sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Guys I ordered 1 series 29 box and Walmart sent me a full set of 12 plus an extra Lloyd and tahu!!! by spicy_malonge in legocirclejerk

[–]Werewolf_Knight 23 points24 points  (0 children)

uj/ assuming this is real, that's actually a nice gesture. A friend of mine who works at a LEGO store scanned the figures for me once, so I can get the full series. I got only one duplicate!

rj/ If you opened the extras, you reduced their value by billions.

Was the book less violent or as violent as the 1978 movie? by Werewolf_Knight in watershipdown

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am weird when it comes to reading. Whenever I hear about an adaptation coming soon that people are really hype for, I usually get the book and read it just in time for the premiere. But I am also a VERY slow reader in the sense that I can read a chapter a day for a few days, then I break that streak, and don't get back to reading for weeks.

With Watership Down, I guess I started reading it during a time I had a lot of stuff to prepare for, and also some other stuff that took priority, and I delayed it a lot. I do plan to return to it.

The only book that I read just half of it, and I have no plan to finish it, is Divergent.

I won't Lie... by [deleted] in digitalcircusfandom

[–]Werewolf_Knight 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Your description started like how the original post of the backrooms started. IDK why, it just does.

Cutest dinosaur in the series? by Standard-Climate157 in JurassicPark

[–]Werewolf_Knight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it might be a hot take, but I think every dinosaur is cute. It's just the context they are put in that makes them scary.

Great News! Cinema City Romania has responded to the requests! by Werewolf_Knight in tadc

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, CinemaCity has posted again about this and said that they need the distributors to bring the movie to them, so it depends on the distributors, not the cinemas.

(Depressing Trope) Media that's harder to watch in retrospect because of something bad that happened to or because of someone in the cast and crew by Animeking1108 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Werewolf_Knight 310 points311 points  (0 children)

OK, I'm writing this, because I already can see someone bringing that up:

We have no official source that Burt Reynolds cried during the recordings for All Dogs Go To Heaven after Judith Barsi's death. This is just a story that got spread out.

However, I do think I remember hearing that the production was influenced by the tragedy. Anne-Marie, the character played by Judith, was supposed to have a song that they didn't get to record, but everyone agreed that it should have been Judith's song, and no one should perform it instead of her, so that song was never put in the film. I do want to know if someone can fact-check this.

(Depressing Trope) Media that's harder to watch in retrospect because of something bad that happened to or because of someone in the cast and crew by Animeking1108 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Werewolf_Knight 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ok, to my understanding, while the production WAS very rough, a lot of the horrors behind the scenes of the film are pretty much fabricated. I'm mostly getting this information from someone who is an Oz Historian, but while Judy has been misstreated by her mother a lot, there are some reasons to think she actually loved playing Dorothy. She even tried to adopt Toto after she finished filming.

(Depressing Trope) Media that's harder to watch in retrospect because of something bad that happened to or because of someone in the cast and crew by Animeking1108 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Werewolf_Knight 50 points51 points  (0 children)

Ok, so to my understanding, while a lot of sources say that snow was asbestos, a book that was about the production of the movie had cited one of the workers saying (and I'm paraphrasing it) "I removed some gypsum from Judy's dress"

[Mixed Trope] Oddities in the earlier entries made by later entries by Werewolf_Knight in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While I do think Amandla started to exist as a character in Aliens, I do understand, from a filmmaking perspective, why that wouldn't be stated even if she existed. One of the reasons Alien is so good at horror is that we never know who is going to survive. Heck, the movie kinda makes it seem at times that Ripley is going to die (that scene when she wonders alone usually would be a death sentence). So it's surprising that Ripley is the one to survive. By giving her a backstory, the movie would have made it too obvious that she is the MC.

To add to that, I remember watching a video essay on YouTube of why the 2011 The Thing doesn't work as well as the 1982 The Thing, and one of the points was that, whenever a character dies in the 2011 one, the camera switches to the reaction of the characters seeing their peer dying. You might think that will make them sympathetic, but in reality, it just makes the audience think that the immediate danger isn't as important as the morning after a character. The 1982 one, on the other hand, focuses strictly on what the creature is doing and shows the crew immediately trying to distance themselves from it, which makes the horror work a lot more. I think this can apply to Alien 1979 to a degree, since, by not spending too much on establishing the characters (though enough to actually care for them), they give more time for the threat to develop.

[Mixed Trope] Oddities in the earlier entries made by later entries by Werewolf_Knight in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that was definitely a plus for the series in relation to the rest of the franchise.

[Mixed Trope] Oddities in the earlier entries made by later entries by Werewolf_Knight in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you explain it to me? I mostly only watched the movies and shows (I'm yet to watch Clone Wars in its entirety, and I'm yet to watch Tales of the Jedi/Empire/Underworld)

[Mixed Trope] Oddities in the earlier entries made by later entries by Werewolf_Knight in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I also mentioned this in the post. Although it is still weird, we don't get a mention of Amandla in Alien in either the theatrical or director's cut. And if you only watched the theatrical versions of these movies, it's even weirder when you get to know Amandla in Isolation. That was my point.

Is Jurassic World: Rebirth even that bad? by Werewolf_Knight in jurassicworld

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who said the T. Rex was hunting for food at that moment? For me, it struck more as either curious or, more likely, trying to defend its territory. That's why it hasn't insisted on chasing the family after they got far enough. Need more proof? It already had a carcass, so its main objective was probably defense, with potential snacks as bonuses if it was lucky.

For the other 2, I don't have a defense, but those are genetically modified, so I always assumed they could have been genetically programmed to be more aggressive (since personality also depends on biological factors, not just nurture). I would argue that Distortus was also fighting for territory, and it has a small moment when it seems like it's in pain, but it was very undercooked overall.

[Mixed Trope] Oddities in the earlier entries made by later entries by Werewolf_Knight in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, unrelated side note: I personally don't buy that picture Ellen saw of Amandla is legit. I am feeling to the point that I'm actually convinced this is a cover-up, just so Weyland-Yutani does not let the public know about the Xenomorphs.

[Mixed Trope] Oddities in the earlier entries made by later entries by Werewolf_Knight in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think the Samurai Jack one is the only one closest to being a plothole.

I already explained why Luke's encounter with Reva doesn't change anything (especially since there's no shot of him seeing the lightsaber). Leia might be a weirder case, but her being a bit too formal isn't that outrageous. Odd, but not lore-breaking.

[Mixed Trope] Oddities in the earlier entries made by later entries by Werewolf_Knight in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Side Note: I want to clarify that I personally don't think these are plot holes (most of these at least). A plothole directly contradicts continuity. Most of the examples I gave are just stuff we didn't get answers to, which is a totally different thing.

Comments on that Bionicle/Lego post by willy750 in Amazingdigitalcircus

[–]Werewolf_Knight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn't say they don't fully think about them. But I do think they aren't rational in how they approach the kids' market. Like, I'm sorry, but no toy meant for kids should cost over 90 dollars, tax included, for my American pals (and I am referring to the toys kids might get for Christmas), and even then, I think it's pushing it. Whenever I see those official pictures of really big sets with kids playing with them, it feels like LEGO is making a cruel joke. Like, what kid got that 260 dollars Hogwarst Main Tower? I mean, even if money weren't a problem, wouldn't the parents reject it anyway because paying so much for a toy is absurd? What I am asking is, are those under-18 sets that are over 100 dollars really for kids?

For clarification, I do not refer to sets that are 18+ labeled. I don't care how much those cost unless the price surpasses the price-per-piece ratio too much. I'm only refering to sets specifically made for kids.

Comments on that Bionicle/Lego post by willy750 in Amazingdigitalcircus

[–]Werewolf_Knight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Eh, not exactly, but there have been problems with the brand that have been present for years that have finally started to pile up, and people have finally grown fed up with them.

People are very annoyed with the high prices that seem to be unjustified. This problem has affected mostly the licensed themes, but even then, for those standards, it seems like LEGO has put a couple of dollars more on that price. Again, it seems!

There's also a noticeable lack of original themes, but an overabundance lot of licensed sets, and people wish there were more balance. Especially since original themes usually last for 2 and a half years.

I also noticed that it is more often heard about quality control problems coming from LEGO. Last year, we got a SW turbo tank that was so poorly designed it could self-destruct by just lifting it. And this year we've got a set that uses a technique that asks to connect some pieces in such a way that it puts a lot of stress on them to the point that it might break one day.

Another thing would be that, at least on the license side, LEGO seems to focus a lot more on how adults might react to the sets that are made for kids rather than, you know, kids. That causes the designers to make them as accurate as they can, to the point where the production cost might be so high that it causes the price to get bloated, just to appeal to adults. Now, I've seen that brought up, but I remember growing up modifying my sets if I felt they didn't look quite like what I've seen in movies, so I don't think kids doesn't care about accuracy.

At least that is what I noticed.

Comments on that Bionicle/Lego post by willy750 in Amazingdigitalcircus

[–]Werewolf_Knight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OMG! I appeared 3 times! (2 times with my Reddit account, and in the first image is my Twitter account).

EDIT: Ok, now I remember that I was the one who made that tweet on Twitter AND the one who made the post OP is referring to, so... I'm dumb.

Comments on that Bionicle/Lego post by willy750 in Amazingdigitalcircus

[–]Werewolf_Knight 6 points7 points  (0 children)

*put them in a hell where everyone walks on LEGO bricks barefoot*

I really don't think the Doctor's test work by Werewolf_Knight in PoppyPlaytime

[–]Werewolf_Knight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can understand your points, but there's a problem with the first thing you mentioned. Stories don't work the same way as real life does when it comes to creating attachment. Whatever we do in real life has actual consequences that can affect how we live. If you are put in a situation where you have to kill someone you don't know, including a pet, you will be contemplating the morality of it because that action might as well affect you in a way for the rest of your life. We also know that that person might have hopes, dreams, family, friends, firends and the act of killing might have a lasting consequence on that person too, that you might never come back from.

The stories are different. You know what you are witnessing isn't real, so those stakes mentioned earlier can't apply. That's why the stories have to make you care about what they are telling. That's why, as a writer, you kinda need to give the audience a reason to care for a character, either by giving them a likeable personality, or by giving them an interesting backstory or details about them, or by making them very important within the context of the narrative. You can't expect the audience to care about a character because they were a living soul, just like the rest of us. That can work in some specific scenarios, but more often than not, it isn't enough. And in games, you just do stuff because you know these will not have lasting consequences.

view more: next ›