Comment

Comment by Lorne Jaffe 2 hours ago

Halle Berry was the first one I thought of too

Comment by c clark 2 hours ago

@Dr. Detfink, they couldn't give it to Peter Mayhew for Chewbacca.  I believe all the make up he need for the role was a hair cut and to shave a little bit.

Comment by Dr. Detfink 5 hours ago

Halle Berry...

Comment by Dr. Detfink 6 hours ago

I have to think on that one. I'm still grappling with how Harry and the Hendersons won in 1987 Best make up when Ron Perlman as Harry didn't look like it was that much of a stretch. ;) 

Comment by Rachel Kolb 6 hours ago

We tried to go see it on Sunday, but the Hoboken theater was sold out! Still wanting to see it sometime this weekend.

Comment by Lorne Jaffe 6 hours ago

Eric and Rachel...have you seen Trek yet? Waiting to hear your thoughts.

Was wondering last night, which academy award winner from the past 25 years has the worst overall filmography? Not just after they won the award, but before as well

Comment by Dr. Detfink yesterday

I think to myself, geek journalists have to be thinking to themselves, "How do I sell this without cutting too deep, thus ruining my contacts..." IGN UK writer Keza Macdonald tweeted Grainger Games passing out promotional condoms at their panel. I'm not sure if that's the industry's perception of the gaming journalism community or just a really horrific joke. 

Irregardless, it's getting harder and harder to justify dropping nearly a grand on a new console when salaries have not been increasing as cost of living contines to rise. That's not just with games but new computers, comic books. Seems to me, NO ONE is interested in making things more efficient, affordable tech but the mindset seems to be:

"How do I get your kid hooked on monthly fees?" 

EA is the BEST at that subscription game. They're the ones handling that 3 year OR monthly fee for the XBox One that stays connected to the web at all times. Cute huh?

It's one of the reasons why Disney gave EA the rights to Star Wars. Voted one of the most unhappy companies to work for, EA is banking that kids can't stop because if they did, they concede their character...their trophies...their records..their e-Ego. 

Monthly bills will stabilize the industry so it doesn't have to spit out a new game under tighter and tighter guidelines. 

I think BOTH consoles are trying to be more than just about gaming: PS3 was already trying to be something more than gaming otherwise it would not have put in a Blu-Ray drive. PS4 is trying to incorporate tablet/networking into its console while XBox One is trying to be a very expensive Apple TV with a Blu-ray player. 

I don't have a problem with that mindset. My problem is, neither are able to make me call up Time/Warner and cancel my Cable (yet). 

TWO positive developments from X-Box One unveiling:

1. NOT using Windows 8. 

2. Able to handle 60+ fps. X-Box 360 runs optimally at 40fps but not 60+ which is what you want for a beast of a game like Bioshock Infinite. 

Comment by Frizzlestick yesterday

Microsoft really dropped the ball of their reveal of the Xbox One (seriously...why are you naming your THIRD gaming console One?).  Besides a silly and inconsistent name, Microsoft seems to be more focused on delivering the entertainment hub for consumers rather than a gaming device.  I'm sure some people are going to be very excited about that, I'm not one of them.  I want a gaming device, if it can do other things, cool.  But I buy a console to play video games.  When your one hour reveal focuses on how I'll be able to watch TV and movies on it (gasps!  cutting edge!) and only features a game series that everyone knew was coming (and isn't even exclusive to the Xbox), it sends up red flags.

Sony, on the other hand, while not showing off an actual console, showed that they were focused on gaming.  They showed off hardcore action and love for the rising and popular indie scene.  Having a press conference where you display both the new shooter from Bungie and Jonathan Blow's new title shows a diverse range that address a major controversy from last year's E3.

All that aside, my biggest problem the day after the new Xbox's reveal is control.  From what I've been reading (not that MS is making it easy with constant contradiction of reports) is that Microsoft will now be a media gatekeeper.  By purchasing Xbox One, you are signing up for Microsoft to control your access to your media.  It's the largest blow to media rights and it's going to stir up the hornets nest.  This will be the focus of much debate up until the release and long afterwards.

the console has some great ideas.  It's using a very PC orientated mindset by using the harddrive for installs and utilization of cloud features.  I just can't help but feel a sickening feeling when I read about the constant need for this things connection to the internet and the forced use of the Kinect.  I don't like the idea that once I "purchase" a game, I'm only allowed to play it on Microsoft's say-so.  I can't play it if I don't connect once a day to the internet.  I am able to play the game on an xbox not linked to my account.  I am unable to borrow or buy a game used without paying absurd re licensing fees.

I have no idea what my mind-set will be come E3 and both Sony and Microsoft unleash their gaming wonders against the populous.  For the time being, Sony is winning in the reveal category, but I'm pricing out a better PC for the future.

Comment by Dr. Detfink yesterday

No retro-compatibility for both PS4 & XBox One...

It's very bold of Sony & Microsoft to test the gaming market. Both consoles look sexy. Trying to become your total package entertainment center. Like BMW vs Mercedes, each sly sale man is trying to out do the other by constantly adding incentives.

I'm sure they are worth their weight in gold but at the end of the day, that's a lot of gold dragons up front. Not sure how to feel about EA handling the online gaming. That company is always looking for innovative ways to get you to pay weekly. 

I wonder if this is going to drive the sales and place PC gaming back on the map. 

Comment by Frizzlestick on Tuesday

Yeah, spoilers for those in the group not up to date with Doctor Who:

Ahh, no I haven't read any theories.  Knowing the Whovians, I can only imagine the depths of which they've gone to figure out what is going on with Hurt.  The only major speculation I read was people wondering if Hurt was brought into replace Eccleston who, rumor, didn't want to return for the 50th.

A personal theory would have Hurt being the older 8th Doctor that was involved in the Time War.  Considering the amount of guilt the Doctor still harbors from his actions that left him the last of the time lords, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that this was the side of himself he shunned.  The major fan question since the rebirth of the series is when the 8th regenerated, the 50th may be focused on that.

Hmm... now that I think about it... Clara did find out the Doctor's true name in "Journey to the Center of the Tardis" in a book specifically about the Time War.  If Hurt is the Doctor's real name, then it would only make complete sense that the Time War is what lead to this disconnect.  Hmm hmm hmm...

I still believe that the Whovians should aid the Sherlock-ians(?) to solve the grand deception at the end of last season's Sherlock...

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 676
• Next ›
• Page