Nerdy rhetorical rant disguised as question list.
-
Ryo7 — 19 years ago(November 29, 2006 03:33 AM)
If you're in the mood for a laugh then you've come to the right placeor just a general place to waste your time if you have no sense of humor
"Why the hell did the engineers build a concrete wall directly in front of the time travel portal? It doesn't seem to serve any function other than to instantly kill anyone who's time travel doesn't initiate properly."
To give them something fun to watch if the pod fails to go back.SPLAT!
"And what the F'(k) happens to the travel pods when they go back in time? They just seem to disappear and re-materialise when VD comes back."
I just got off the phone with Sam Raimi. Apparently he said that they had a whole scene where the pod inserts itself into Jean Claude Van Damme's @$$ (that HAS TO BE SHOWN EVERY MOVIE HE IS IN GOD DAMMIT!) for safe storage while he's out kicking @$$ and taking names.
"And why is it such a friggin' rigmarole (is this a word?) to travel BACK in time - with elaborate rocket propulsion and unnecessary deadly walls - when all you have to do to come back is push a button and step through a vortex?"
Because that would make too much sense. What really happens (they also cut this out for time restraints) is Jean Claude Van Damme flexes and farts the pod out and is some how quick enough to slip back inside for the return trip home.
"And how can VD be so flippant with the bad guy ("I'm still kicking, I must be on Broadway!") seconds after he sees his wife get a bullet put through her?"
DudeYou're talking about his wife vs being a smart@$$Look at how he left his wife to go own that thief with the purseYou didn't see it coming? She went and died on him for 10 friggin years so he figured if she was dumb enough to get shot again (stupid ho!) then he'd just leave her to die and kick the bad guy's @$$ with cheesy stupid one liners and then watch him melt like a really cool wicked witch of the west when he touched himselfThen he looked and realized he wanted a piece of @$$ down the road and decided to save her after all since she was still breathing.
"And why is their house, blown up in the scene before, suddenly 100% restored in the closing sequence?"
I'll wager he rebuilt itNowaithe had that in his ass tooAll he had to do is fart and Vuala!
"And how come the "futuristic" 2004 cars look so astoundingly sh*t?"
Dude, I've built things just as cool if not cooler outta legos when I was a kid!
"And why do I still love this movie despite all the flaws?"
Great friggin movie.
Sorry, you ranted so I had to return the rant. Hope you enjoyed it.
YeahI'm gonna go watch the virtual scene in that movie for the 100th timedamn she's hot.
"GoodBadI'm the guy with the Gun" - Army of Darkness - Ash (Bruce Campbell) -
Thor777 — 19 years ago(December 12, 2006 08:30 AM)
"Why the hell did the engineers build a concrete wall directly in front of the time travel portal? It doesn't seem to serve any function other than to instantly kill anyone who's time travel doesn't initiate properly."
Concrete consists of a mixture of oxides of calcium, silicon and aluminium which must be placed no further than 20 feet from any time vortex portal for the vortex to work properly. Geez, everyone knows that.
"And why is their house, blown up in the scene before, suddenly 100% restored in the closing sequence?"
VD hired Jimmy Carter and Habitat for Humanity. They put the house back up in 45 minutes.
"And how come the "futuristic" 2004 cars look so astoundingly sht?"
Well, they did nail that one. The 2004 cars do look like sht. The Scion and Honda Element come to mind.
"And why do I still love this movie despite all the flaws?"
A darn good question. It might be that bad guys mullet. It's possibly the King of all mullets. His mullet could have been it's own movie. I watch it everytime it's on. -
cranky_carrot — 17 years ago(May 17, 2008 06:48 AM)
-
solitaire40 — 12 years ago(September 09, 2013 10:14 AM)
"And how come the "futuristic" 2004 cars look so astoundingly sh*t?"
Dude, I've built things just as cool if not cooler outta legos when I was a kid!
Wow I was thinking the same thing about the Legos. Believe it or not I JUST saw this yesterday. Have no clue why I never watched it before.
[cheers
] -
1point21-Jigawatts — 18 years ago(April 27, 2007 04:41 PM)
Why doesnt the bad guy just go back in time and kill van dammes whole family!! LOL
theres so many things wrong with this movie its untrue but its still a laugh!
"Why do IMDB message boards stay on topic for 2 posts, then end up being playground squabbles?" -
cranky_carrot — 17 years ago(May 17, 2008 06:55 AM)
After checking back in on this post 1.5 yrs after the fact, I'm pleased to say most of my original questions still hold water. Except that one about how they rebuilt a house in 10 years. That was obviously my bad.
Anyway, this movie still makes me smile, as do many of its ilk, like Demolition Man, Running Man, anything else with Man in the title, and ComMANdo. I'm sensing a theme here could it be that movies for guys in the mood for dumbarse action contain the word "Man"? I never really noticed it, but then, I am a man
On an unrelated note, I've decided to become a huge fan of that mullet bad guy. He's in Time Cop and Rumble in the Bronx, again playing the part of moron.
I'll be checking his profile on IMDB to see what else he's done. I'll wager he seldom strolls from the role of dumb henchman, but we'll soon see. -
Spifflock_Holmes — 17 years ago(May 17, 2008 03:20 PM)
Except that one about how they rebuilt a house in 10 years. That was obviously my bad.
It didn't need to be rebuilt. Once Senator McComb was destroyed, the timeline was changed and the house was never blown up in the first place, because there wasn't any Senator McComb to go back and blow it up.
A better question is why Max's memory didn't change accordingly.The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
-
polsixe — 17 years ago(August 24, 2008 06:23 PM)
The boss when he returns to 2004 explains McComb disappeared in 1994. The timeline would only start changing bit by bit after the house explosion and Mccombining.
Some other technical possibilities - the concrete wall in the timepod accleration facility was there maybe because there was only so much room, it was a covert operation. But why have windows on the pod? The time travellers had no real need to look out and have a panic attack.
As for the mullet henchman being threatened with not being allowed to return to 2004, he may not have been fully educated on the technicalities of time travel, and he may have really wanted to be himself in 2004, I understand there were things like computer 6ex, etc. by then
As for McCombining, even if one accepts that an entire body regenerates itself over time (Deepak Chopra anyone?) the process would follow some kind of exponential relationship, even after 10 years there would be some bits on the original body left, maybe not hair and skin but then again maybe the molecules only have to be within a few inches to cause the blobbing. I expected an explosion of sorts myself. That being said, I think 2004 Walker and 1994 Walker were fairly close to each other at one point -
avortac — 12 years ago(April 14, 2013 04:00 PM)
"Why doesnt the bad guy just go back in time and kill van dammes whole family"
Names are written with capital first letters and questions end in a question mark, not two exclamation points (which I didn't bother to quote). When you indicate possession, you use an apostrophe ("Van Damme's family" instead of "van dammes family").
The word "doesn't" has an apostrophe.
"theres so many things wrong with this movie its untrue"
Sentences are not started with a dot, two dots or three dots, and a capital letter is used for the first word in a sentence. (To clarify: you did END your previous sentence, and even added an overly-used, nowadays meaningless and embarrassing, lame acronym between the sentences, so this makes what I quoted a new sentence, not a continuation of a previous sentence that was ended in more than one dot.)
The word "There's" is written with an apostrophe. The word "it's" is also written with an apostrophe, unless you mean to indicate multiple "its", which wouldn't make any sense in your context anyway.
Your sentence is ALSO incorrect in that you don't say "there IS so many things", but you say "there ARE so many things", because you are not talking about only one thing, but multiple things. A plural requires an "are".
And you probably mean to say "unreal" instead of "untrue".
There are so many things wrong with your post that it's difficult to believe to have been written by a human being.
As to the actual point of your message, now that we have got your errors and inability to type english out of the way, I would have something better in mind for a time-traveling, evil movie boss.
How about the senator goes back in time to when Damme is a baby, and arranges to raise him (and brainwash him) from there on. He'd have a kick-ass "Evil Damme" to combat the time-traveling police-Damme, and there could be a pretty cool fight between the two. Though, of course, if this happened, there would be no "police-Damme", and thus no "Timecop", and thus no movie.
But the same would be true with your suggestion.. then you'd have to rewrite the whole plot.
Actually, this kind of "Let's think about a movie character's motivations and more probable decisions properly and thoroughly" attitude, if applied, would destroy a great deal of movies. I mean, if the characters acted plausibly, realistically or intelligently, especially the 'evil bosses', many movie plots would vanish instantly.
The only way for movies like this (and many other kind) to exist is for the evil bosses to be unrealistic and/or stupid, especially when making decisions. -
cranky_carrot — 17 years ago(May 17, 2008 07:07 AM)
Okay - the mullet haired bad guy is none other than Richard Faraci. Let's call him Dick. Dick is in the new Postal movie, so it looks like he's continuing to get all the plum roles. He was in a Canadian lottery ticket commercial AND he worked in the capacity of transportation operator in The Final Cut. My hero!
-
shockabsorber — 17 years ago(June 04, 2008 02:35 PM)
I've a question to add to your list:
Why, when Van kicks McComb at the end, does he spin towards his future self, and the future self not get out of the way, and why, when they then touch each other, do they turn into a silly version of the blob?
I've come to warn you! In three million years, you'll be dead!
-
Lunchbox-3 — 17 years ago(November 17, 2008 09:50 PM)
And why is it such a friggin' rigmarole to travel BACK in time - with elaborate rocket propulsion and unnecessary deadly walls - when all you have to do to come back is push a button and step through a vortex?
I believe the comic this was based on had the answer. Whenever you're out of your own time, your body naturally wants to return to its own time. Going back in time is like fighting against the current. That's why it takes a huge ship to travel backwards. Once you're there, you are held in place by the device (an armband or something in the comic). When you're ready to return home, you simply turn off the device and your body is, like, washed downstream back to your home time. I believe you can even control how far forward you go on the return trip, like you can return all the way home or just jump part of the way home. Like say you had originally gone 10 years back, you couldn't go back any further but you could have the device slide you forward 2 years to 8 years ago. And so on until you are home.
If I recall, the ship travelled with the pilot in the comic and didn't return home, once they arrived in the past they had to blow it up to destroy evidence of the future. I think the movie turned down the brain factor a bit.