TrueGentleman

Akira, particularly the multi-volume manga, is steeped in the subtext of the Japanese 20th century experience, especially from the country's direction after WWII and into its growth as a superpower. Even if the American producers come up with an analog for Kaneda's biker gang - and to judge from their wimpy wish list, they're casting for a suburban boy scout troop - they still have to provide decades' worth of social and historical parallels. As was pointed out earlier in this thread, even the title presents a challenge for a US version.

Ringu, by comparison, was more focused on creating a traditional ghost story updated with current technology (videos, TVs, telephones), so it didn't have nearly as complex a subtext. Americanizing Akira presents even more of a challenge as the original Gojira. Remember how well the ersatz 1998 American remake worked?

The Venture Brothers' pilot, The Terrible Secret of Turtle Bay, was animated in Flash, with all the quality you'd expect. That experience probably turned them off computer-generated animation. Besides, cell-shaded CGI wouldn't recall the Johnny Quest-style animation from the 60s that grounds the show.

Odd, even during the nadir of proliferating pouches 'n' pistols in that era, I don't recall Lex Luthor ever sticking up old ladies in order to finance his death rays or the Kingpin personally expanding his criminal enterprise into purse-snatching.

Surely by the time players have broken out of the Zig in CoV, they've graduated above the rank of street mugger. Besides, CoH favors a more encompassing view of heroes - Gold, Silver, Bronze, and whatever-metal-we're-currently-in Ages.

What a peculiar definition of "fun". Moreover, when a certain recent game allowed players to attack civillians, it generated some ... controversy.

Because this isn't "City of Antisocial Personalities".

This kind of complaint sounds like you want a game that's rated "M"/"18+". CoX is "T"/"16+".

No, my RL were similarly disappointed in the Daredevil movie. Then again, they're fans of the comic book, so the adaptation was already handicapped (so to speak).

Ironic, though, that the Internet, a fundamentally democratic and egalitarian platform, is often criticized for elitism and snobbery.

Oh y--

Wait, can we all agree that it was literally Ben Affleck's laziest role? He and fellow smoker Colin Farrell were wheezing after each take in the action scenes, and frankly, it shows in the final product.

It seems like the recommendation boils down to "come for the alien anal probe jokes, stay for the characterizations."

Pandering to the citizens of Praetoria with sexist exploitation?! Tyrant's villainy has no shame!

Which isn't to say the divide is unbridgeable. Among game designers, there's a sweet spot to aim for: "easy to learn, difficult to master". It holds true in varying degrees for hits from Starcraft and Angry Birds to chess and go.

Designing toward this goal for MMORPGs is an even bigger challenge than in other video game genres because of the variety of playing styles and the necessary richness of a virtual world worth staying in. Aside from a certain 800-lbs. gorilla that has introduced soccer moms to orcs, most MMORPGs tend to try either appealing to certain types of players or offering something for everyone. (CoH probably falls in the latter category, pace pvpers, but the OP evidently feels uncomfortable with being compelled to participate in gated content.) The flip side is, of course, "Please all, and you will please none".

The second link's Youtube videos don't seem to be region-locked.

I've tried a low-end third-party stylus for the iPad and can confirm it entirely misses the point.

It's not that the iPad isn't configured for the kind of input with styluses for, say, a Wacom Tablet or a Lenovo ThinkPad X201, which have buttons that can function like a mouse's or perform other UI inputs. Rather, the iPad's full-blown haptic UI doesn't limit itself to a single point the way a stylus does.

The iPad, at its best, runs on hand gestures, which is something very different in a consumer computing device.

I've started many a character on Galaxy City's unhurried streets, but outside of my Warshade, I rarely find reasons to return, much less mission arcs, particularly compared to Atlas Park. It's as though the Paragon Chamber of Commerce decided to give the Wentworth's to Atlas and the arena to Galaxy City, and only the former turned out to be a good long-term investment.

While a major overhaul of Atlas Park would affect too many mission maps to make it feasible, Galaxy City ought to petition the city planners for some rennovation investment (or possibly fortify itself against extra-dimensional invasion).

That "if" is the Big Lie of Praetoria. Apart from a few scattered sightings of a tentacle beyond the sonic barrier, there's no indication of what kind of threat Praetorian Hamidon presents, much less whether or not Tyrant is the only opponent capable of defeating it. (Why yes, I am holding out for the possibility of GR-side Hami raids.)

Big Brother, as it turns out, is under no obligation to love you. The relationship is intended to be strictly one-way.

Disney used to re-release their animated movies every seven years or so in order to catch the latest generation of children. Similarly, back in the Silver Age of comics, it was axiomatic that the readership would turnover every five years, so writers and editors freely recycled plots and ignored continuity.

As mainstream Hollywood orients its product around younger and younger demographics, remakes/reboots/recycling will increase in frequency.

When the potential audience is almost exclusively adolescent males, a decade is more than enough time for turnover.

You admit millions are buying the iPad yet can't imagine a market for it? How many Apple "fanboys" do you think there are?

Like how they picked a Friday to open a comedy?

If this does for superhero movies what Slither (the director's previous movie) did for horror, I'll be quite happy.

Also, Nathan Fillion is in this? Bonus!

Basil Rathbone, despite being in some very silly Sherlock Holmes movies, did quite a good job (besides being tall and having the right profile). Jeremy Brett, although slightly less of a physical resemblance, embodies the role.

Robert Downey, Jr., however, is playing only a slightly sharper, slightly more pompous variation of his movie star persona, this time in Victorian costume. It must also be said that since he's of only average height, he simply cannot physically dominate his scenes the way taller actors can*. His Sherlock Holmes movie is entertaining enough but doesn't even resemble Solar Pons. In this case, movie audiences were very much going to see a RDJr production, which is a different sort of iconography.


* Similarly, Hugh Jackman, standing 6' 2", cannot physically get across the "runt" aspect of Wolverine's character, which is a significant part of his appeal.

For starters, "In height [Holmes] was rather over six feet,and so excessively lean that he seemed to be considerably taller. His eyes were sharp and piercing, save during those intervals of torpor to which I have alluded; and his thin, hawk-like nose gave his whole expression an air of alertness and decision. His chin, too, had the prominence and squareness which mark the man of determination." Does that sound remotely like Robert Downey Junior?

Mickey Mouse Clubhouse? Wasn't that Disney's attempt to mimick Seasame Street? At any rate, it's not a showcase for the character of Mickey Mouse himself, although it certainly sounds designed to promote recognition.

If there was one common complaint about Superman Returns among geeks and ordinary moviegoers, it was that the film didn't capture anyone's imagination, certainly not in the way Action Comics #1 did or the 1978 movie ("You will believe a man can fly"). And an icon absolutely must capture the imagination.