Quake3World

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 7:52 pm**

Dave wrote:
Iccy wrote:Movie looks good, but they couldnt have picked a worse actor for the role. I think she is hot as anything, but she doesnt embody aeon flux at all. Its like asking gilligan to play bruce lee, she just doesnt fit. So much so that as much of a fan of the cartoon i was, i dont think im going to see the movie cause she kinda ruins it with her whole some good looks.

This is the type of girl that should have filed the role. Michelle Rodriguez. Look at the intensity in her eyes, Charlize Theron cant pull it off.

and yea, she can be real fine too.

Point is, you need a girl that can be tough to play this role, they failed horribly. Charlize Theron needs to stick to the cute roles she is good at, like in Trial and Error. To me her presence changes the movie from a hardcore, underground potentialy good sci fi flick, to a T&A driven rip off of a good cartoon series.

Weird, no ?
That chick is too thick to play the main character in Aeon Flux.. Charlize Theron is built like the chick on the cartoon--tall and skinny--except they gave her short hair

too thick and, imo, not attractive.

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:01 pm**

by too thick, i hope you mean too thick to play aeon flux, rather than "too thick for my taste"

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:02 pm**

[xeno]Julios wrote:by too thick, i hope you mean too thick to play aeon flux, rather than "too thick for my taste"

i was directly referring to dave's post, so yeah. imo, she's not attractive either, which has nothing to do with the movie.

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:03 pm**

and should attractiveness really matter in a good action flick?

in a way, having chicks that aren't gorgeous play leading roles allows the male viewer to see past the domain of sexuality, into the domain of the actual character.

kill bill is a perfect example.

edit: nm, seems you don't disagree on this point, as you said it has nothing to do with movie

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:04 pm**

Yeah but most male viewers wanna see the movie for the wank material

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:08 pm**

dzjepp wrote:Yeah but most male viewers wanna see the movie for the wank material

you know, i have NEVER gone to see a movie for the chicks. If I'm putting down money and time to watch a movie, it's to see a decent fucking movie.

how are you gonna wank in the cinema anyway?

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:13 pm**

dzjepp wrote:Yeah but most male viewers wanna see the movie for the wank material

you mean, most virgins

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:17 pm**

[xeno]Julios wrote:
dzjepp wrote:Yeah but most male viewers wanna see the movie for the wank material
you know, i have NEVER gone to see a movie for the chicks. If I'm putting down money and time to watch a movie, it's to see a decent fucking movie.

how are you gonna wank in the cinema anyway?

The same way they record bootlegs in the cinema, be very sneaky.

Perhaps not on a direct level, but maybe subconsciously the (average?) male viewer prefers to receive visual stimuli via pleasurable ways - such as shit blowing up or seeing hot chicks. It's why every video game heroine has big boobs and a pretty face and dresses scantly - something the prepubescent male enjoys viewing.

But I'm sure from a marketing standpoint there have been many case study and research performed saying that the male viewer enjoys looking at hot women

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:22 pm**

if i want to see hot women, i can do it for free.

why should i pay good money to see hot women when i can do it for free?

i rarely go to the cinema, but when i do, it's to see a movie that I expect or hope to be QUALITY.

why the fuck would i waste an evening, and 10-15 bux, to stand in line and sit down for 1-2hours just so i can see a hot chick?

wtf man - if i were 15 or something maybe i could understand that...

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:24 pm**

[xeno]Julios wrote: Many people voted for bush.

Many people listen to britney spears.

Many people like bush

Many people like britney spears.

Many people have bad taste.

you know, i have NEVER gone to see a movie for the chicks. If I'm putting down money and time to watch a movie, it's to see a decent fucking movie.

The same fallacious argument approached from 2 opposite sides.

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:28 pm**

[xeno]Julios wrote:if i want to see hot women, i can do it for free.

why should i pay good money to see hot women when i can do it for free?

i rarely go to the cinema, but when i do, it's to see a movie that I expect or hope to be QUALITY.

why the fuck would i waste an evening, and 10-15 bux, to stand in line and sit down for 1-2hours just so i can see a hot chick?

wtf man - if i were 15 or something maybe i could understand that...

Maybe because your opinion doesn't make up 70% of Hollywood's targeted customers.

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:29 pm**

[xeno]Julios wrote:if i want to see hot women, i can do it for free.

why should i pay good money to see hot women when i can do it for free?

i rarely go to the cinema, but when i do, it's to see a movie that I expect or hope to be QUALITY.

why the fuck would i waste an evening, and 10-15 bux, to stand in line and sit down for 1-2hours just so i can see a hot chick?

wtf man - if i were 15 or something maybe i could understand that...

Ok take away the hot woman for a second. Having removed that, MOST males still want a 'quick fix' whilst at the cinema, which firsthand comes from watching action films. It's why a lot of males drudge going with their gf's to see romance flicks.

Blame the testosterone?

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:34 pm**

dzjepp wrote:
Ok take away the hot woman for a second. Having removed that, MOST males still want a 'quick fix' whilst at the cinema, which firsthand comes from watching action films. It's why a lot of males drudge going with their gf's to see romance flicks.

Blame the testosterone?

but isn't it reasonable to ask for QUALITY fixes?

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:35 pm**

[xeno]Julios wrote:by too thick, i hope you mean too thick to play aeon flux, rather than "too thick for my taste"

I never said she was ugly. I specifically said what I meant

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:36 pm**

Foo wrote:
The same fallacious argument approached from 2 opposite sides.

Let me rephrase:

I think if one likes bush, one has bad taste.

I think if one likes shite movies, one has bad taste.

I think if accepts hollywood garbage just because of the hot chicks, one has bad taste.

Speaking out against this is an attempt to get people to raise their expectations.

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:37 pm**

R00k wrote:
[xeno]Julios wrote:if i want to see hot women, i can do it for free.

why should i pay good money to see hot women when i can do it for free?

i rarely go to the cinema, but when i do, it's to see a movie that I expect or hope to be QUALITY.

why the fuck would i waste an evening, and 10-15 bux, to stand in line and sit down for 1-2hours just so i can see a hot chick?

wtf man - if i were 15 or something maybe i could understand that...
Maybe because your opinion doesn't make up 70% of Hollywood's targeted customers.

That and he thinks waaaay too much about stuff

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:37 pm**

Dave wrote:
[xeno]Julios wrote:by too thick, i hope you mean too thick to play aeon flux, rather than "too thick for my taste"
I never said she was ugly. I specifically said what I meant

was directed at juggs

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:39 pm**

R00k wrote:Maybe because your opinion doesn't make up 70% of Hollywood's targeted customers.

yea and this is a problem.

the fact that 70% of (north american) males put up with garbage means that hollywood standards go down.

From what i can gather, Europe doesn't suffer this problem.

which is why foreign films tend to be far superior.

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:40 pm**

I think looking at worldwide sales hollywood probably makes more overseas than during domestic screenings.

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:42 pm**

wouldn't surprise me, there are more people outside the US than there are inside the US.

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:43 pm**

[xeno]Julios wrote:
R00k wrote:Maybe because your opinion doesn't make up 70% of Hollywood's targeted customers.
yea and this is a problem.

the fact that 70% of (north american) males put up with garbage means that hollywood standards go down.

From what i can gather, Europe doesn't suffer this problem.

which is why foreign films tend to be far superior.

That's a matter of opinion too, not necessarily bad taste.

For instance, I loved The Rundown, even though it was just a cheap action flick, because it had what I enjoy in a cheap action flick. Doesn't mean I have bad taste.

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2005 9:47 pm**

But I agree with you as far as Aeon Flux goes. The story and world of that series require a lot more than a pretty face who might be able to do some of her own stunts.
To me, this seems more like whoever is making Aeon Flux decided to pattern it after the Charlie's Angels flicks. Which is exactly the opposite of what the movie calls for.

I think it should be some battered, beaten woman with a nice body, who looks rugged, like she might have been in a few bar fights and been arrested a couple times. Charlize Theron just doesn't fit the part for me at all.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:15 am**

Hang on, didn't she win an oscar for playing a battered, beaten woman who looked rugged, like she might have been in a few bar fights and been arrested a couple times?

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:20 am**

Dave wrote: That chick is too thick to play the main character in Aeon Flux.. Charlize Theron is built like the chick on the cartoon--tall and skinny--except they gave her short hair

True, aeon was tall and skinny and flexible. Point though was that michelle up there has those intense eyes, thats what aeon needs, the intensity, the darkness. charlize cant fake that, she is too much of a girly girl model type. Simply dying her hair black doesnt do it.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2005 7:32 am**

Just saw this tonight and was pleasantly surprised with it. The storyline, setting, and action sequences are good; it's definitely worth checking out in the theatre IMO.