Cowman

I always thought those were Morbius' previous regenerations.

I was actually kinda intrigued by the idea behind Colin Baker's Doctor. Something goes wrong during the regeneration making the Doctor even more unbalanced than usual. I also thought it would've been a great character builder for Peri, who wasn't really much of a companion up till then.

I liked the idea of a companion having to use their wits and persuasion to keep this semi-insane Time Lord in line. Suddenly, the standard roles of Doctor and companion are almost reversed. The Doctor is still getting involved in crazy and deadly situations, and if the companion wants his knowledge and expertise to survive, they'll need to keep him focused.

Sadly, the negative feedback seemed to make them back off that darker tone, leaving Colin Baker's Doctor rather undefined. Rather sad, since I thought "Trial of a Time Lord" proved that Baker could play a very good Doctor.

I'm..... not sure what you're saying here. If you're talking about the companion romances, then yes, I wasn't a fan of those. I wasn't really a fan of Rose in general, but there were companions in the old shows that I didn't like either, so that's neither here nor there.

Thankfully those sorta ended after Rose and Martha. Donna was much better and I'm actually really digging the husband-wife team of Rory and Amy.

Beyond that, I often felt they were shoving Doctor-angst down our throats a little too much. David Tennant's little speech about how when he regenerates it's not really HIM, nearly had me grabbing the television and shaking it with rage.

The whole point of regeneration was that it WAS him. Different looks, some shuffling of personality, but it was always the same man. Even when Eccelston regenerated into Tennant; the whole point of the episode was Rose realizing that it WAS the same Doctor.

Yet now, all of a sudden, it's just his body that regenerates and he's essentially a different person then. Yeah, that ticked me off good.


But my main problem with the show.... my MAIN problem...... is that I'm sick of them telling me how awesome the Doctor is. Seriously, it's like we can't go more than two episodes without someone giving some speech about how great, amazing, and magical the Doctor is.


That being said, overall I think the new series has done a pretty good job at carrying on the Doctor Who legacy. They've already had some great stories and really memorable monsters. And while I may have found Eccelston to be a bit bland and Tennant to be a bit whiney, they still played the role well and had some great episodes. "The Doctor Dances" I really enjoyed and "Blink" was fantastic.

Matt Smith has really won me over. I was pretty down on him initially cause he seemed way to young, but I've come to like his Doctor the most out of the new series. So while I may complain now and then, I DO really like the new shows. Doctor Who is one of my all time favorite shows from my childhood AND adulthood, so I'm inclined to nitpick a little.

While I've had significant.... issues.... with the new series; I'll agree that someone brought in by the new ones should go through those first and then start dabbling in the old stuff.

But I DO recommend giving the original shows a fair shake. Don't be put off by the old effects. The original series was made on a very low budget with VERY little time; and they still managed to put out some downright amazing material.

Agreed.

One of my favorite things about Farscape was how Crichton just got crazier with every season and Harvey was great for that kinda stuff.

You are dead to me.

I'd pay for it just so I could have a health bar floating in the top left corner of my vision.

Oh, oh... how about options? Different styles of health bars, ammo counters, shield and XP gauges.

What if you could hook it up to your phone's GPS and have your own mini-map?

They synthesized it from the remains of Ivan Ooze after his defeat by the Power Rangers.

This was my first thought.

What's cooler than a huge, flesh covered sword with a giant eyeball on it?

Eh, Hudson Hawk is at 23% and I love that movie.

Likewise with Kung-Pow at 11%.

So apparently, I really like ****y movies.

This is another good alternative.

Then you could have them "visit" for a mission or two.

Not really.

At least I didn't. He was over-the-top and his abilities were exaggerated. That's what made him a fun villain. Realistically, the Joker would've never survived through even HALF of the movie.

But that's why we go to see movies in general and comic book movies in particular (at least it's why I go and see them), to see stuff that wouldn't happen in real life. Like a man dressing up as a bat and fighting crime, or a nut who can lay siege to an entire city, or a cat burglar who dresses up like a cat.


Yeah, the current Catwoman doesn't have a tail. And you don't need LARGE ears. Batman has had subtler ears on more than one occasion.




Maybe you want to be recognized for a different reason by other types of people. Maybe she'd want to stand out from other cat burglars to the people who might hire her. Maybe she wants fences and the like to be wary of double crossing her cause she's dressed up in a crazy outfit and they don't know WHAT she'll do to them.

Not to mention that if you're wearing a cowl and goggles, yer not gonna be recognized if someone happens to see you. The movie version; if she happens to have those goggles pushed up, her face is perfectly visible. If you're dressed up as a cat and someone spots you, they're not gonna remember your face; they're gonna remember that you were dressed up as a cat.

Then why make it a Batman movie?

Loonies and outlandish costumes ARE Batman. If you're going to throw all that out, why not make it an original character. Hollywood could always use new content.

Plus, Batman is already dressing up as a bat. Say what you want about how functional his ears and cape are; he's still dressing up like a bat. Why is it so farfetched that a cat burglar with a flair for the dramatic (like Selina Kyle) might read about him and think, "hey, I kinda like that idea". From that point her choice of costume is obvious.

Look, I'm not saying she needs to be in the purple spandex with a tail. We've already established that in Nolan's movies, color=bad and body armor is the only acceptable super hero outfit. But would it be so bad to just give her a cowl with some subtle cat ears on it? Even with the exact suit and goggles we've already seen, the cowl would have her pretty much in line with the current Catwoman outfit.

The idea of the goggles being the ears when she pushes them up on her head is something at least. But it still feels like a cop-out.

Maybe there's no in-between, but there ARE extremes. There are people who will overreact to anything, which is who my "over-touchy" comment was aimed at.

I don't mind someone expressing regret or even anger when someone lets a spoiler slip. I do it enough myself on topics I might feel strongly about. But I've seen enough multiple paragraph rants full of unnecessary insults.

I guess I shoulda said, "people CAN be over-touchy about things". Using the word "spoilers" DOES kinda imply that I'm limiting it to that topic, I suppose.

Obviously. That was just my personal preference.


What's your point?

I'll admit that if there's a movie I want to see but I think the main character might die in the end; I'll find out before I go see it. Because if I go see a movie that I like, but the character dies or it's a depressing ending, I feel cheated.

Other than that, I don't need to know any spoilers.

Of course, I'm not overly upset if I come across one by accident. Sure, it's fun to see it unfold fresh, but it's not gonna spoil the movie for me if I know some plot points. I think people CAN be a little over-touchy about spoilers.

Given the track record of comic book movies until just recently; I think we can be forgiven for assuming the worst.

Yes, how could I have possibly mistook the meaning.


Well... yeah. I would hope they'd give a reason for the outfit. They gave Batman and Joker good reasons for their outfits, so why are they suddenly wussing out on Catwoman?

Which implies that Catwoman wearing cat ears would be campy and silly looking. Cause why else would she be doing it, right?

She wouldn't be trying to set herself apart from other catburglars, make a name for herself, or simply be doing it to draw Batman's attention.

Unless those ears have GPS, Wi-fi, and laser beams in 'em; it's campy and silly.

Exactly!

And a costume from the comic book, like Catwoman's, AUTOMATICALLY equals silly. That's why only nerds and losers read comics. Thank goodness Nolan's doing away with all that stupid comic book stuff. Catwoman's not wearing a cat outfit to look sexy or just cause SHE likes it; it's just pure camp. And ANY camp is a VERY bad thing.

Everything must be realistic and gritty and colorless. Throwing in a dash of whimsey might make the films too fun, and we can't have that. Then it might be sorta like..... [stage whisper] a comic book. [/stage whisper]

WOOO!!

Someone made the "hardcore comic nerds" argument!

That's right, you losers! How DARE you assume that this movie would be aimed at you! Of COURSE Batman isn't going to wear that stupid cloth costume. REAL men wear elaborate body armor. Catwoman dressing up like a cat? How lame would THAT be, right? It was okay for the Joker to look KINDA like a clown cause he KILLED people, so he's still awesome. But CATwoman..... PLEASE!!

I mean, I know Nolan kinda set the stage for stuff like that with the Joker's whole "you've changed things speech"; and sure, that'd be the perfect excuse for people to start wearing elaborate costumes like Batman. But we wouldn't want them to actually follow through with that. Just put Selina Kyle in black leather like every single other femme fatale action woman in who knows how many movies. That's safe and predictable. We wouldn't want to try anything new or push the boundries of the movie's universe or anything.

Oh yeah, and Bane's silly looking mask is just fine cause he's wearing a trenchcoat and military gear. Plus he'll probably have GUNS which makes up for that, right brah?

*fist bump*

More than likely.

After all, that might introduce some fantasy or whimsy into Mr. Nolan's super-duper realistic, "too-serious-for-silly-comic-book-stuff" Bat-films.