Thank God scientists finally found the missing link (aka Darwinius masillae, aka “Ida”). Now we can at last prove Charles Darwin right and be done with films like Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, as well as all the seemingly pro-science movies that inadvertently ruined the theory of evolution. We now look forward to the “Ida” biopic, or at least a movie detailing the 26 years (give or take 47 million) it took for the discovery of her fossil to become a mainstream media sensation. Never mind that this is hardly the missing link between apes and humans. With almost 50 years passed since the release of Inherit the Wind, film-loving Darwinists need some kind of missing link story to grab onto.
It is true that cinema has not been so kind to Darwinism, giving us such mockeries as Evolution, Howard the Duck and Creature from the Black Lagoon. But filmmakers have consistently shown a special love for the concept of the missing link, at least. Although many movies depict the idea with little seriousness, and some feature negative portrayals of primitive monsters, there are a number of truly lovable creatures that represent the concept of the missing link on film. Check them out after the jump.
…Read more
First of all, kudos to all the bloggers who downplayed the Monsters vs. Aliens box office triumph over the weekend by recognizing how inflated the gross is thanks to premium 3D fees that have some people paying as much as $20 per ticket. Second of all, shame on all of you who are posting “exclusive” photos of posters on display at ShoWest while ignoring the story (coming out of the same convention) about Fox fucking exhibitors with its decision to put the cost of 3D glasses solely to the cinemas. I wish I could say that this news has inspired me to boycott Fox’s upcoming 3D animated film Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs, but I actually wouldn’t go see that piece of crap anyway.
What has me so angry over Fox’s decision? The fact that this adds to a long history of studios bullying theater owners. Hollywood acts like it’s only the cinemas who need the studios, yet it’s totally a reciprocal relationship. On top of that, though, Fox doesn’t need to make 3D movies if it doesn’t want to. Or, it can make them and just have nowhere to show them. Unfortunately theater chains are submissive and would never attempt to put the studios in their place by refusing to put up the cost for something like this.
Sadly, either way, moviegoers will continue paying a premium fee, even if they bring their own 3D glasses saved from the last 3D feature. Because once the studios and the exhibitors manage to get people to pay a certain price, that price isn’t ever going to come down. When it comes to moviegoing, the savings are never passed on to the customer.
Quotes from the few bloggers who thankfully wrote on this story after the jump.
…Read more
Jeffrey Katzenberg, for all his attempted promotion of digital 3D as the future of entertainment as we know it, may have done irreversible damage yesterday by attempting to advertise DreamWorks Animation’s upcoming digital 3D feature Monsters vs. Aliens by way of an anaglyphic 3D Super Bowl commercial necessitating outdated red/blue glasses. Here is a collection of scathing reactions found around the blogosphere:
- Cinematical is polling readers for their reactions to the 3D ads, and so far the majority response, at 43%, is “I never picked up the glasses to begin with.” The most popular response from those who did have the glasses: “They were okay.”
- One Cinematical reader asked the most important question in the poll’s comments section: “Why promote the amazing current gen tech that would wow the majority of public that hasn’t seen it with antiquated red/blue-lackluster crap?”
- CrunchGear also has a poll, and the current majority is of the opinion the 3D ads were lame.
- A sample comment on David Poland’s Hot Blog: “The unanimous opinion here was that the 3D in the Monsters Vs. Aliens ad sucked it” and simply. “
- Alex of FirstShowing.net rants against the ads: “This whole Monsters vs Aliens gimmick, or publicity stunt, or whatever you want to call it, only achieved the act of being a gimmick and nothing more. All of those millions of people who did have glasses were caught up in a frenzy of enthusiam over the novelty rather than genuinely interested.”
- I Watch Stuff also complains about the gimmickry: “I thought all the animation studios were pushing hard to legitimize 3-D as more than a gaudy bell and/or whistle. If that’s the case, maybe they should starting cutting all the look-at-this-coming-at-the-screen!-for-no-reason crap. A paddleball zooming at me? Come on. And furthermore, a paddleball at all? Does this generation of kids even know what a paddleball is? Why not a guy using a stick to roll a hoop out of the screen?”
- Too little too late? DVICE got a response from someone who will be harmed by the responses: “The good news: The CEO of RealD Cinema, the technique in which Monsters and Aliens will be shown in theaters when it’s release this March, assured us this morning that his effects are much better. ‘It’s important to recognize that today’s RealD 3D in theatres is a quantum leap better than what they saw on TV or may remember from years past.’ The only thing we can gather from that damage control: RealD sucks less.” Exactly, and this still doesn’t explain why millions of viewers were marketed to with the outdated effects.
- At Defamer, Seth ignores the 3D issue altogether and instead offers some criticism regarding the film itself, but ultimately he notes that negative responses don’t matter, because “This will make a gazillion dollars.” Well, if he’s right, then this won’t be a misstep for the technology after all. But I completely disagree with that box office prediction.
- And now, in case you found the glasses (I hear some people had trouble getting their hands on them) and want to watch the commercial again (or for the first time), here is the Hulu embed:
…Read more
