DreadPirateRoberts

Even the Scarlett Johansson minimate has cleavage.

Sorry, but this film just looks horrible. I like both Chris Pine and Tom Hardy and could not possibly want to see this film less.

@wade What was so stupid about Dark Towers or At the Mountains of Madness? The source material is excellent. Did you not like what they were doing with them or just do not like the stories?

Wow @Masta_Chiefed, you really are confused: First, I never said China is not a threat, not that I believe it to be an immediate one militarily. Just that as of today it is not really prepared for a ground invasion across the Pacific. They are much more interested in besting us economically than militarily. And like I already said, North Korea is even sillier as the villain in this.

Second, Red Dawn was not a propaganda tool. It was a jingoistic, ridiculous film that made money doing what those films do. It was not really controversial except to some silly people who think such things actually make a difference. Red Dawn was a RESULT of and attempt to cash in on peoples feelings, not a CREATOR of those feelings. Decades of cold war were NOT nudged in the slightest by a Sheen/Swayze film that was only sort of successful. And no one said it look transcendent. It looks lame, which is why most people including myself will not bother to see it.

Third, I never said that the Chinese people were too dumb to log on and look up who the villains were. In truth, they won't care in general. Any more than the American public will. And the studio is not worried about that either. All they care about is that the film will almost certainly be banned in China in its current form, which will cost them money. And more importantly, other films from that studio will also get banned as punishment, which will also cost them more money. That is ALL this is about.

You can believe anything else you want. But it's still silly.

Sure it it is a lie. So what. Please point out the fear mongering Mr. Dictionary Man. Let me do it for you: Fear mongering is the use of fear to influence the opinions and actions of others towards some specific end.

Really?! He is trying influence the movie goer to some specific end through the use of fear?!

No. He is trying to make money. A movie with Americans blowing invading people up will likely make money. And China has been known to blacklist films and studios that portray them badly, and they want their money too. So they change the villains to the North Koreans since they HAVE NO MONEY and will not bother the bottom like with their protests in the least. That is all it is. Maximizing profit for this and future films from the studio.

So again, where is the fear mongering? And your boycott would cost at most $10 to the studio per film, and likely less since you weren't going to see those films anyway!

Fear mongering? Why? It's an action movie. Do you think they are actually trying to whip us up into fear of a North Korean invasion. What's to boycott?

Sorry, but this is just silly. Soviet Russia made some sort of sense in the original. China invading the US makes far less sense (they have far to much to lose financially and their military is NOT up to an invasion across the Pacific). North Korea makes NO SENSE at all. Them shipping a nuke over, sure. Them INVADING? No chance.

@OhTheFilmNerd: I said two things, and left it off. The 2nd is that it allows Harry to be free from flying responsibilities, allowing him to view more of the action for narration purposes and have his hands free to defend himself. That is my take anyway.

@OhTheFilmNerd: Don't have a problem with the motorbike sequence. Having Harry in the sidecar does two things. 1st it amps up the tension since he is at the mercy of other's protection and takes his one best skill, flying, away from him.
@movie-nut: The dragon in a trailer would only be odd if the trailer was only for part 1, but it looks likt this is a trailer for both films in a sense.

Diaigma: you do recognize the irony in complaining that there are too many sequels while demanding a sequel to Incredibles? At any rate, while I am also a huge Incredibles fan, keep in mind that it is popular with mostly the older Pixar fanbase, which makes it one of the poorer sellers in toy stores. So fun it may be, but there is little to no sequel pressure. Lasseter has gone on record stating that he does not like sequels, aside from his sense that Toy Story lent itself to them. So they will only come about when he gets pushed hard enough into them.

First, Disney DOES own Pixar. They bought it some time ago. However, that is not the reason for the sequels. When Disney bought Pixar the deal effectively put Pixar's in people charge of Disney Animation. So the sequels are Lasseter's ultimate decision. And while the older fans don't like Cars as much as their other stuff, people overlook that Cars is one of the most successful films in terms of aftermarket merchandising, the the pressure to expand it is enormous.

Homosexual superheroes are not new. The Authority is a pretty popular title, and Apollo and Midnighter are a gay couple.

The (sort of)very short answer is that in Japan there was a huge rage over Macross in the early 80's. Gundam was another huge success amongst others even a bit earlier. Due to Harmony Gold's import and reworking of Macross for American audiences, Macross made pretty big inroads into the US as wellas Robotech. Soon after the Japanese produced Transformers initially for American audiences (although they also reworked it a bit for Japanese release, sort of a reverse of the Macross/Robotech process). Transformers is much more episodic and 'robot' focused. Macross was more arc driven and character focused (ala BSG or B5 and the like).