frostytheplebe
Seventh Part of the Seal
This thread gets the Captain Morgan Bateson Award for "Haven't I Seen This A Thousand Times Already?"
The Morgan Bateson AWARD!!! HAHAHAHAHA!! Thats good, I like that!
This thread gets the Captain Morgan Bateson Award for "Haven't I Seen This A Thousand Times Already?"
Well thought out post. I loved it, and just wow, you have spent a lot of time on the movie. I will add some more when I have time to process that all, but it seems that you are quite on the ball about it.While I personally love the movie and it's not a *bad* movie, it definitely isn't a "good" movie either. But the potential was there, and what pains me more is not that people don't like it but that they chose to disrespect it with crap like "so and so pissing on my childhood" and "they ruined everything..." etc.
Well thought out post. I loved it, and just wow, you have spent a lot of time on the movie. I will add some more when I have time to process that all, but it seems that you are quite on the ball about it.
While I personally love the movie and it's not a *bad* movie, it definitely isn't a "good" movie either. But the potential was there, and what pains me more is not that people don't like it but that they chose to disrespect it with crap like "so and so pissing on my childhood" and "they ruined everything..." etc.
...
In college I had bad movie night, some friends would come over and watch terrible movies like Dracula 3000 and Laser Mission. One Saturday, for lack of DVDs, I threw Wing Commander into the player and we watched that. Aside from some wisecracks about the Kilrathi, Prinze and Lillard, everyone enjoyed the movie and without a hint of irony.
Wow. That's a lot I didn't know. Thanks, AD. The movie's rough edges make a lot more sense if, at the time of filming, there were whole elements that later had to be edited out and plot points re-arranged after shooting. I have always felt that many of the movie's failings came from badly written dialog and choppy actors reactions given context of the scenes...maybe the scenes, reactions, and dialog would have made more sense in their original context. Oh well. I guess we'll never see what might have been.
I personally really like the movie, and it is on my all-time top 10 favourites list. However, even I can find a lot wrong with it. If they had fixed up the rough edges (mostly to do with the script. I think the described storyline would have been VERY useful to the proper development of the story) there is no doubt that it would be #1 on my favourites list, instead of 3 or 4.I don't think there is anything wrong with the movie. Personally, I was interested to see how they'd cast Angel and Hunter. I think those two were cast pretty well. I will admit a little disappointment with no Iceman but oh well.
As much as I like the guy who played him, Paladin's actor was a huge disappointment.
Did Vision Quest ever make it into your lineup?
Let me take a stand on the movie;
It could hold it's own without the background of the games. Had the movie be named dreadnought squad 2600AD or something, we would be discussing that the movie was ripped of off wing commander.
This discussion does keep it going, when will the day comes when Chris Roberts signs in and awnsers all your questions, or announces a new game, i'm pretty sure he reads some stuff here every now in then, wing commander was his creation, and part of his legacy.
Going by what Chris Roberts has said, it seems that during production the movie wasn't intended to be part of the same fictional universe as the games. The original relationship between the two was apparently like the relationship between the Spider-Man comics and movies, where the later compresses and incorporates various plot points from the entire run of the former. The Spider-Man movies had their own interpretations of stories like "The Night Gwen Stacy Died" and "Spectacular Spider-Man 200," like the WC movie had its versions of Bossman's death with Angel on his wing (SM2) and Paladin's work with Special Ops (WC2).
A great many of the "inconsistencies" have been fit into the canon, some more believably than others (for example, the "Rapiers" in the movie are a predecessor fighter to the Rapier II's that appear in WC1 and 2, not the same ships, which is certainly plausible,
but less plausible is that Bossman is only "thought" dead in the movie and somehow is found to only be MIA, not KIA, and comes back later... I'm not clear on how that could happen, though...)
1) They tried to fit way too many references in there and it was distracting. "Paladin"'s Covert Ops (WC2), Skipper Missiles (WC3), Mandarin Traitors (WC2), Concordia (WC2), The delaying action mentioned in, I believe, Claw Marks (WC1), WC1 storyline (WC1), Marines (WC4), etc.
I think the consensus is that it is the same "Tiger(s) Claw", but that it has a predominantly different fighter loadout in the movie.
I agree with many of your points. It always seeemed to me that when they made the movie, they made a conscious decision to throw in a bunch of references to the games that would be lost on the casual viewer but resonate with dedicated fans...hence, when they needed a recently dead pilot, they named him Bossman because he dies in the games. When they needed to name the fighters, they called them "Rapiers" because Rapier-class fighters feature prominently in the games. I would well believe the comment that originally the movie wasn't supposed to be a strict prequel with perfect continuity, but rather a re-imagining, and only after the fact (or after people who cared more passionately about the universe got control of things), did they try to fit it in.
It's just a shame that when they decided to throw in references, they didn't have someone who was more careful about continuity suggesting what references to throw in. For example, instead of having Bossman be the recently dead pilot, why not have "Tooner" or "Dribbles" be the recently dead pilot? Same hat tip to people that have played the game, but fits perfectly into the WC1 continuity without needing creative explanation. Or instead of calling the old obselete fighters on the Tiger Claw "Rapiers", and then having to explain that they are a different fighter than the Rapier II that the game players know and love, why not call them "Scimitars" or "Raptors"--which the game already established are aging fighters that were on the Tiger's Claw? And why call the secret Special Forces frenchman "Paladin", when the game has already established that Paladin was (probably) not in special forces at that time, that he was Scottish, and that he was a pilot that had served on the "Claw" for a long time. Why not make your cool frenchman an entirely new character...it wouldn't have detracted from the story of the movie, and hardcore WC fans would probably perfer it, because it requries less explanation within the universe continuity.
and they really could have got somebody better for Maniac (Maybe I'm jaded by Tom Wilson's amazing performance as the character. Maniac is supposed to be nutty and over the top, but not annoying)
And I think they could have done without the Rosie character for Maniac, it was bad enough that they shoehorned in the Angel/Blair romantic subplot from WC2 so early, as I thought it was perfectly done in WC2 (a slowly developing friendship that is thrown together through tragedy befalling both protaganists).
And the road to Hell is paved with posts like yours.
Of course I was bothered by the lack of fur for the Kilrathi and this strange green grass but what bothered me mostly was that they looked so damn cheap, like very bad stop motion puppets from decades ago. I was embarrassed.
It's funny, if you go back to chat logs from when Wing Commander was in development, I kept saying things like "I'll believe it when I see it". It was hard to believe, and harder now to believe that we actually got a movie.
No, tell me all about it!! (Vision Quest)
the claw looks identical in WC1, Wing Commander 2's intro, the box art and even the cartoon, it looks totally different in the movie.
Also please note that the briefing scenes and universe maps deviate in the cartoon and in the movie, the briefing room does not feature a table-wide screen attached to a wall for looking over starmaps, like the cartoon, the briefing maps are holographic projections.
This discussion does keep it going, when will the day comes when Chris Roberts signs in and awnsers all your questions, or announces a new game, i'm pretty sure he reads some stuff here every now in then, wing commander was his creation, and part of his legacy.
Oh man, you are lining yourself up with that one...
Chris Roberts... while it would be cool, I don't think it'll ever happen... but that gives me an idea...
but the last time I mentioned anything on the subject I was blasted
I spoke to Chris Roberts a few months ago and he was still interested in doing Wing Commander again, if EA would support a project.
I've always seen the movie as a retelling/re-imagining of the WC universe
like the new battlestar galactica
but the last time I mentioned anything on the subject I was blasted
I do like the movie though when watching it as a retelling
I spoke to Chris Roberts a few months ago and he was still interested in doing Wing Commander again, if EA would support a project.
I spoke to Chris Roberts a few months ago and he was still interested in doing Wing Commander again, if EA would support a project.