Raptorific
I go to Temple and enjoy soda. I also like dinosaurs and Batman. I promise, I am not a child.
-
Photoset reblogged from Raptorific
-
-
i don't know if i'd get too excited about skyfall if i were you - maybe i just went into the movie expecting too much because of the great reviews, but i didn't enjoy it as much as i thought i would. the action was cool, but the whole point of the movie just seemed to be a sort of nostalgia kick for the 50 years thing (and to have daniel craig sex up as many women as possible before he left - seriously, the majority of the women in the movie seemed to exist just to have sex with him.)
Asked by Anonymous
First of all, don’t tell me how excited to be. That’s patronizing and disrespectful.
Second, I’ve already seen it and loved it, so kindly blow it out your ass.
Third, I’m having a hard time figuring out where you’re getting “nostalgia kick.” Is it because the movie does what any good Bond film does, reinventing itself to be appealing to a modern audience while still keeping what’s still working?
I also would like to point that there were around eight major characters in this film. Three of them were women. One of them had sex with Bond. Eve plays a large role in the plot as both a field agent and an ally of Bond, and even though there’s sexual tension between them, they never actually have sex, and in her defense, there’s also sexual tension between Bond and Q and between Bond and Silva. The entire plot of the film revolves around M, and no part of her role is sexual. There is one female character who Bond has sex with, and yes, that is the majority of that character’s role in the film, however, I feel like by saying all the women in the film were just there to have sex with Bond, you’re completely invalidating Eve and M, the two major female characters whose contributions to the plot were indispensable, who 100% did not have sex with Bond. It’s true that women are underrepresented in this franchise and action films as a whole, but it doesn’t make sense to say the women in this film only existed to have sex with Bond.
Finally, even if I hadn’t seen the film yet, what on earth makes you think I’d give even the slightest weight to your opinion? I have no idea who you are. I have no reason to trust your movie opinions. In fact, from this message, it’s clear that you have no idea what I’d be looking for in a movie, so really, what made you think I’d even consider your advice on how much to anticipate a movie?
-
Strange crossover headcanon: M is Sherlock and Mycroft’s mother, Miliscent Messervy-Holmes.
-
I basically thought this for like, the entire movie.
-
The way I see it, “Skyfall” is the story of Q wishing he was allowed to give Bond explosives that are shaped like not explosives
-
Post reblogged from Raptorific
There’s no prize for MTV polls. Even if the win was legitimate, a random poll on an online magazine means nothing. The whole purpose of this is to “beat Twilight,” but why? It’s so important to everyone that nobody anywhere thinks Twilight is better than the Hunger Games that everyone’s swarming to prove how good it is by sabotaging a poll, but in doing so they’re becoming as rabid and insufferable as Twilight fans.
“The Hunger Games” was published in 2010, and the movie is being released in 2012. To give everyone a sense of scale, here are some book-to-film adaptations that are probably more anticipated:
- “The Dark Knight Rises.” The last movie was released in 2008 with a cliffhanger ending and no word on whether or not the director planned to make a third movie. Almost no details of the film surfaced until Spring of 2011. Fans waited almost three years to find out the name of this film, then learned what actors were in it months later, then didn’t find out what characters those actors were playing for months after that.
- “Skyfall” continues the James Bond series started with “Casino Royale.” Since a lot of people didn’t like “Quantum of Solace,” which came out in 2008, diehard Bond fans have been waiting four years for a new film to take the bad taste from their mouths.
- “World War Z.” The book was published 6 years ago, and in that time has come to define the zombie genre. It is considered by many to be the most realistic scenario (that includes zombies) told in literature to date. Because of the nature of the book (short stories taking place around the world rather than direct narrative), many fans believed this book to be unfilmable, and never thought a movie would get made. 6 years.
- “Artemis Fowl” Published in 2001, with an upcoming film that’s been “in pre-production” and “coming out next year” for the past 11 years, with no sign of any of these things changing.
- “Les Misérables” the musical was released in 1980 with no film adaptations until this year. 32 years.
- “The Avengers.” The Avengers first appeared in 1963, and are one of the most iconic superhero teams ever. Some fans have been waiting 49 years for a major motion picture adaptation.
- “The Hobbit.” Published in 1937, there has never been a major motion picture adaptation of this novel. Animated TV specials notwithstanding, some fans have been waiting for 75 years. Fans who were babies when the book came out have literally died of old age waiting for this movie to be made and released.
Consider that before you insist everyone bomb the “most anticipated polls.” Consider that when you scold people for admitting they’re looking forward to one of these films more than the Hunger Games. And consider that before you post about how we’re not getting any information on the film. I love the Hunger Games, but when enthusiasm turns to venom, I get uncomfortable with the enthusiastic.
- The Hunger Games
- Hunger Games
- This is going to make me unpopular
- My prediction is that I'll be unfollowed by 3 or 4 smallish Hunger Games blogs that follow me but have never talked to me
- And that I'll get at least one anon in my ask box saying I'm ''ungrateful''
- Or facetiously asking if this is REALLY important
- And then one anon who says that based on my tumblr posts they don't think they'd like me very much
- The Dark Knight Rises
- twilight
- breaking dawn
- Skyfall
- world war z
- Artemis Fowl
- Les Misérables
- The Avengers
- the hobbit
- I included the professor because what he's trying to say is ''I'm a professor! Why isn't anyone listening to me?!''
- Reblogging for my daytime followers
-
There’s no prize for MTV polls. Even if the win was legitimate, a random poll on an online magazine means nothing. The whole purpose of this is to “beat Twilight,” but why? It’s so important to everyone that nobody anywhere thinks Twilight is better than the Hunger Games that everyone’s swarming to prove how good it is by sabotaging a poll, but in doing so they’re becoming as rabid and insufferable as Twilight fans.
“The Hunger Games” was published in 2010, and the movie is being released in 2012. To give everyone a sense of scale, here are some book-to-film adaptations that are probably more anticipated:
- “The Dark Knight Rises.” The last movie was released in 2008 with a cliffhanger ending and no word on whether or not the director planned to make a third movie. Almost no details of the film surfaced until Spring of 2011. Fans waited almost three years to find out the name of this film, then learned what actors were in it months later, then didn’t find out what characters those actors were playing for months after that.
- “Skyfall” continues the James Bond series started with “Casino Royale.” Since a lot of people didn’t like “Quantum of Solace,” which came out in 2008, diehard Bond fans have been waiting four years for a new film to take the bad taste from their mouths.
- “World War Z.” The book was published 6 years ago, and in that time has come to define the zombie genre. It is considered by many to be the most realistic scenario (that includes zombies) told in literature to date. Because of the nature of the book (short stories taking place around the world rather than direct narrative), many fans believed this book to be unfilmable, and never thought a movie would get made. 6 years.
- “Artemis Fowl” Published in 2001, with an upcoming film that’s been “in pre-production” and “coming out next year” for the past 11 years, with no sign of any of these things changing.
- “Les Misérables” the musical was released in 1980 with no film adaptations until this year. 32 years.
- “The Avengers.” The Avengers first appeared in 1963, and are one of the most iconic superhero teams ever. Some fans have been waiting 49 years for a major motion picture adaptation.
- “The Hobbit.” Published in 1937, there has never been a major motion picture adaptation of this novel. Animated TV specials notwithstanding, some fans have been waiting for 75 years. Fans who were babies when the book came out have literally died of old age waiting for this movie to be made and released.
Consider that before you insist everyone bomb the “most anticipated polls.” Consider that when you scold people for admitting they’re looking forward to one of these films more than the Hunger Games. And consider that before you post about how we’re not getting any information on the film. I love the Hunger Games, but when enthusiasm turns to venom, I get uncomfortable with the enthusiastic.
- The Hunger Games
- Hunger Games
- This is going to make me unpopular
- My prediction is that I'll be unfollowed by 3 or 4 smallish Hunger Games blogs that follow me but have never talked to me
- And that I'll get at least one anon in my ask box saying I'm ''ungrateful''
- Or facetiously asking if this is REALLY important
- And then one anon who says that based on my tumblr posts they don't think they'd like me very much
- The Dark Knight Rises
- twilight
- breaking dawn
- Skyfall
- world war z
- Artemis Fowl
- Les Misérables
- The Avengers
- the hobbit
- I included the professor because what he's trying to say is ''I'm a professor! Why isn't anyone listening to me?!''
Design by Simon Fletcher. Powered by Tumblr.
© Copyright 2010
