question is lesbian AND Hispanic. Some go as far to suggest that ethnic characters should have their own ethnic legacies. Is a new, white Blue Beetle came along, instead of the (awesome) Jaime Reyes, they'd be happier with it. Oh, and I forgot, Scandal Savage in DC is awesome. Because she's somewhat three-dimensional, lesbian, and has supervillain daddy issues. Her daddy was played by Dean Cain, in Smallville. Squee moment, there. That article really is disgusting, parentstv (or was it All About the Family) are the ones that hated CHARMED of all things for its graphic violence. They're very good at wright polemics which indicate that ALL comics are suddenly gay/ethnic propaganda (oh noes, black lesbian immigrants with disabilitis are taking over!!!!), not even taking into account that there's different tiers of comicdom. There's Marvel Heroes, Johnny DC, Marvel MAX, Vertigo, Wildstorm, and then you have your standard cheery book... say Ultimate Spider-Man, and occasionally your dark and macabre Crime Bible. Fuck off, religion.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 13:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Today at work I was accosted by Christmas carollers. I was like "I'm an atheist and you are offending my right to believe you should not exist." They wouldn't go away, so I maintained this whole "I'm actually a serial killer routine" until they went away. My regular customers found it funny, but I may have put some complete strangers off me for life.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 21:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, essentially, I'm an atheist for want of a better argument. Should God exist as a plausible first cause (although I believe this less and less) then I would view his existence in a deist way, he exists but is not compelled to interfere.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 21:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Despite my arrogant atheist nature (I won't deny it), I loved Joan of Arcadia and Wonderfalls, Touched by an Angel was alright, and my favourite Futurama episode is "Godfellas".~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

As if Buffy wasn't already encoded in deep existential postmodern thought :P.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

...The Revenge

So you didn't really comment on what you thought about Freddy's look in New Nightmare, or, at least I must have missed it somewhere.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I liked his look, mostly his new clothes. Even in the dark you could make out that his sweater was green and red. I was tired from all the school work yesterday, so I had to stop the film right at the point that Dillan left the hospital--will finish it after work. My favorite part in the movie will always by the bed scene, when Heather accepts being Nancy. I don't know, it's like that coolest moment to me. The symbolism behind him waiting under the sheet till just the moment she calls John Saxon "Daddy", and then breaking free. The muscle look of his face was something Craven wanted in the original I believe. I remember reading somewhere, to the best of my memory, that he wanted muscle and skull showing, and even some teeth in the jawline, but he couldn't do it for the original.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it had such a good build up...that it was heart wrenching to see it fizzle out like that in the dreamworld. What about the leather pants and new sweater? You didn't comment on the glove either..lol.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I was just curious because they made some many changes, some minor and some major. I think the problem with the face was that it was dry. In the original film is always looked slimy, and I think that added to the realistic look of it.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there were scenes where it looked good, but almost all of the dreamworld sequence at the end, save for maybe the moment that he grabs Heather/Nancy for the first time, was crap. I won't go into the exploding demon crap though. I liked his first appearance, in the bedroom, where he sort of stalks her like a "demon", all hunched over and stuff. I think Englund captured the difference between his Freddy and the real Freddy. Did you catch the Nosferatu reference?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there was a commentary on my DVD as well. If you get to it first, then might I request a full work-up? It could be used on the film article as well. If you don't want to spend the time (which it will take longer to write down everything then to only worry about the character) then don't worry about it, I'll just watch it after I get those Nightmare books.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Appreciate it, but you were right...I did know..lol. I've got it sitting at the top of the sandbox for easy access. Thanks for looking out though. That's actually where I got the Freddy image for the infoxbox. They have tons of stuff, that's for sure. Unlike Halloween Films...pssh, crap website. ;)  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Casually mention what? That the comics and novels are canon? I personally don't like to, because it gives preference to the idea of "canon". I mean, it would be fine to make note on a particular page like making note on Jason Lives that writer/director McLoughlin basically said that Part V did not happen and removed it from continuity, but as far as the character goes, what they do in those "non-canon" sources still happen. I mean, if they changed the character drastically, I would simply put that (if I had a source stating such) the next form of the character chose to disregard the events of that comic, novel, film etc etc. I don't know, I just don't really like say "but it's not canon", because it comes off as if I'm some crazy fan (please note that I'm not making a personal jab at you, because I'm like "that didn't happen in continuity" with some series of films, just trying to explain my reasoning) who doesn't like to accept when writers change my favorite character or show. Plus, it doesn't help that "Nightmarefilms" is a fansite, and not an authority on what is canon and what is not.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

If there was something that said, "according to New Line", then maybe..but like I said, "Nightmare films" isn't an official website. Yeah, Lucas basically gets final say in whatever is produced for his franchise, and that includes all those books. I was watching an online video for a new game they are making, and the creators were basically saying, "yeah, we had to call George up and ask if we could use this character in the storyline, and if, in the storyline, they could do this"...lol. I was like, damn, that's control. All I know is that McLoughlin considers Jason Lives to be a sequel to The Final Chapter, and not A New Beginning". I mean, I don't think there is anything official from Paramount saying, "this doesn't exist in continuity", because frankly I don't think Paramount, or New Line for that matter, actually care in that regard.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd agree with you on Halloween. I personally snatch A New Beginning out of F13, because it doesn't actually have Jason. It was commendable for trying something different, but if you look at the films that really strayed from the series (A New Beginning, Jason Takes Manhattan, and Jason Goes to Hell and Jason X) they really weren't all that great. Not to detract from them, because they either had good ideas that were just implemented horribly, or they at least had good parts that just didn't add up to decent entertainment as a whole. I would say Nightmare 1, 3, and New are the only canon versions, because they are the only ones that have a sense of continuity with each other that isn't just mere character association (i.e. Part 4 and 5 are continuity because they were continuations, but the feel always seemed detached probably because the character was treated as a joke).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, but it does. It revolves around the fictional universe of Part 1 merging with the fictional "real" universe of that time. Theoretically, it's the same universe. Well, you can watch the Sarah Connor Chronicles and pretend that T3 didn't happen and that this is the real continuation.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but what was the "entity" trying to do? He was trying to get into the "real world". He was stuck in the fictional world, and the fictional world he was stuck in was the world of Nightmare 1. Remember how blended the "real world" became by the end of New Nightmare? It had blended into the world of Nightmare 1. So, seemingly, the events of Nightmare 1 were being played out by the entity/Freddy, who sees it all as one world. All the events, settings and characters eventually merged together to take place in the same universe...so one could theorize that by the end of the film, they were in the same universe. ;) lol. I deleted the Satisfied Customer list for a couple of reasons. One reason was that I usually run into similar people all the time, but fail to think about putting them on the list. Two, I just got tired of it. I kept the two insult/compliments that I've received, because I don't think they are bad things.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe in the idea that there can be multiple canons. You have the first canon in Halloween, which runs H1 - H6, then the second canon that disregards H4 - 6 and picks up after H2. The same could be said for Freddy, and you know what two canons would include what movies already, so I won't go into that. It's the same idea behind Golden Age and Silver Age comics. They are both technically canon, one just replaced the other after time went by, and in order to replace it they merely state that those events happened somewhere else.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, because it's kind of like the ending of F13 (gee, wonder why that's so. ;)) . I think, if you take Part 3 into consideration, then the ending of Nightmare 1 was Nancy's dream, after she stripped Freddy of his powers. Otherwise, she wouldn't have survived to be in Part 3, given that he would have killed her in the dream if he was alive at the time. But, I think the reason he survived to Part 3 was because of that dream. Basically, kind of like how FvJ played up the idea that by not thinking about him you strip his powers. She had already stripped his powers, but, subconsciously, she was still in fear--seen by the ending of the film which I believe was a dream of hers--and that kept him alive enough to regain his powers at some point and start killing the Elm Street kids again. That's my MacGuffin-esque type of interpretation.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe she died in the bed, and was inadvertantly absorbed into the bed with Freddy, since he was dying in the real world. Her death in the dream was just that, a dream. Nancy was dreaming she had got her wish, but in fact she hadn't. We just don't see her waking up to the reality that there was nothing she could do to bring her friends back. If you look at it from your addition--the blackout--she could have passed out after seeing her mother burn, and woken up to Freddy--now having passed back into the dreamworld after his real world re-death--trying to get to her, but this time she realizes the way to defeat him in the dreamworld is to take away the fear. That's the problem with having "dream endings", because you always create confusion. Good for a jolt of shock, but terrible for anyone that sits back and goes, "how the hell did that happen?"  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

The boy was having hallucinations the whole movie, and anger problems. He was probably aware that there was a fear he was going to go psycho and kill people. I think that fear manifested itself in the form of nightmares, the last being that of him taking on Jason's persona--as Roy did--and killing Pam (since she was the only person left, other than Reckless).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Where does it say that he killed her?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Here's a problem, Tommy didn't "escape" in Part 6. First, if he had escaped there would have been an all points bulletin sent out, and the Sheriff would not have set him free he would have taken him back to the sanitarium. Secondly, his buddy says "if they knew what we were doing they'd put us back in the blah blah blah". By his wording, it's clear they were released, and that it's Tommy's actions that could land him back int he sanitarium.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Break 1

Thanks. I'll have to read it when I get off work.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not used to working on a laptop (I hate the setup), I've limited myself to less big edits and more just reverts. I wanted to thank you for the New Nightmare commentary, those two points were rather interesting. Gives a good launching point for information looking--namely that part about him being considered "sexy". As for the images, I know it can be a pain. As I stated on the talk page, as long as its clear where the image comes from I think it should be fine. I personally like promo shots for the lead, because, as I stated, they are usually much better quality and detail than a screencapture from the film. I was happy when I found that woman's name on the MySpace page for that image. As for the Castle image, we'll just have to wait and see if anyone tags them, or questions their sources. The page isn't ready for any reviews right now, given that we are still missing Part 4, 5, 6..., just about all the films really. Most of the mask stuff is on the first film. I think there are a few things on the film page that we could use, but I want to review their sources first, because they are pulling directly from "Halloweenmovies.com".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I can't stand them because they are flat, and the base of my thumbs always cause the mouse to jump to a different location, thus I begin typing the rest of my sentence in the middle of one I had already completed. It's annoying. Plus, I find that my desktop is much faster than any laptop I've ever used. It doesn't currently appear that I will have my computer fixed anytime soon. The damn thing dumped service pack 2, and doesn't recognize my CD-ROM drive....so I cannot boot to a disk (namely my operating systems disk) to wipe the hard drive and start fresh. I'm going to be forced to call a technician, and I don't want to do that. Did you see that someone put A Nightmare on Elm Street up for peer review?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I had a really nice wireless keyboard and mouse, but I spilt some tea on the keyboard and corrupted the circuits. The mouse is still good, but I had to resort to using my old plug-in keyboard. That was before the entire computer basically crapped-out on me completely. I'm so close to just saying, "screw it" and buying a new one. Yeah, the Nightmare page had a bunch of stuff that really reflected more of a "franchise" component. Like, there was a sequels section. I've cleaned it up a little. I'll have to go in an clean up a lot more. Some of the sources are not that reliable. I think they actually sourced Amazon for one of the DVDs, instead of properly sourcing the DVD itself. lol. There was some stuff in there that we could use for the Freddy page though. A potentially big problem is with the Freddy image that is on the page. That's the image that is on the character page, but it isn't from the first film it's from the second film. I didn't realize the image was being used on so many pages until after I uploaded the newer one. I think I'm going to try and find them a Nightmare 1 image to replace that one on that page, because anyone that sees the fair-use rationale will see that it isn't from the film page that it is being used for.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I am poverty stricken. If I buy a new one I will be making the minimum payments on it until I am out of school. ;) lol. I have no idea where the original image was from, because I couldn't actually find it anywhere other than IMDb, where it was originally sourced. They claim it is from the first film, but they could simple not know where it is from and are simply stating that the character first appeared in that film.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:27, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

If it's a straight appearance (ala Robot Chicken, where it's clear that it's him because he looks the same and they call him by name) then I don't have a problem with including it. It just becomes a hassle when you think, "where do we draw the line because the article is getting so huge". If it's a reference to the character, like them saying his name, I generally go by the idea that it probably isn't that noteworthy. We could probably remove any of those from the section just to be fair. I think the only one I would keep would be the Scream one for a couple of reasons. One, it's a Wes Craven film and he created a character that directly competed with Jason. Two, the common mistake of assuming the killer in F13 was Jason, considering he's the dominant killer of the film series, is somewhat noteworthy. Then again, we could eliminate all media "references" (i.e. simply saying his name in response to something), and just have straight appearances and maybe inspirations (like the First Jason band). That should help us defend the constant "Character X said Character Y looked like Jason" type of additions--which are too many to list. What do you think we should do?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I say we clean house and, unless it is an appearance accompanied by name, we force any inclusion to be verified by a reliable source. So, for the time he appears in the Simpsons' opening credits we have a source that actually says "Jason and Freddy appear in the opening credits". But, for any appearance where he isn't called by name we require a source stating that it is him. Since appearances accompanied by name are few and far between, I think we'll be ok there. But, if it becomes too much with appearances and a source that confirms it was him, then we may need to rethink that criteria. When it comes to strict references, I say we go with your idea and restrict any mentions unless they come with context and confirmation.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I thought all the Robot Chicken episodes had him identified clearly? Anyone, the IGN source would be much better than the episode itself. All secondary sources are typically better than primary sources...typically. As for that otherstuff, it would probably be better to dump it in my sandbox. I'll move it all there.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Nope, that's why it's there. Feel free to dump whatever you find that's relevant in there. As long as it's labeled so that I know what it is I don't care if you dump sources.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Here's the list

Top 50 Marvel and DC characters. What do you think of these line ups? As you can see, FAR more female characters for DC. Gaywise, Colossus (no votes for Ultimate) doesn't count, Jamie Madrox barely counts, although DC has John Constantine at 19 and he certainly counts. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 21:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Batman (and all Bat-titles) are significantly more popular. In the top 10 alone, you have Batman, two Robins and a former Batgirl. I think Jason Todd should be there too, but fans hate him because Judd Winnick resurrected him. And fans hate Judd Winnick because he writes a lot of gay characters.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC) Oh, and Joker (Bat-character) made the top 10, and shockingly so did Green Arrow (Smallville effect, I reckon). There's way more non-powered DC characters in the top 50, too.22:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm watching Halloween: Resurrection and I'm all excited to see Katee Sackhoff in it. Anyway, yes some Bat-books are good. Detective Comics is basically done in the most realistic, gritty and least "greater DCU universe" way... that is to say, there will be no Superman, and Batman doesn't have a battle suit, Mother Box or fleet of robots like he might in Justice League of America. Plain old Batman is far more prone to a science fiction element. Robin is meant to be brilliant - the Jo Chen covers of Tim Drake are HOT. Nightwing sort of passes me by. Birds of Prey is fucking awesome, but it's so far removed from the Batuniverse (not even being set in Gotham) that it BARELY counts. Crime Bible is the new Question/Batwoman series, and it's going for very edgy very lesbian very dark themes. All Star Batman and Robin the Boy Wonder is typical Frank Miller. It's like "Ultimate Batman", where Batman is a sociopathic asshole who's pretty much the Punisher. And Gotham Underground (new one) is a greater Batverse crossover series, featuring the entire Batman family (sort of).

The other few big DC titles are JLA (okay, fun), Teen Titans (awesome, lots of fun) and JSA (which is just Geoff masterful Johns at his best.) Geoff Johns is also striking a winner with Sinestro Corps War in Green Lantern and Green Lantern Corps (critically and financially) which is possibly at its best in years, I believe. Loads of high-octane fun, really needs a movie treatment. I sound like Patrick Bateman in American Psycho when he spends six pages devoted to discussing the discography of Genesis. Youch.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, missed a Batfamily. Catwoman. Yeah, her title pretty much sucks.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I already own H20. I understand why JLC did H20, a true sequel to II since all the ones since we re plain bonkers. I have no idea on Earth why she starred for five whole minutes in that awful Resurrection travesty. Did she just give up after making the hit 20 Years Late sequel she pushed for - did she just decide she was typecast already and resigned herself to it?00:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I see you were discussing Terminator continuity. The brilliant bit about Terminator is all the time travel means that Sarah Connor, Terminator 3 and Terminator 4 (Christian Bale - MUST SEE) can all exist in separate timelines and therefore all be equally canon. The only ones that are canon to every timeline are 1 and 2. Like Halloween, I see 4, 5 and 6 as a couple of directors' vaguely supernatural interpretation of who Michael Myers is... but H20 is the first time they tried to just keep in line with what I and II started. In a strange way, I consider Rob Zombie's Halloween to be perfectly suitable as a revised version of Halloween's continuity, as it offers believable backstories and motivations but keeps entirely true to what Mike's supposed to be. The fact that he doesn't inexplicably drive a car is just an added bonus.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 15:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

No, but it doesn't appear it will be in Supernatural either, just the similar hockey-mask-dream-guy. Clearly, Eric Kripke was trying to garner publicity by making it come across like a genuine Friday crossover, and then had to doubleback with "we don't actually have the rights, but our lawyer says it's totally cool to show a guy in a hockey mask."~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 11:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, is Hasbro trying to make Starscream appeal to the gay crowd? He always had that voice but still... Alientraveller (talk) 12:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Faith (again)

You done with your Faith rewrite? The mainspace one looks good enough for a Good Article nomination at least! ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 17:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Transformers

The movie is totally entry-level for a TF-newbie. They don't delve too much into their civilization or the motives of most of the Decepticons, bar Megatron himself of course. I also recommend the IDW comics, which are also a modern reboot.

As for canon with Marvel, Marvel created the Transformers, and initially they were part of the Marvel Universe. As you can imagine, the Autobots and Decepticons are too small to go unnoticed in the larger context of the Marvel U: ultimately, the Marvel Transformers run exists in a universe where superheroes are thinner on the ground. And yeah, the recent crossover is supposedly canon, but I don't see the point. Again, I guess it's just a universe that mixes Marvel and the Transformers IDWverse, and for that I'm thankful (I heard it was terrible). Alientraveller (talk) 14:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Transformers is a multiverse, and ultimately you're hearing about the Transformer universes that overlap with the Marvel multiverse. And yes, continuity is fun, especially when discussing a toy line. In any case, just see the movie and read the IDW comics. There's a new cartoon, so try checking that out when it eventually airs here in 2008. Alientraveller (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I might have a look at the Doctor Who comic. Gary Russell's great, and Nick Roche did splendid artwork for IDW's Transformers Spotlights. Alientraveller (talk) 20:00, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, Roche is great. He wrote and drew the Spotlight on Kup, the crusty Autobot oldtimer. You'll like its twisted tone: Kup's on a planet with strange crystals and is hallucinating that's he fighting zombies. Alientraveller (talk) 20:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought "this user is evil and frequently says mwhahaha!" And nah, Transformers can in all shapes and sizes and some are even females. Alientraveller (talk) 20:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, well, when you see the movie, give the article a review for me. I plan an FAC in the new year. Alientraveller (talk) 21:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

It's allright, some things just don't work out. It was a fun experiment. Alientraveller (talk) 21:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that mate. Alientraveller (talk) 14:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Do you want a new project? :D

Have you watched any of the Terminator films at all? They've got a convoluted timeline and a lot of cultural notability I'm sure, and a prolific sect of Wiki-editors have put together a very broad range of articles about all the various characters, organisations and whatnot in the Terminator universe. Now, in the light of the new TV series The Sarah Connor Chronicles, I'm noticing that several articles (particularly John Connor, and Sarah Connor (Terminator) to a lesser extent) are in need of total rewrites as they're fundamnetally in-universe things, and could do with following the ==Appearances==, ===Film===, ===Television=== and ===Literature=== format implemented on the horror icons, Jack, Buffy and Faith articles. I haven't seen the original two films in a long time, seem to be totally incapable of remembering the third one whatsoever, but with news like Christian Bale in #4 (I'm swooning) and Thomas Dekker being in the TV series, I'm totally psyched to get into this series. I'm confident these articles are rectifiable, one particular film/TV magazine (possibly Empire) had an article that went into a lot of depth about the real-life history and fictional timeline (and even published diagrams) of the series, so sources shouldn't be TOO hard to find. Obviously if you're not much into Terminator, then sorry... but would you be up for helping fix these crappy articles?~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 19:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm suffering memory loss, yes. I'm very ill! Hah. Yes, well, my Media teacher today congratulated me on getting an offer from Balliol and in the same sentence managed to let me know that the pilot of Sarah Connor had been leaked online. It's very good! (I mean, I haven't watched it, I'm just sure it is. Law-breaking is bad, kids.) But yeah, wooh! They need some proper good sorting. I'll get myself the DVDs, watch some commentaries (I imagine the commentary for numbers two and three are particularly relevant to John Connor) and get working on them! Sorry for forgetting your Terminator love, I was going to write the same thing assuming you already liked them on the basis that I do, but thought that would be too presumptuous!~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 19:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll make my User:Zythe/John Connor into a redirect :) ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, definitely! Although, I'm partial to Thomas Dekker cos he's cute, and I'll damn sure be partial to Christian Bale after T4 cos I've been in love with him ever since buying both American Psycho and Batmin Begins in the same weekend and being awoken to his awesomeness. Plus, he looks a bit like my ex. Anyway, yes, Furlong.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:02, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Did you ever watch Honey I Shrunk the Kids the Tv series? (What's it with this guy and doing TV adaptations?) He's so unbelievably camp - he's Justin off Ugly Betty. The actor is blatantly gay and as Bryan Singer implied, his management is trying to keep his public image as straight as possible in order to protect his career. It's sick, I know... oh well, it's not going to get in the way of me enjoying the film.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:18, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Dekker had released a statement on a blog somewhere disputing what Tim Kring said about the character always having been envisioned as gay, and implied it was something they tried adding on around episode 6. Even before Dekker had been cast however, the show's outline mentioned a teenage girl who could heal and her gay buddy, I believe, as Tim Kring said. In some interview, Bryan Fuller (easy to confuse film/TV's two gay director/writer/producer Bryans) said that that was always the concept of the character from the very beginning because he had helped put it together and then later quite explicitly said that it was basically "Dekker’s management didn’t want him to be playing a gay character for career reasons." Lol.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thing is, he'd played it three times before, when he was more of a nobody. I'm pretty sure it's sort of "hey, audience test results are in - they think you're cute!" and "FOX thinks you have a shot at playing John Connor, but there's one tiny problem I can see ahead of you..." Of course, there's a double standard there. Lena Headey famously played a lesbian woman in the past? Hollywood is still very homophobic. I suppose lesbian icon Lena Headey (I think she's played a lesbian a couple times too, they generally adore her) can play Sarah Connor, cos butch warrior woman suits, but a guy who is connected to "gay" in the public consciousness is totally unsuited to American action hero roles?~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays

Sarah (my g/f) and I are going to my parents house in Virginia for a week, then we'll hit her parent's house when we come back to Florida. Smallville doesn't return till Jan. 31 (unless they move the date) so I have a long wait. You see the debate at WP:EPISODE about how it should be deleted because no one likes it? Man, I think I'll be glad to have limited Wiki time on my Christmas vacation...though, I still don't have my computer back so I'm slightly upset about that. Stupid laptops. ;) Time go to give the dog a bath so that she doesn't stink up my car on the 10 hour drive up to Virginia.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

damn, I was just about to get you with one after Bigs's came through. Beat me to it! ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:23, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Yessums, just got back from the xmas party for my work and I've been asked out on a date for tomorrow so I'm quite well thanks :D I'm looking forward to Voyage of the Damned too, it's tradition. I'm seeing my aunt as well sometime over the holidays, but mine's a lesbian and I have the exact opposite problem "So, do you have a BOYFRIEND yet Liam?" etc. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:26, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

EY! I hope you're having a great Christmas... in half an hour's time lol. Christmas eve was a good'un for me and all, same for you I hope. Enjoy your presents and don't go near Wiki (after reading this message - close this window!!!)... we shall conserve our nerdiness for another day. xx ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Nope, no drinking, just the morning after a great date! :D Set my whole day in a positive light. I may get drunk now, just so I can have a mild xmas hangover. (Joking, I think.) ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah mine's been mostly alright. I've spent most of it in my own world contemplating whether or not the person I like will eventually be my whateverfriend, but I'm quite pleased. Ah, I had got myself Mario Galaxy a while ago so I'm backtracking and enjoying myself some Super Paper Mario!! haha. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:38, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Galaxy's fun if only a little easy. Which can make it less compelling. But it's clever, and fun! Did I say fun? Mario + Sonic is also a fun, especially with mates round.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:51, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Merge proposal

It has been proposed that WP:EPISODE be merged into WP:WAF. Your input is desired, so please comment here. Ursasapien (talk) 11:10, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Festive

Thanks for the Christmas message, Paul. Have a good one. --Nalvage (talk) 18:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Angel

Well, yeah I'm a bit miffed to be honest. It's okay. Buffy Season Eight is a barrel of godly goodness, and by comparison Angel feels like Amazons Attack. Characterizations are off, I'm afraid. Connor's introduction felt ... crappy. Wesley's been introduced in the wrong way - don't jump him into a new role and backtrack characterization, do a Giles where you see him maybe two panels at a time and flesh him out through his own internal monologue. Lynch is a Spike fan, and he's projecting weird lusty desires onto Spike (vicariously?) - although Spike's not above the occasional Buffybot, it seems so strange. Strangest of all is Illyria. I would imagine she would either be desolate and destructive, walking about town killing without rest, or in some way secluded and shattered. For some reason it reminds me of Marvel vs. DC, where writers decided "why introduce them cleverly? just have them start wailing on each other!" I also am trying my hardest to like Urru's style, but personally I think Jeanty and Lee are so much better, the slightly cartoony style better captures the tone of the series. Perhaps somebody like Nicola Scott would have been a better choice for Angel (by bizarre coincidence, going on her page after recommending her, she's done Illyria comics for IDW before!).

I'd say a good quality of the series is Betta George. I think 12 issues may be too long if this is the pace Lynch is going to have, and I'd have liked to see another writer try the Fight Night double-issue. I hate these publisher-exclusive contracts - I wish Geoff Johns or somebody could give it a go. I feel the book needs more pace, and better humour. Fix those two things and the other faults will fizzle away.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 16:41, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, the other issue is I find myself rereading it all the time - I don't know whether that's the panel layout or Lynch trying to be too Whedony, but it sort of jarrs and it a tiny bit discontinuous, I found. Still, it's shiny. And the Harris covers are alright, but I don't particularly like his style. Obviously not everyone's a Jo Chen or Alex Ross (who would be so bad for drawing Buffyverse men and women), but there's definitely something lacking there.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 17:06, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, Lynch said something (somewhere) about that being the Partners punishing Wesley by making him everything he used to be, or something. Couldn't have hurt to indicate that more clearly in the actual isue, though.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 17:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Printed source fetishist

Bet. Idea. EvAR! Seriously, I want one when they're done. :) -Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 02:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm Back!!!

Thanks. Sorry I didn't respond sooner, but I was catching up. I'm going to take my computer to the local Geek Squad tomorrow, but I think in the end I'm just going to buy a new one. I can afford a monthly payment of $50-60....for the rest of my life. ;) Anyway, "Santa" was pretty decent this year. In the disguise of my g/f, he got me 4 new posters (Friday 6, 7, 8 and Freddy's Dead), some cologne, and the 1985 The Twilight Zone season 1 set. In the disguise of my parents, he gave me Two Mules for Sister Sarah, Play Misty for Me, a shirt,and some money. In the shape of my aunt, he gave me Seinfeld season 8 and 9 (completing the collection), and in the form of my step-sister he gave me Shark Week: The 20th Anniversary and a Lake Placid/Python DVD combo set. Cash from my grandmother as well. All in all, not a shabby X-mas holiday. Oooh, and my g/f's parents got me a George Foreman Grill. What about you? I see you've been holding down the fort as well.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Super Mario Galaxy is full of awesome! I got a Wii for Christmas, so I got that game and The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess to boot. I've been playing mostly SMG, though -- I've gotten 40 stars so far, but I took a break from playing so I don't get sick of the game so quickly. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

(EC)Niiice. My grandmother told me she was going to buy herself a Wii..lol, as well as the Dance Dance Revolution game. I told her to get someone to videotape her playing that game. I actually did enjoy my wikibreak. I was slightly paranoid about what could be going down on Wiki that I might miss, or people messing with pages in a manner that "corrupts them", but for the most part it was good to get away. Now I'm just annoying at my current computer situation. (P.S. Edit conflicts suck worse when you are a desktop user on a laptop...you feel really slow).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Hopefully I won't be conflicting Bignole here... but I got Galaxy when I saw it at the mall and messed around with gravity on a Good Egg planet. Going into orbit was just flippin' satisfactory, put a big grin on my face. I'm working pretty dedicatedly with each galaxy, finishing one off before moving on to the other. So when I open up a new galaxy, I usually have enough Stars to activate all the places -- pretty satisfactory! One thing I miss from SM64, though, is the dive (where you'd Jump + Punch to dive, flip back on your feet, keep running -- always fun to do in boss arenas). Still love the game, though! Thankfully, it's starting to get challenging. The beginning was easy (understandably), but there are some trickier elements now like the Daredevil Run (took me a few tries to beat the Bouldergeist) and the Spooky Run. I think the next Mario game should be time-traveling, though -- do things like dinosaur era with Yoshis, Wild West with Mario's great-grandfather, a Biff-esque future ruled by Bowser (that would need some fixing). Gravity is fun to mess with in this game, and I think time (4D) should be a factor in the next. As for Zelda, I can't say much 'cause I haven't played it yet! :) I heard good things about WarioWare, though -- was looking for a party type of game. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 02:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Hahaha, the Spooky Run was the one with the @#$%ing blue orbs -- it really pissed me off when I lost control because Mario falls way too fast to realistically save him. I've got that damn thing beat now, though! I agree with you about my first impression of the game, seeing only asteroids, but the end result is fantastic. The epic side of me, though, kind of desires a Mario game that would be RPG-esque (like that SNES game). I like the notion of building up one's character, which doesn't quite happen in Galaxy -- it's more likely in the Zelda games. I'm looking forward to Twilight Princess as a result! I don't have a DS; the Wii is my first gaming machine since Dreamcast, actually. I missed out on that console war, haha. I'd probably get PS3 and Xbox 360 if I wasn't so pressed for money -- I don't care to be a fanboy of a particular system, but the Wii seems to work for a casual gamer like me. My fantasies of epic games probably don't match up with that, oh well. :) Do you have any interest in Super Smash Bros. Brawl, coming out next year? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a Wii. I haven't bought a console since Playstation 2. The biggest reason is where I live. My apartment is not that most ventilated place, and my dog is mostly German Shepherd (she's a mix) and she has the German Shepherd shedding problems. Basically, since my place is a haven for dog hair and dust I don't want to buy a console that is going to get clogged and burn out. The last Nintendo console I played was N64, and I was addicted to Mario Kart (still believe it's the best game in the world); that and the original Mario Party. For my PC I have sports games (Basketball, Golf, Football...they haven't made a baseball game in forever so I don't have that unfortunately). I really liked the Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic games, and the Battlefronts. The Lego Star Wars games where pretty cool, in a nastalgia (sp) kind of way. I'm not really into the RPGs (Star Wars being the exception), or the first person shooters...though there are plenty that I like to play. I enjoy Halo in the multiplayer setting than the single player mode. Did you ever play the Evil Dead video games? Were you dissing Howard the Duck? I have that movie, just so you know. lol. ;)  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:16, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeahhh, I appreciate the backward compatibility with the Wii -- makes me want to swoop down on a few video game stores and buy some GameCube games, el cheapo. Any suggestions of games to go with the Paper Mario one? I like the look of the Wii update. It may not be RPG-y, but I like the 3D-ish 2D gimmick. Hasn't it gotten pretty good reviews, too? I'm definitely picking up Brawl when the time comes, though I need a couple more controllers. I'm anticipating Mario Kart Wii, too, and I'm actually looking at List of Wii games to see what else may be coming up. Have you had a chance to do anything with the Virtual Console? I haven't set up wireless connectivity yet to start playing around with online features, though I look forward to that. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Cat, cat?! Hah, I laugh at the thought that a cat, any cat for that matter (except maybe one of the Big Cats) sheds more than my dog. When I clean my floor I pull up enough hair for a second dog. The Evil Dead games (at least the "Fistful of Boomstick"..or whatever it was called..was fun. That was kind of repetative, but still fun. It picked up right after Army of Darkness). Howard is awesome. lol. Sorry, just another movie from my childhood that I have to like no matter how much it really sucked.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:17, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't get far in the game. It was fun to play, but I think either it froze up on me during play, or the Playstation did...I can't remember the reason I stopped playing it. I love Short Circuit 2; the first was good, but for some reason the second had more charm...even if it was a poorer made movie. I was never big into Disney. I think my favorite as a child were The Lion King and Rescurers Down Under---maybe even The Great Mouse Detective. Too much singing for my tastes. I'll take Nightmare/Christmas over The Little Mermaid. Speaking of which, Nightmare/Christmas was just released in 3-D. Toy Story was awesome...lol, I was just reciting some dialogue to the first one two nights ago. I was thinking about buying them. I don't remember seeing the second film all the way through. (P.S. Now I have that damn Whole New World song stuck in my head...thanks. lol)  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure I'll put it on my list of movies to get.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

2 1/2 hours left over here till the "New Year", buddy. ;) The g/f and I have been watching the final season of Seinfeld...I'm personally about to fall asleep, don't know if I'll make it to midnight.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

No, I don't read them. To me, I don't see a reason to fuss about such things because it's the same ol stuff that's been going on in the comic book medium since it began.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Eh, it'll blow over eventually and everyone will be chattering about how good/bad the "new" continuity is. Well, countdown is in 11 minutes....can't wait---because I'll be able to go to bed afterward. Catch you in the new year...er, my new year, yours already started.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll just add One More Day is a mistake and it'll be retconned soon. Quesada tried to kill MJ before and he failed. Alientraveller (talk) 11:10, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I "peeked" a couple days ago at them, but you hadn't worked on OMD yet. If the quote box is getting a stir, then find another quote (on the opposite end of the spectrum to balance the section out). Things like this--"However, he also claimed that even noting these few high points was generous given the "sick feeling in the pit of [his] stomach", and dismissed the story as "infuriating and downright disrespectful to anyone who has come to love Spider-Man comics over the years."--are highly personalized and don't really add any understanding as to why he thought the story was so bad. His personal anguish is not relevant, what is relevant would be his literary analysis of the story (which should show his hatred of the story anyway). This--"Given the controversial nature of the story"--should probably be explain, because I haven't noticed anything in the reception section that explained what was "controversial". Like, I wouldn't start the section with "it was universally panned" (that's rather hard to show without someone else actually saying/showing it themselves). Regardless, to keep a more neutral tone, I would start it like, "The series has come under controversy for the ....." (fill in why it is controversial). Then I'd find sources from whatever professionals talking about how controversial these stories are to the character and/or the comic series. Most of the reviews that I'm seeing seem to be heavy on the "this sucked, but this is ok", instead of explainatory dialogue that shows why it sucked. Reception sections should strive to show more than they tell (though, I can admit you're forced to get a bit of "tell" in with your "show"...does that make sense?)?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I know what you mean. I was reading it and saying to myself, "damn, that's some pretty messed up stuff to say about a comic...especially when you aren't talking about the graphic nature of the artwork but how much it sucked".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, theoretically Labyrinth retconned everything in Smallville for an episode...lol ;) That's the name of the comic business. You have to retcon things every so often so that you can start fresh. Now, I don't like the idea of retconning just because you personally don't like the relationship, but I'm not the writer.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I really liked the Smallville "delusion" episode. They did a good job of explaining where he got his "ideas" to create the delusion. I don't read the comics, but I like the idea of "growing" characters. I mean, who wants to read a 40 year old comic where the lead character hasn't aged in a day. The best character development is watching the character grow, and that's sometimes "literal growth". That's why I respect the retcon to a degree, because you can develop a character to a point then retcon everything to start over for a newer generation.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

LMAO, you and Shulkie. I don't know, I guess since I don't read comics (not enough to be more accurate) that I don't have a really strong opinion about how they go about it. I'm sure if I read them all the time I would probably feel as you do.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, all I have to say is good luck with Marvel's continuity changes..lol.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:03, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look at them and see what we can get out of it, if anything.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that. I must have forgot to put it in..dopey me.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Nowhere near blonde. It's good. The problem is with Vista. I have to be careful what I put on here because if it isn't compatible then it crashes drivers or whathaveyou. I haven't found a way to run my printer yet, because the installation CD isn't Vista ready, so if I try to install it then it dumps my CD drives. I'm hoping that I can get some of my games on here, since they are less "must have Vista" and more "must have at least Windows 98". Every time I download something new I restart the computer to make sure it all works and then if nothing is wrong I create a restore point so that I don't lose anything that I've done if I have to restore the computer to get back anything a non-Vista ready program removes. So, it's testy, but not bad if you watch yourself.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Chipping in, you may or may not be interested to know that the whole One More Day furore actually made it onto Channel 4 News last night. I had the volume down, so I don't know what was said, but there might be some interesting tidbits in there if you can find a copy lying around anywhere on C4's website. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 14:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Here we are. Alientraveller (talk) 14:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I think cite web would be appropriate since you've found it online. Alientraveller (talk) 14:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Why do they do it?

Since this is on Wikipedia's articles, I decided to ask you here. Why do all those users add to the South Park articles here? Most of what they add gets cited as "trivial", and removed. Why don't they add the information to South Park Wiki instead? You even agreed that it is the wiki-encyclopedia for South Park. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 01:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

In response to "Why do I ask, anyway". Because they want the information added, and it isn't as appreciated in Wikipedia as it would be in the wikia for South Park. Plus, they have options there of writing in out-universe or in-universe. Some types of original research are also permitted. Really, so long as they don't vandalize the site, they're much freeer there than they are here. (And, that site's still in the works of development, and needs all the help it can get. I haven't been here or there for a while due to some... complications, but in the next little while, I intend on contributing more to it.) Wilhelmina Will (talk) 01:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

'Lo again. I traded a good chunk of the Kyle Broflovki article in Wikipedia with what's in his article in the wikia. I also deleted a lot of stuff, like was done with Eric Cartman's article. If anyone protests this movement, you'll stand by, right? Wilhelmina Will (talk) 04:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

By the way, if you want your discussions on your page archived, how is it done? Wilhelmina Will (talk) 05:18, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Good advice, thank you. I actually intended on fixing most of the links when I was done rewording and rearranging some of the things in his wikia article. I don't know about adding things back in (that's a risky undertaking!), but I'll definately remove the "death/revival" section. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 05:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

B,R,D

I have boldly followed consensus and policy by archiving WP:EPISODE and changing it to a disambig page. You reverted my edit. Could you please discuss why you wish to ignore policy and maintain the guideline-cruft? Ursasapien (talk) 06:48, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

In a sense, you were right. I would describe what I was doing as edit-warring. I made a change, was reverted twice by two different editors, and began to discuss the situation with said editors. Having regained what I saw as consensus, I waited 24 hours and made a modified change. The I was immediately reverted again, by yet another editor that was not involved in previous discussions. I should have discussed the situation again, but in frustration I simply hit undo. You have every right to consider this edit warring and my previous post was also made in frustration. I am frustrated primarily by working hard to gain what I considered consensus and then being reverted out of hand. I apologize to you. Feel free to delete both these post from your talkpage if you wish. Ursasapien (talk) 05:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Brandeks

I put the (now) 3 new reverts on Brandek's 3RR report. The Admin that warned him said to update the page if he continued and it appears that the Anon is really him. So, we'll see what happens.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, don't worry about it. If you see him revert more just add it to the report. I just added his most recent.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Jack = British Angel

You probably saw all the criticisms (mostly in Youtube comparison videos) saying that Jack Harkness is an Angel ripoff, and that Torchwood itself is an Angel ripoff. Now with the introduction of Captain John (Spike) played by James Marsters, Jack (Angel)'s closest partner in his dark days, except with the insinuation that Jack (Angelus) was far worse... add on the layers of sexual tension between them, and the attraction to the same woman (Gwen, Buffy) I cannot help but feel that Davies is ripping off Whedon royally. Like he's looking at the Angel Wikipedia article and trying to steal the cool out of Angel and use it for his own ends.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 16:53, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Haha, that's hysterical. Apparently Torchwood s2 will also take the piss out of Jack's fondness of rooftops - he blatantly just does it so he can feel all mysterious or something. Or he grew to like them after repeat suicide attempts, who knows. Are you expecting a slight Heroes, Claire jumps off of bridge moment? I mean, I can see Torchwood being very Charmed in its regular homages to whatever has become topical. And of course, the writers knew that every fangirl out there wants one thing: James Marsters with a British accent snogging some guy in a swishy coat.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 21:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

The self-depreciating humour was definitely needed, if only to convince the fans that they're trying to make improvements. Script was poor. Sorry. Too gay, do you think? There needs to be something more overt between Jack and Gwen, despite my distaste for her. In terms of direction, it was okay, and I saw it more as a big ol' setup for a plot where Captain John uses his Torchwood DNA to ... access the rift manipulator? Or something. That was definitely part of character set up - he's going to go from scorned lover of Jack to vengeful nemesis for everybody, particularly Jack. And he's right, I said it myself - the show needs a blonde damn it! :P And the online game they set up was top notch! ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 21:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

It's under "join" on the revamped Torchwood website! It takes all your self-inflicted website-puzzle-discovering from season one and turns it into Ianto and Tosh giving you instructions of what to look for on various websites (Angie from Skins is one on one of the videoblogs) and it's all very... well put-together.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

It would be amazing, if for a New Years Day or Charity special, Sarah Jane and her kindergarten brigade just totally showed up the all-guns-blazing professionals. I can just see him pulling out his magic wrist-strap, before she just points her lipstick and completely disables it. And Clyde and Owen would have a manly chat. And Mister Smith would ask Ianto if he'd like a coffee, and he would be delighted. Meanwhile, Alan meets Rhys on a trip to Wales and now feels he must hide his new best friend from an emotionally fragile Chrissie, who has experienced yet another break up. It would have to be comedy. And the "star poet" would have to appear, as Sarah Jane's bodyguard, or something. And Tosh would be all SAY WHAT! in a totally uncharacteristic Foxxy Love voice. My mind is running wild with Dead Ringers/2DTV-style sketches! :| ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

DigitalSpy had a video interview with Naoko Mori. She said there is an episode this year (perhaps the "memories" episode) which is basically all flashbacks to how the team came together (sounds like "Pre-Witched" to me, which is fantastic) and will feature a crossover with "Aliens of London." Interestingly, she says "you'll learn a lot about me in that episode, and a lot about Tosh, and whether or not they're the same person" which makes it sound like they're going down the Martha-Jones-has-an-identical-cousin route, although with the same surname it could well be a twin sister. I'd quite like that she was just sent in by T1 to investigate.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:54, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

This year's "The Zeppo"-episode sounds fantastic, though! Rose, Donna and Martha in charge! Shame no Jack and Sarah, but maybe that would suggest Jack was one of the girls, so it's just as well.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

This year's Love & Monsters/Random Shoes/Blink is a story where the Doctor is captured or something early on, and the girls (Donna, Martha and Rose) have to save the world without him, and maybe find time to rescue him too.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

If I were exec producer, I'd play up the comedy. All the time. All fans love it. Period. I'd insist that every female Doctor Whoian possible show up in this episode. Harriet Jones! Rose the dog! Gwen Cooper! Tegan! It's sci-fi, have all y-chromosome animals shifted to a pocket dimension or some shit, by some misogynist alien race and then have a strong actiony episode with the moral of the story being that women in every way equal to men, even the Doctor. Of course, this RTD can only write three women: swooning (Rose, Martha, Gwen, sometimes Tosh), vaguely nuisancey (mum in QAF, Jackie, Chrissie, Donna - probably based on his own mum, since the QAF character was an author surrogate) and finally, wallpapery (lesbians in QAF, non-companion females).~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Fans disliked L&M cos it was mostly cheap comedy. The cheapest. Final scene? The foreplay before pavement blowjob. The rest? Peter sodding Kay. I like Donna, I like Jackie, I even like the mum on QAF, but they're all variations of the same character (within the show, they're written as "nuisancey loudmouth", is what I was getting at.) ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Blink was undeniably great. Now, do you agree Torchwood is a negative portrayal of bisexuals? I can't help but feel "omnisexual" is a cop out from showing genuine bisexuality on television, and it portrays it as some sort of supernatural impossible-but-i'll-suspend-my-disbelief sci-fi thing. And Captain John being sexually attracted to poodles / John Barrowman joking about Jack fucking monkeys and cars? I think it's horrific, but gay websites seem to think it's great. But then, the whole scifibi aspect might make sense to them. I just think it's a lot of negative encoding.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:30, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Humanoid aliens is ok. If Jimmy Olsen can fuck Forager and Captain Kirk can (to quote Stewie on Family Guy) "copulate with green-skinned women" then it's not a double standard. Pavement slabs and poodles not so much. I dislike the concept of "pansexuality" in general. The fact that it's obscure means the Wikipedia articles is written by self-avowed "pansexuals" (you know, I'm-not-gay-honestly-types, and bi-sounds-kind-of-gay-so-I-guess-there-are-no-categories types) and didnt highlight any criticism of the neologism. Captain Hero is so bad. Foxxy Love (linked already!) much more positive, same show. I think, realistic portrayals of bisexuals? Bret Easton Ellis books, although his bisexuals are mostly closeted, and they have all dated the same (Lauren Hynde) girl if you over analyse the continuity. Willow Rosenberg, had Joss gone another way, would make sense. That show Dirt was a horrific "[male] bis don't exist" (quote) or "[female character] i'm only bi when i'm stoned" (quote) or "bis are serial killers" (series finale). Skins potentially, if they would have Tony address it overtly. Hellblazer possibly, if its current authors were more willing to acknowledge it. And then there's characters like Sonia from Eastenders. What the fuck was she? Are writers so afraid of the word bi? Marissa and Alex on The OC were good portayals. All I see (as a male who dates men and women) on TV is bisexual erasure. Kinda pisses me off. Just a little. *twitch* ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 01:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't like Ianto being bi. It should be just Jack and Tosh. I don't mind Tosh. There's something fitting about it, almost. And yeah, Jamie Madrox... posssibly Rictor, Quicksilver and Shatterstar with their whole love triangle going on? And if you ask the fangirls: Nightwing (and Robin, and Robin II) and Red Arrow, Booster and Beetle, Robin and Robin, Supergirl and Wonder Girl. In all those instances, Red Arrow's the only one who's implied to have had gay sex (drugs money prostitution), the Robins are mostly fantasizing based on sexy Jo Chen art, and Supergirl and Wonder Girl will remain paragons of heterosexuality no matter many slashy covers and splashes artists indulge in.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 10:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Just to chip in, I enjoyed Wednesday's episode. I especially loved the bar room scenes, really like a good old western. Except the snogging of course, but that was funny. A literal love-hate relationship. So, I'm hoping the rest will be better than the first series. Alientraveller (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the writers know when not to overdo something. I know some fans were getting sick of Rose, so they sent her off to another dimension for a year-and-a-half, so they realized what they had lost, and now she's back. I hope the quality of the last episode keeps up, and we'll definitely learn more about John (if that is his real name). Alientraveller (talk) 12:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Ain't seen todays yet, gonna watch the 11.30 repeat.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:13, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Watched it. Glad there was less gay stuff. Although, any viewer tuning in during season two for the first time would get a distinct impression Jack was exclusively gay or at least very much in favour of the lads.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

RTD plots are heavy-handed, often tacked on. Like you know, a buzzword repeats itself then we find out what it means. Or perhaps, something's indicated, forgotten about, picked up on later. Next week's website's about a character who was mentioned on the website really early in the first series. Either they have a game plan, corrected a continuity error about Jack by writing this new character, or a script got pushed back a year. Either way, it's nice. Still, who do we hate more: Joe Quesada ("the devil"), Dan Didio ("the hero-killer"), or RTD (the most militant gay TV producer in history.) ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Joss Whedon is immensely aware of his own genius and fanworship. I think it was David Fury who said that Buffy ended because SMG and JW's egos collided: Joss believed it was mostly due to his fantastic plotting, directing, characterizations etc and Sarah believes her acting and presence contributed more towards the show's success than anybody wanted to admit. Dan Didio is the Executive Editor for DC, until One More Day he was far more reviled that Quesada. Now they're about even, at least in (I'm told) death threat counts.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 01:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

And I seem to be on my own in thinking that Judd Winick and Brad Meltzer (who's doing Season Eight!) are pretty fucking awesome. Anyway, night.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 01:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

DarkTalk

I'm thinking of calling in this tie-in site but I'd need a good voice. I was thinking of making reports about Weevils spotted amongst the Brighton nightlife, I'm sure RTD would love that.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 21:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

It's one of many websites made up for the new alternate reality game tie-in. They've got Angie from Skins being the radio lady, and a casting website lists who all the other actors involved are. They've put a lot of thought into it, setting up a very complex mystery about this Conrad Fischer guy. My best frenemy is good at Welsh accents, I feel like scripting something for him to say. Even if I started doing one in a Queen's English accent, the sheer fact it's Torchwood-related would have me degenerate into an incoherent poor attempt at Welshness. "Soooo, I was walk-ing past the Mill-en-ium Cen-tre when I sweeaar to God I saw a pter-o-dact-yl!" ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 21:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

We're very good friends who can't stand one another! Torchwood 2? Psh. 4 is the real mystery. I want sexy, homophobic, blonde-haired dastardly Irish bastards! :D ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, you've got a point. I hope the Brig is in charge . And yeah, Irish Torchwood be genuinely sexy (no stuntcasting James Nesbitt, thanks). And yeah, the top bit is. Maybe it's "missing" cos of those Southern Ireland folks stealing it back. I really think Ireland would be interesting, what with Torchwood being so very "British Empire" and Ireland having the history it does. Lots of story potential. Torchwood 4 as a spin-off series? :P ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Same. Marvel too, but DC is very keen on their appreciation Golden/Silver Age history, with lots of legacy characters being written by grown up fanboys, and characters who regale about 1930s/40s "mystery men".~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

And OMG, look at young Captain Jack! On a related note, as Jack's background becomes more and more fleshed out, I see the need for a "backstory" subsection of appearances (although it might not fit there) or a "background" or "overview" section before the "appearances" section. What do you think? ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

If you mean Whatever Happened to Sarah Jane?, then yes, that was fantastic. Also, "Sleeper" was quite good, now that I've had more time to consider it.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Can't wait for "Planet of the Ood". And in typing that I just got a mental image of Captain John and... Ood-people. Lovely. RTD is a pervert.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

You've been reading spoilers right? I'll assume you have done, as their vague at best anyway. I hope when Sarah Jane and Jack appear in DW S4, they all get to use their toys (sonic lipstick, Time Agent wriststrap etc.) alongside the Doctor. I can just visualise that shot having so much energy.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

#3

Woah, Angel: After the Fall just picked up! Some nice experimental writing from Lynch, solid pace and the last page? WOAAAAH STAUS QUO CHANGED MUCH? Very nice stuff. I had wondered if (the thing) had happened when we saw the brief time travel panels, but yeah, it's still shocking. YOu read it, right? ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 19:32, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

You know what? I'm starting to dig Franco. I just wish we had a consistent run of Tony Harris covers. It seems Uruu now does the "A" covers. Had I known that, I would have got his "B" covers for #1 and #2 for the sake of consistency. With Buffy, even if Jo Chen does leave (and I hope she doesn't) it would appear they've gone for similar styles with the stand-ins. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

God damn, Lynch's podcasts are funny stuff! He didn't get as far as my question though :( "I can't wait until Newsarama reads "Loanshark #1 has it all." ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

My questions were less geeky than most of the others. Basically: Will Tony Harris do more covers, and can you get Jo Chen to pleasepleaseprettyplease do one? Yeah, he was mostly discussing funny stuff about the Loan Shark cameo and stuff, but I just love when he mocks his own fans in a sort of friendly way. Very funny guy. "Yes, Spike and Angel will kiss lots in Loan Shark #1. Basically the first 11 pages are the fight in "Not Fade Away" from Teeth's point of view, and the other half is a whole lot of kissing. And who says I don't give the fans what they want?" ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia appears to forbid linking to Myspace, so I'll route you through Whedonesque. It wasn't my joke, it was Lynch's, and it will probably be funnier in context.[1]~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I would use {{cite podcast}}! But no, I've never read Aslyum. I think there's some great stuff in there about his introduction, how Joss favoured the character, about the purposeful ambiguity of Asylum's canonicity and also how Lynch purposefully tries to avoid making George into Jar-Jar Binks. But yeah, George is mentioned a lot lately, so it would be helpful to Angel articles at large were he covered. Would you like me to see if I can... ascertain a copy... of Spike: Asylum? Oh, I recently bought Hellblazer and wow, does the Keanu Reeves adaptation suck by comparison.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 10:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Jack

I'm working on a paper right now, so I won't be able to take a look at it immediately. I do know that I always kind of thought we gave a bit too much detail to Jack Sparrow, and I've never really read the Star Wars bunch. To me, I'd have to read the IU information, and read the information that people felt should be included. It could be there's too much irrelevant detail in there now, and trimming that could make room for the more important things that people have mentioned that they want. I won't know till I read it, but even so, I'm not an authority on what's "important". You and Zythe are probably better at that than I, so maybe you two could look at it with that kind of eye before I come over and read through. This way, maybe the two of you can find a way to include what should be included without going into extraneous details. Who knows, maybe nothing can be trimmed and more needs to be included.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I definitely think you might have purged too much. Yes, Torchwood isn't a serial like Smallville or Buffy, but I think you might want to detail bigger revelations about Jack's past as shown in the programme. The article actually left me confused about Harkness not being his real name, until I read the summary for that episode. Something like "In episode XX, it is revealed Harkness is the name he took from a lover during WW2" would suffice. Alientraveller (talk) 10:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

John maybe, you could write regarding his message about "Grey" before he left. The time jump and how he spent life on Earth throughout the whole 20th century. Alientraveller (talk) 15:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

You watching this edit war over at Smallville?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I doubt they'll revert more, but more valued opinions are always welcomed.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. If it makes you feel better, my brand new computer was defective so I'm waiting on them to send me a new new one.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it seems to be the same problem with me lately. Hopefully there won't be any issues with this next one.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I have noticed them talking about them. In a recent interview with William Hurt, he talks about having a scene with Robert Downy Jr. As for the JLA, it isn't cancelled (unfortunately), just put on the backburner until the writers strike is over.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I know it's a bad idea to have 3 different Supermans existing at one time. If they know what's good for them, they'll wait till Smallville officially ends, and then try working on a JLA movie. They'll also wait till Nolan's Batman franchise is gone as well. You can't have that many simultaneous characters existing in live-action form. Iron Man looks good.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Who knows, maybe they'll wait so long that Tom Welling will transition over to that film. I highly doubt it, because he's always said he has no intention of playing "Superman". Plus, I would rather if he played "Superman" that he do it in a movie by himself first, and then we'll worry about "joining" people together. To me, you need a World's Finest before you need a JLA.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

In a general Welling/Superman movie, I liked Gough and Millar's idea of having Lex be President of the US. I think that's an intriguing idea, beacuse it puts Lex in a position that he's "liked by all" (at least the majority, given that he was voted President...and that he didn't cheat), which would make Superman's job of showing Lex's true side all the more harder. I would also make it grittier, with more action for Superman against foes that could actually hold their own against him. The whole kryptonite to weaken him has been done to death. As far as a Smallville-verse JLA movie, I'd kill Aquaman before I'd kill Cyborg. That's because I think Alan Ritchson couldn't act his way out of a paper bag (that was left open for him). I liked Young's performance as Cyborg. Plus, how freakin' often do fights actually take place in the ocean for Aquaman to be able to lend a hand anyway?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, he fought the 3 Kryptonians in Superman II and that clone in Superman IV, but those fights sucked, there was nothing to them. The hooked-hand Aquaman could be cool, but I just think that the character is too weak developmentally to be able to support a movie by himself. The only way it would work would be if you gave him a really good origin film, where you explor the psychology behind learning that you're really an Atlantian (go with the Silver Age version). The problem is, he has one of the goofiest costumes, and the primary villains would end up being ocean dwellers--or the film would end up constantly be about environmental conservation all the time. People would get tired of the same old message. You'd have to make his movies less about the environment messages (though they would definitely need to be present) and more about him as a character.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, the Aquaman that Gough and Millar created for the spin-off series had more personality than the one on Smallville. I don't know if that's because of the actors portraying the character each time, or because one had a whole episode about him whereas the other had to share it with Clark.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:02, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Namor is gettingh his own movie, so it's unlikely he'll be an F4 villain. In any case, they shouldn't waste any more time butchering great baddies until they fix Doom and Galactus. Funny you mentioned Iron Man: I watched an F4 cartoon where he takes on Doom last night, and I realized Stan Lee created Stark as a good version of Doom. Alientraveller (talk) 09:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

That was a cool little short (or 3 shorts). I liked the Hulk in that. The CGI looked good for an animated film. I liked Spider-Man's look.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I love how Spidey's calling everyone up on the cell phone to get help. lol.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but if it was that silly then it would have been more of a children's movie and less of a serious action film (er..at least with the first two films).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:18, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The comic character sure, but the films have never been about the wacky (until that Emo dance in 3). You can't have a conflicting Peter Parker, who all of a sudden becomes wacky, when you're dealing with a 2 hour movie. Sure, it's fine for comics because you have huge time lines where you can be conflicted one issue, and wacky another because they don't necessarily pick up right after the other; or the fact that he has time to brood longer in comics, so the chance to be wacky is easier to find.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't blame the films, because I don't want the wacky Spider-Man. I like my heroes to be serious. If I wanted silly, I'd petition Aquaman get his own film. ;) Goblin wasn't wacky. The helmet was plastic, the suit wasn't. The suit and helmet were all fully functioning pieces of equipment, all tied into the glider. They had a purpose. A lot better than spandex green and a purple hoody. If you say that he has a completely new personality when in costume, then I have to start assuming that he may have suffered(suffers) from some form of personality disorder (which could make him all the more conflicted if it wasn't for the fact that he can do everything he does as Spider-Man when he's Peter Parker. The mask only covers his identity, not his heroisism (sp). I love that "here's your change!" line, btw. lol. It was the touch of humor that I needed. I don't need goofy humor. There was dialogue in the originaly Spider-Man that was goofy (Spidey dialogue is wacky because it's usually bad dialogue). You have the "oh boy" that, to me, is classic Peter Parker dialogue (classic as in, it's something i invision him saying). There's the exchange with Goblin--"It's you who's out Gobey; out of your mind!"--in the burning building. The retort to Jameson when he shoots web onto Jameson's mouth.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Having a personality disorder doesn't mean the personality is new, just that it was released through some traumic experience. Regardless, I don't want Buffy in a Spidey outfit. I like Buffy the way she is, and I like my masked heroes to be serious. It's one thing to be puny and wacky when everyone knows you can kick their ass, and another to do it behind a mask.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I meant "new personality" as in a personality not seen by people before. Anyway, like I said, that's something that works well for comics, or an animated series, but not for film. Look at what happened with Fantastic Four? They tried to be all fun and games, and no one took the movies seriously (and they stunk).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I thought the Human Torch was horrible, but I think I was more turn-off by his constant asshole nature. Come on, Reed dancing in 2, was funny but in one of those embarassed that the film makers actually put that in kind of way. As for Tobey, when I first saw him it seemed to me that he was the only person that could have played that role. I think Gyllenhaal was close, but his face is too associated with this dark, melancholy attitude (Donnie Darko and Moonlight Mile....hell, even in Bubble Boy he had kind of a creepy face). To me, Tobey had that look that still appears to be young, but at the same time wise beyond his years...which to me, I always felt that Peter acted older than he looked.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I think Ben was the best FFer, but I'm a Chicklis fan so I'm bias. Didn't May know Peter was Spider-Man for a long time, but never said anything? I always got the impression in Spider-Man 2 (when they are having the discussion as May was packing her things) that she might have known the truth.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

To me, I think the costume helped his performance. I say that because he had all those issues with claustrophobia during filming and I think it helped the anguish The Thing felt about his new form. As for Spider-Man, what specifically about that scene makes you think of Capt. A?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Gotcha. Didn't they add that brow for the sequel?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Nightmare characters

I'm holding a discussion at Talk:A Nightmare on Elm Street (franchise)#Cast in regards to the cast list, kind of like what is being down with Friday the 13th. Obviously, that list needs to be cleaned up some more, but at least it's a home for all those characters that may be important to the series but not notable enough for their own articles.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

That was my thinking, only because Nancy has been covered in so many different mediums extensively (not just walk ins) that it would probably be difficult to condense that information into a reasonable section on a list page. Though, I would vote to include her on the list page, for consistencies purposes, and just have a brief exert from her main article that summarized the character nicely.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:18, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I could see us finding some information on her, but right now I'd rather worry about the ones that really don't need a page at all (Kincaid anyone?). As for Jason and Pam, I'd say yes to Pam and no to Jason. I see the lists as more for secondary characters in those franchises, and though there may be "lead roles" for characters, Freddy and Jason are bigger than anyone they ever fought. Plus, it would probably be kind of hard to summarize both of those articles into a section on a list page. We'd have to start by summarizing the lead itself. I mean, to be fair, we could do that, but I say lets focus on everyone else first.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

On the nightmare franchise talk page,I put a link to the page for its creation. It's the same as Friday the 13th's title. Though, I think it should be retitled to "List of characters in the Nightmare on Elm Street series" (the same goes for Friday the 13th) as just saying "List of characters in A Nightmare on Elm Street" suggests that they are all from one film....which they aren't. As for Thanos6, I hadn't noticed because I frankly don't pay much mind to what floats around the Wiki toilet. ;) Just kidding...about the Wiki toilet remark. I don't care if he has me on some list; his opinion of me is not something I care about. Basically, his argument boils down to the fact that I'm an editor that believes all topics must prove they are worthy of notice, instead of the belief that anything with a name deserves a page. To me, that's a good thing...so maybe I should go thank him. Anyway, back to real Wiki work...if you want to start working on the list we can do that. I have to go find a news article and write a summary of it for my class tomorrow, but hopefully it won't take me that long.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice, working is always fun (*rolls eyes*). I'm bored out of my mind at work, now that I can't edit Wikipedia while I'm there. Good luck with it there. As for Thanos, it may be aggressive, but I didn't take it that way. ;)  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Not at all, I work for the Florida Department of Transportation. I'm just an OPS (Other People's Services) employee, which boils down to the "goupher" of the office. Whatever they want, I "goupher" it. Generally, there isn't that much for me to do so I just sit around the computer and play on Paint or whatnot. Usually I'm hanging out at my friend's cubicle, or in my boss's cubicle.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, at least your job will require you to be active. If I had anyless work to do at my job I'm pretty sure I'd grow roots.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I noticed (I had already saved the title before it was created). It'll do for now, until we can clean it up.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Go to this page, if you look at the top where you would normally click the "watch" button, you can do it for non-existent pages as well. That way, if someone creates a page that you had listed on your watchlist then you'll know about it. In this case, I saved it when I saw that you put the brackets around the title. Normally, you can use it for things that don't need article yet but you know will get created soon by over anxious editors (like a new movie). Then you'll know when they create it. Anyway, I'm off to bed. Good luck with work tomorrow.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.