heres 2 trailers. havent watched em yet so Ill watch em with you. 

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1502712?ref_=hm_hp_i_2

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0369610?ref_=hm_hp_i_1

 

F4 traIler: 

 

Jurrasic World trailer: 

24 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I think they should have kept the gag of Die Hard and had John innocently caught up in a crazy situation.   Under Siege stole the idea for a warship...and a train.   But John on a cruise ship vacation with his wife and its hijacked?  Gold! (notwithstanding Speed 2).  Although Diehard 3 wasnt terrible.

He and Holly are on a cruise with Al and his wife when the Caribbean bad guys rob it during a storm .

Flip-flops!

Put on some weight, lay off the exercise.

 

Edited August 7, 20187 yr by FrostyWinnipeg

https://www.techradar.com/uk/news/jim-carrey-confirms-he-will-play-dr-robotnik-in-live-action-sonic-movie

16 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

https://www.techradar.com/uk/news/jim-carrey-confirms-he-will-play-dr-robotnik-in-live-action-sonic-movie

WHoa... that sounds like a paycheque role... 

On 2018-08-09 at 11:33 AM, wanna-b-fanboy said:

WHoa... that sounds like a paycheque role... 

well he hasn't done alot this decade film wise so I'll give him that....never thought I'd see the day where he would play a villain

I'm not going to get excited about this until we get confirmation from either Matt Groening or show runner Al Jean

https://birthmoviesdeath.com/2018/08/10/report-20th-century-fox-is-working-on-another-the-simpsons-movie

27 minutes ago, iHeart said:

well he hasn't done alot this decade film wise so I'll give him that....never thought I'd see the day where he would play a villain

Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events?

Batman Forever?

Granted not serious roles.

Just now, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events?

Batman Forever?

Granted not serious roles.

I said this Decade as in the 2010s?

4 minutes ago, iHeart said:

I said this Decade as in the 2010s?

(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻

 

6 hours ago, iHeart said:

well he hasn't done alot this decade film wise so I'll give him that....never thought I'd see the day where he would play a villain

https://www.the-numbers.com/person/530401-Jim-Carrey#tab=acting

Yikes he hasn't really had a hit in forever....

Sooner or later he'll turn into Bruce Willis and take any pay day and have everything to direct to video

With the new Star Trek film set to begin filming in January, reports are that Chris Pine and Chris Hemsworth have walked away amidst Paramount's insistence they re-negotiate their deals as the studio tries to save money on the film.  And even crazier, the studio says the film remains a priority with or without them.   

On 2018-08-11 at 2:14 AM, Brandon said:

https://www.the-numbers.com/person/530401-Jim-Carrey#tab=acting

Yikes he hasn't really had a hit in forever....

Sooner or later he'll turn into Bruce Willis and take any pay day and have everything to direct to video

I think he's too into his meditations, paintings etc... to care much about doing movies anymore.  I think he mostly looks for something that will challenge him.  Maybe he's doing this one for fun.

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

With the new Star Trek film set to begin filming in January, reports are that Chris Pine and Chris Hemsworth have walked away amidst Paramount's insistence they re-negotiate their deals as the studio tries to save money on the film.  And even crazier, the studio says the film remains a priority with or without them.   

I read about that on the weekend and I laughed and I laughed and I laughed. Why is it so hard to not **** up a Star Trek movie?

3 hours ago, 17to85 said:

I read about that on the weekend and I laughed and I laughed and I laughed. Why is it so hard to not **** up a Star Trek movie?

You'd almost think they were part of the DCU.......

3 hours ago, 17to85 said:

I read about that on the weekend and I laughed and I laughed and I laughed. Why is it so hard to not **** up a Star Trek movie?

I think because they hire a producer who said he never liked Star Trek and knew the answer to "fixing" it was to make it more like Star Wars.  I mean, thats a screw up from Day One.

I don’t know how they’d do it (would robocop age? CGI?) But it would be awesome. 

 

57 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I don’t know how they’d do it (would robocop age? CGI?) But it would be awesome. 

 

They could steal Terminators reason that the Tissue on Arnie aged .....

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I don’t know how they’d do it (would robocop age? CGI?) But it would be awesome. 

 

Thought he looked half-decent in Trek: into Darkness

1 hour ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Thought he looked half-decent in Trek: into Darkness

He sure aged in just a few years.  But Robocop is bald anyway.  They could CGI him young or do a story where Robocop's organic matter ages like normal.  That would be interesting.

2 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

He sure aged in just a few years.  But Robocop is bald anyway.  They could CGI him young or do a story where Robocop's organic matter ages like normal.  That would be interesting.

Or they could replace him with the Rock!!!   I kid....  Stone Cold seems like the better choice

2 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

He sure aged in just a few years.  But Robocop is bald anyway.  They could CGI him young or do a story where Robocop's organic matter ages like normal.  That would be interesting.

I don't think it matters much. It's not like he was all robot. He should be aging.

I remember reading that so much of the character came from Weller himself, how Robocop talked, how he walked (which was really cool), etc.  I felt like a lot of that was missing from the re-boot film (plus it sucked).  Getting Weller back would be great.  Maybe they create a newer model and Robo is in retirement but has to come back when the newer model is corrupt!

 

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

 

He'd be 46/47 by the time they starting filming and they have not even started filming the next one yet and if that one is a hit which I predict it will be cause its an odd numbered Craig film then what?