- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:21 pm
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:21 pm
(no message)
This post was edited on 11/10/23 at 4:24 am
17
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:24 pm to DelU249
quote:
x men days of future past - maybe not a great example of tying up loose ends, but his mind travels back in time. Now I'm not sure if there is an alternate dimension or timeline, but when you can eradicate the franchise killer movie, without actually dismissing it, then bravo. It's about as good a job as you could do. Maybe episode vii can do something similar with the prequels.
Roommate and I talked about this the other night.
X2 never happened either in this timeline.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:24 pm to DelU249
Primer?
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:26 pm to Freauxzen
I haven't seen every movie ever made... 
what is primer? also, I don't have time to think about every movie I've ever seen
what is primer? also, I don't have time to think about every movie I've ever seen Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:27 pm to DelU249
quote:
the time machine
That movie was terrible. 1960 version is much better.
This post was edited on 4/6/15 at 3:29 pm
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:27 pm to DelU249
About Time.
If going back in time to bang Rachel McAdams isn't the best plot for a time travel movie, I don't know what is.
If going back in time to bang Rachel McAdams isn't the best plot for a time travel movie, I don't know what is.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:27 pm to magildachunks
how so? not that it matters, I didn't walk out of the theaters after X2 saying "that happened".
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:28 pm to DelU249
So, although it's not a movie, how does Doctor Who handle time travel?
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:31 pm to DelU249
quote:
Posted by Fox Mulder how so? not that it matters, I didn't walk out of the theaters after X2 saying "that happened".
Because Stryker didn't create Wolverine, therefore had no reason to hunt h down or for Wolverine to go after him.
It was Mystique who did it. All because they always have to do a Mystique "gotcha" scene at the end.
Plus, Jean is alive after the events supposedly take place.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:36 pm to DelU249
Everyone knows Bill and Ted are the GOAT when it comes to time travel logic
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:38 pm to magildachunks
eh, there are a lot of assumptions in your theory though
how do we know mystique wasn't posing as stryker to save wolverine or use him for some other purpose and that later stryker doesn't nab him (sure it doesn't have to go down the same way as in origins, but still)
also, jean was in a telekinetic bubble, so she never died, and even so, maybe the events of x2 are slightly altered...
the things that made us hate x3 are clearly undone:
1. rogue is still a mutant
2. jean isn't dead...and I mean, claw through her midsection dead.
3. scott isn't dead.
we all hated the professor dying but clearly he cheated death somehow, maybe that death is undone, I don't know
I can only speculate. I can speculate that nothing in 3 happened, and most if not everything in 2 did
what a great luxury for the super fan (I'm not one, but I imagine there are and they're happy)
how do we know mystique wasn't posing as stryker to save wolverine or use him for some other purpose and that later stryker doesn't nab him (sure it doesn't have to go down the same way as in origins, but still)
also, jean was in a telekinetic bubble, so she never died, and even so, maybe the events of x2 are slightly altered...
the things that made us hate x3 are clearly undone:
1. rogue is still a mutant
2. jean isn't dead...and I mean, claw through her midsection dead.
3. scott isn't dead.
we all hated the professor dying but clearly he cheated death somehow, maybe that death is undone, I don't know
I can only speculate. I can speculate that nothing in 3 happened, and most if not everything in 2 did what a great luxury for the super fan (I'm not one, but I imagine there are and they're happy
)Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:39 pm to wildtigercat93
I considered that movie, but I regrettably don't think its even mildly funny.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:41 pm to DelU249
Great Scott...your list isn't even heavy.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:42 pm to DelU249
Primer and Los Cronocrimines (Timecrimes) are two I watched on the recommendation of this board that I thought handle it well.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:42 pm to DelU249
quote:
I considered that movie, but I regrettably don't think its even mildly funny.
You're a crazy person
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:43 pm to SEClint
but back to the future falls apart upon inspection.
it isn't a comedy completely disregarding the rules in a funny way, nor is it adhering to the rules.
I said handle the issue well, not my favorite...and I love me some marty mcfly. I actually keep referencing the movie while considering resale value while looking for a house
it isn't a comedy completely disregarding the rules in a funny way, nor is it adhering to the rules.
I said handle the issue well, not my favorite...and I love me some marty mcfly. I actually keep referencing the movie while considering resale value while looking for a house
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:43 pm to SEClint
In all seriousness, I don't know about handling the time traveling shite in Back to the Future, but I thought it was pretty great how they shot the scenes in part 2 where he was making part 1 happen.
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:43 pm to wildtigercat93
crazy like a fox
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:46 pm to SaintEB
quote:
In all seriousness, I don't know about handling the time traveling shite in Back to the Future, but I thought it was pretty great how they shot the scenes in part 2 where he was making part 1 happen.
2 is exactly why it's not handled well.
Even if he had to go back to 1955, his part one counterpart wouldn't be there for him to manipulate the events.
Alternate universe 1985 Marty would not have gone back in time to be in 1955.
This post was edited on 4/6/15 at 3:47 pm
Posted on 4/6/15 at 3:47 pm to SaintEB
it's not bad...
the first movie - doc still gets shot, so marty will still go back in time. he comes out with an awesome truck, a better life, a more stable family, everything.
the second movie - while I really like it, it's so convoluted I haven't even given it serious thought, though the events that take place are fraught with potential paradoxes. just making the future better means that doc doesn't come back to warn him, they don't go there and alter events...that's just off the top of my head. then there's the stuff with biff, the prom, etc.
the first movie - doc still gets shot, so marty will still go back in time. he comes out with an awesome truck, a better life, a more stable family, everything.
the second movie - while I really like it, it's so convoluted I haven't even given it serious thought, though the events that take place are fraught with potential paradoxes. just making the future better means that doc doesn't come back to warn him, they don't go there and alter events...that's just off the top of my head. then there's the stuff with biff, the prom, etc.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News