Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • AndalayBay

      Orphan Attachments   07/31/2018

      I have been doing some housekeeping lately and I've noticed that I had a lot of orphaned attachments. Attachments get orphaned when the PM or post is deleted without removing the attachment first. Deleting a PM or post does not delete the attachment and the file or image remain on the server. I'd like to ask all members to go through their attachments and delete any attachments you don't need anymore or those that have been orphaned. Where can I get a list of my attachments? Click on your display name in the upper right corner of the forums and pick "My Attachments" from the drop-down list. How can I tell an attachment is orphaned? If the PM has been deleted, you'll see a message like this in your attachment list: Unfortunately there is no message if the post has been deleted, so please check your old posts. We do purge old birthday threads every once in a while. Also some hosted projects have been shut down, so you may have orphaned attachments on one of those locations. Thanks!

Recommended Posts

Initial impression of Dracula Untold was about 7/10- somewhat more than the general reaction. A problem with the movie was the opening intro (or lack of it). along with monotones in the rhythm and sameness of the sound effects. Doesn't work with formulaic content. The music was good, however. And the sets, camera work & flow of the story. Didn't see anything glaringly wrong with the mythos, a new light on the traditional representations. Nothing wrong with the acting or the CGI. In summation, the movie made a positive contribution to the Dracula brand. Perhaps time will be kinder than the critics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2019 at 3:35 PM, Schtearn said:

Initial impression of Dracula Untold was about 7/10- somewhat more than the general reaction. A problem with the movie was the opening intro (or lack of it). along with monotones in the rhythm and sameness of the sound effects. Doesn't work with formulaic content. The music was good, however. And the sets, camera work & flow of the story. Didn't see anything glaringly wrong with the mythos, a new light on the traditional representations. Nothing wrong with the acting or the CGI. In summation, the movie made a positive contribution to the Dracula brand. Perhaps time will be kinder than the critics.

A major problem with a lot of these films, even the ostensibly serious one staring almost no one you've heard of, is that they insist on mixing the story of Vlad Dracul with Stoker's Dracula.

 

this tends to annoy modern Romanians as Vlad Dracul is a Saint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven’t seen Dracula Untold, but most Dracula movies are talking about Vlad the Impaler, the son of Vald Dracul and not Dracul himself. This would be the first I’ve heard of to confuse the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They mashed & ballzed up a lot of the content for sure,- for a heroic/action movie, it's not for the overly discerning customer. They could have thrown in Frankenstein's monster or the Incredible Hulk or even Rin Tin Tin, as long as they did not disrupt the pace of the movie or upset the development of its internal plot line.

However, thankfully, Hammer and others kept close to Stoker's Dracula and the likes of Le Fanu's Carmilla.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, AndalayBay said:

I haven’t seen Dracula Untold, but most Dracula movies are talking about Vlad the Impaler, the son of Vald Dracul and not Dracul himself. This would be the first I’ve heard of to confuse the two.

 

sorry, that was me getting confused - I meant Vlad Dracula. He was the saint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another way of putting it:  A hybrid Sword & Sorcery styled "reboot" of the Dracula franchise with the emphasis not so much on fangs & milky white necks but wham bam super undead prowess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it came across as not being complete drudgery for the director and crew. Novelty these days, as we well know, wears thin in a sitting- this movie is worth at least a look, a second viewing is for action fans only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I like Dracula movies; Bram Stoker's Dracula from Francis Ford Coppola being my favorite that I've seen.  Admittedly, I haven't seen any of the old stuff like Nosferatu.

Wait!  I have Untold on my backup HDD.  Grand!  Which means I've seen it, but don't recall seeing it.

Edited by Malonn
eureka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a bit mystifying in Man and Amoeba when untangling the precise reason for Newton Jennings to revise his theory to accommodate for a more sentient life form on Mars. Martin suggests it was all tied in to the Pauli Exclusion Principle. In the grand order and scale of things, we are little more than fermions- and it's possible many of their characteristics commute through the chain of life, as far as that goes, in the knowledge the writers of the show blithely grabbed any old random scientific theory just to keep us on our toes. It's mentioned at he following point:

There's also this interesting article with the following quote:

Quote

But being science fiction, My Favorite Martian took efforts to inject some scientific facts into its scripts. Among many examples include the acronym for LASER being correctly defined as "Light Amplification By Stimulated Emission of Radiation". The size of an electron (only 1/1837 that of a proton) is stated, along with a mention of the "M" and "N" shells of an atom. A theory of combining cobolt (Martin correctly gives its atomic weight as 58.94) with silicon is postulated. Quantum Physics is touched upon with the mention of Pauli’s Exclusion Principle and Einstein’s Simplified Field Theory. ("I simplified it for him," says the Martian.) One Martian moon (Phobos) does indeed rise and set three times a day, as Martin tells Tim, but even if some facts stated about the fourth planet didn’t coincide with what we knew to be true, the Martian does refer to the "red night" on Mars 13 years before Viking photos confirmed it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×