User talk:Paul730/Archive 8

Jason

Eh, I don't know. It doesn't appear to be a reliable source. If the info came from an interview, then I'd say sure, but since it appears to be hearsay I wouldn't use it. BTW, tonight's Smallville was awesome.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it was supposed to happen in episode 10, which aired Feb. 7 (season 3 will end in May). I didn't see the episodes so I don't know if it actually happened or not. Your source is dated November 30, 2007. The most recent source we have is November 27, 2007. In that source, the creator is saying that they cannot legitimately call him "Jason" on the show because of copyright issues. I think that is what your source is saying when they say that Jason won't be on the show. I mean, if there is a similar character in the episode (don't know, again, haven't seen it), then we have the creator saying flat out that it was intended to be Jason.

As for Smallville, if you want me to ruin it for you I guess I can. lol. Recently, Lex has been looking for these two keys (real keys) that will unlock a box in Zurich, which will tell him who "The Traveler" is and how to control him. "The Traveler" is Clark. Anyway, he learns that Lionel, who has been protecting Clark's secret for awhile now, has the second key. So, Lex steals it and then throws Lionel out of his LuthorCorp office window...all the way down to the street below, killing him. Clark learns the truth and he and Lex have a pretty powerful scene in the mansion, where Clark tells Lex he knows the truth and has evidence. So far this season, Clark has to worry about what Brainiac is doing with Kara (as he forced Kara to go with him, or else he was going to kill Lana), and not what Lex is going to do should he find the box and learn how to control Clark.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:22, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. It wasn't a total surprise if you saw the trailer, because they basically showed it happening. What made the episode great was the scenes with Clark and Lex together, and then the ones with Lex by himself (because he was struggling with his inner child). There's good things about all the seasons. The first season is very monster-of-the-week, then the second season is when they start really getting into the Superman mythos and laying the foundation for the rest of the show. It's really fun to watch a marathon because you get to see the evolution of all the characters in a smoother motion. I've head that South Park has been on the decline since season 10.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:22, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

What do those crazy fans know? ;) I haven't watched South Park since it came out originally. It has funny moments, but it never peaked my interest. Kind of like Futurama, King of the Hill, or any of those animated shows. So, is the Doctor supposed to act so over the top?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Battlestar Galatica?? lol. That trailer isn't available for us in the US (it actually says, "not available in your country." lol). I don't watch Torchwood, so I couldn't tell you how popular it is. Whatever you read is probably accurate. Are you going to watch that new Whedon show, starring Dushku?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

JM - "everything's about sex with you people". lol. I love it when Asian people have British accents. So, Jack Harkness didn't really appear all that much in the trailer for that show, any particular reason? Oh, here's a trailer for the Smallville episode that was on tonight.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

He was almost there at that point. They established in an earlier episode that there was still some good in him, and at the end of this episode (Lionel is killed in the opening teaser) Lex destroys the part of him that was good. So, I'd say that now he certainly is evil. That was funny, but the production value looks so cheap. It reminds me of Space Cases.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not dissing the Tardis, I'm dissing the entire asthetic of the show. It just looks like it has no budget. I don't doubt it's enjoyability (budgets don't make a show, good acting and good stories do). I've never across anything that could rival Smallville. Even when the episodes suck, they still look good. We have some of the best, and most imaginative cinematographers and directors of photography out there.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I never dissed Tardis specifically, so I technically never took anything back. I simply clarified what I was saying. No, Buffy isn't. Buffy never transitioned in the cinematography. Once out of the pilot, all the episodes basically has the same lighting to them. There was no dynamic. I've never seen Buffy make warehouses look beautiful enough to live in permanently. The DOP and Ciny make things that are typically ugly look like they could be an off-shoot of heaven. The use of colors in the show is unmatchable. Buffy had a set theme as far as picture quality went. It certainly got better with time, but it was never like Smallville. Also, just because Buffy was on the WB first and set the stage for comic book-esque heroes, doesn't mean that everything successful with Smallville is based on Buffy. The only thing Smallville owes Buffy is opening the door to an audience that was ready for that type of show.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I mean that when you look at Buffy, the visual style (not referring to monsters and stuff, but the actual visual style - like lighting, color usage, etc) is more about making everything look like real life. The school library looks like what it would look like had you walked in their in real life. Everything has that standard feel to it visually. Not that the show looked like crap (which is how I feel you're taking my meaning). When I talk about Smallville visually, I'm referring to their use of colors and lights on the sets. They're constantly adjusting every scene to reflect the mood that is being shot. When I watched Buffy, I never noticed them doing that with the show. The visual elements of the show were more geared to making it look like everyday life, where monsters just happen to spring up. Smallville almost goes for this surreal look in every episode; giving it a more comic book feel. Speaking of, Amazon is selling the entire Buffy series for $165. That's pretty cheap. Boils down to about $23.50 a season.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:54, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I was never trying to say that the show looked cheap, because it didn't.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've checked on the meaning of my name before. It has different meanings depending on the origin you choose.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I didn't pay attention to the comments at the bottom. OMG, I think I remember that guy too. I don't recall his name, but he was basically trolling on some pages and picking fights and then telling people he "prays" that they will become better people and lose their anger. LOL. That's awesome that you found that.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Wait a minute, you were searching "Bignole"? That's so weird that it came up on a religious forum for my real name. LMAO. Oh, the irony.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

OMG, I remember that guy. LOL, that's so awesome that you found that. That's certainly going up on the user page. "Gunning" for it, eh? I don't know if I was gunning for it in the sense that I didn't want it to be FA, but more that I knew it wasn't FA material and that if they didn't clean it up I didn't want it being used as an example for new editors to strive for.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:24, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

You've seen right through me. I'm really a vindictive person, who hates religious people...MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA!  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Whedon stuff

Amy Acker will be in Dollhouse!! The new Buffy (#17) and Angel (#9) covers are fantastic! Mel and Buffy, Illyria and Fred, Harth on a chair... with Drusilla? Ooh it's a good time to be a Whedonite. And mygod, getting towards the end of Firefly and it's actually so good. The comics don't catch my attention though.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 18:56, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I haven't been to the comic shop. I keep telling myself I'll go tomorrow, on the way to meet the dude I'm seeing, but he always cancels/is busy so I end up going down the beach and having a barbeque with mates instead. Early summer!~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 18:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Late reply, but I thought both were really good.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 11:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I got the tragic impression Kate went out a suicide bomber? Hah. Erm I liked when Renee and the gang set the trap, it had a very TV feel, but Willow's mojo gave it the perfect X-Meny quality to it as well. I like Betta George, but I was a bit annoyed at Lynch's attempt to get the whole audience riled up over "Slayers? LIke them things out of Buffy? How lucky we should be to feel like there's some continuity!" Bla. Bring back Dana if you want an Angel character who can allude to some Giles connection. What about Faith, are the rights owned by both holders?

AND OMG, the Dollhouse trailer!!! I'm excited. I'll be missing Doctor Who tonight as it's my birthday and I'm out clubbing.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 12:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think Martha is being criminally underused. Donna is shaping up to be very useful as a counterbalance to the Doctor's... darker tones. And I think the MarySueish Jenny has potential. I'd prefer her to intermittently recur, and maybe have a strip in Doctor Who Magazine or someting rather than a full blown spin-off (I wouldn't buy them, but I think there are kids who might.)~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 13:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

It was linked on Whedonesque [1] (I joined!), and it's also linked from the image for the Dollhouse logo here on Wikipedia.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 14:10, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I try avoid forums. They're addictive. Like Wikipedia and Facebook. Erm I downloaded the entire trailer using realplayer to put it on my ipod. I think Fox would disapprove of my putting it on Youtube as it's meant for the upfronts, but I could sent it to you sometime.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 15:02, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Bond

I'm to understand the non-Fleming novels are designed to continue on from his books, though purists may disagree. It was certainly Fleming's intention to continue the character unchanged through the decades had he lived long enough. EON's first twenty films follow up each other with the odd continuity alteration (On Her Majesty's Secret Service is at odds with Connery's last two films, Dalton and Brosnan's films deaged Bond from Moore's last three films), while CR and QOS started anew.

And while we're at it, some shameless advertising for Bond's cinematic son: do you have tips for improving Indiana Jones characters? Alientraveller (talk) 07:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

FAR

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV series) has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. I figured you would be one of the better editors to contact for this, given your love for the series and the articles on here.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Collectonian initated the FAR, but there was concern that since he had 2 FARs in progress already that he couldn't handle a third, so the Buffy one was removed. Since he only gave it 3 days of response time I wouldn't normally worry, but since I left similar comments on the talk page back in November and no one cared to do anything with it I saw it more as 5 month response time. I've left notices everywhere that it is relevant, notifying several editors, so I guess we'll see if anyone cares to clean the article up. This could turn into Andrew Van de Kamp all over again, with people basically saying "I like the article the way it is, and if that means it's no longer FA then so be it."  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:58, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Halloween

Yeah, I was annoyed by all the "fuck" this and "fuck" that that was in the film. I didn't like Laurie because she came off as less innocent that the JLC version. What you have to respect is that Zombie made a film that was both for the fans of the original, and unique enough to say "this is really MY film, and not Carpenter's". I think if he had cut back on the cussing some, it would have been better. The reason, as I saw it, that a lot of the characters were the same was to show my Michael would kill them. In my opinion, he kept seeing his family over and over again in the people he killed. Everyone was that school bully, or the asshole step-father (though, it wasn't a true "stepfather", but you get my point). All the women were his slutty, goodfornothing sister. Laurie was the only innocent, until she tried to kill him. Anyway, yeah have the DVD. I just haven't watched the special features for the article yet.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

It's a psychological look at it. You cannot look at one piece and say, "ok I can see why he started killing", and then look at the rest and say "everyone's the same". To him they're all the same, and we see the film as he sees it, just want night out of the year. Any other night at they could all be the humblest of people. The town didn't seem that bad, plus you have to look at the time frame. Suburban towns of the 70s are a lot different than they are today. There was just about as much sex in the original than there was in Zombie's. I mean, everyone that was only out for sex in Carpenter's was the same people only out for it in Zombie's. The only addition (I don't know what version you saw), was the rape scene in the sanitarium. As for Loomis, to me the idea of a psychiatrist only out for the next best seller is more plausable nowadays. Everyone's motivated by greed.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a problem explaining his origin, the sequels have been trying to do that with half a dozen films. Zombie just did it with one. Plus, it doesn't make the original any worse because of it, and we don't have to sit through a frame-by-frame remake that gives us nothing original. We've already seen a monster without a reason, it's a nice change of pace to see a motivation behind everything from the start. It makes it feel "original" and not a "retcon" like the sequels made it feel. I kind of preferred the theatrical ending, because it had more suspense. Both could have worked, but I just like the theatrical over the alternate.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:41, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you liked it more on the second go-round. Yeah, I'm with him, Ressurection didn't happen. It's the first film that basically departs from the "he's after his family" theme (not including the original where you don't know Laurie is his sister). So, are you just pulling the Michael stuff from the commentary, or are you pulling everything for the film article as well?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I was getting my sentences mixed up. That should have said "with you". My bad. The changed ending I felt would go perfect in a "Writing" section, where we can note that the ending was changed for such and such reasons. Obviously, right now there is no writing section but it would be fine to just have that.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

It seems fine. It's a Q&A, so you cannot go wrong there. If a movie came along and effectively said "these three films never happened", I'd be pissed too if it was my film they erased. So, understandable to a degree, but H20 is still waaaay better than any of the other sequels that followed Halloween II.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Kill the girl and her mom? Has he ever killed a child? Why would he start now? I agree about the characterization in H20, and Sarah's death. That was pretty wicked. Oh well, can't please everyone. How's everything else going for you?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't remember him killing a kid. I think in Part 5 he ran over the little boy, but they didn't like that so they had him pop up later to say that he was alive. We don't know what he would have done with Jamie's baby. Glad you finally got to see CR, took you long enough. ;) Everything's going well, just really tired. I'm working my real job, plus my internship (which amounts to 70+ hours a week total). I just have time to take a short breather, see what's up here, and then move on to the next thing. I can't wait till this summer is over and I can relax for a couple of weeks.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't call Tommy a "child", per say. He's older than Jamie is in the Halloween films, not to rationalize either of them potentially killing a "child". I'm thoroughly enjoying the internship. I'm there just about every day, and I don't live going "I can't wait for this to be over", with exception to when I'm thinking about how I have no money or free time on my hands...but that isn't a reflection of the program itself.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Iron Man

Keep the blasphemy to yourself. Nothing, so far, can beat Tobey Maguire as Spider-Man in Spider-Man 2. Otherwise, I might just say that Kristy Swanson was a WAAAAAAY better Buffy. I liked the chemistry of all the actors in the film, even Bridges. I liked Potts, except for in the final battle, as I don't understand why she wasn't (a) slightly hysterical that her boss/friend was about to die (b) literally just standing in the parking lot "waiting..." for something to do. It was like they couldn't find a need for her until Stark requested her assistance, so they just had her stand around doing nothing for a few minutes of screen time. The action was good, but I think a better composer could have made the sequences a bit more suspenseful.

Yeah, I stayed for the Nick Fury cameo. I had to pee, and I was afraid I had missed it by the time I returned, but alas, it truly was at the very end of the credits. I'm curious as to whether the same guy will be the S.H.E.I.L.D. representative in the Incredible Hulk film. That would be cool. Then again, Norton toned down the S.H.E.I.L.D. presence in the film, so maybe he won't.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

You're crazy. There was no one more perfect for Peter Parker than Tobey Maguire. Yeah, I'm hoping the SFX of the Hulk movie are unfinished in the trailers, because they really don't look better than the Ang Lee movie. Granted, I prefer the color of the new version, at least with Lee's lime green Hulk the detail actually looked real.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, becuase I'm not that familiar with them. I am almost certain that you won't see several Avengers live-action films. I think crossover films are generally for fans; they tend to not have the larger audience because most of the characters are not known by the random moviegoer. I'm kind of weary for these big crossover films (ala Justice League...thank god that's been shelved) just because of all the characters you put together and how certain ones can stretch the suspension of disbelief in the fictional world of another.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say it couldn't be successful, I just said that it wouldn't appeal to a larger audience outside of fans, mainly because of all the comic book characters. If you have to explain who they all are (because no everyone is going go watch each of the origins, I know plenty of people that don't care for the new Hulk movie) then it's going to take away from the experience.

As far as moviegoers are concerned, it's a crossover. They don't care that they are actually a team in the comic book world. To a moviegoer, it's merely a film that contains characters from other films. People like Superman, and people like Batman, but does that necessarily mean that they are going to like a movie with Superman, Batman, and about half a dozen other characters they dont' know? Maybe, maybe not. Unless you have each film directed by the same person, or force each director to follow the same tone as the others, then you're going to have problems. Thor might be more Fantastic Four in tone, while Captain America could be more V for Vendetta. Put the two characters together and you got a really stark contrast in film tone. That's the problem with doing films with multiple characters from different franchises. I'm sure that the Avengers tone was different than the individual character series.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Neither FvJ or AvP did well critically. Commercially, FvJ was better, the sequel to AvP (which I actually liked more) did far worse commercially than the first AvP. I don't see Thore performing well in the theaters, period. The movie could be good, but I don't believe that there is an audience for such a character. Obviously there is the fanbase, but that doesn't amount to much when you really think about it, especially not with a character like Thor. People are going to see Conan, or some other barbarian persona and not be interested in seeing the film. I see it like the first Hulk movie. A lot of hype about its release, then oversaturation with marketing, and finally a bomb in the theater. Thor is going to be the thorn in the side of that Avengers movie, you mark my words on that.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

You're assuming that Marvel is the reason Iron Man is good, and that the same product could not have been made with the same people but just with a different studio. The game developers that created Doom, and they are also the people that the most creative control the film daptation of the game. In case you haven't seen that movie, it ranks up there with Street Fighter in horribleness. One would have thought that the people that created the game would be able to at least get the movie right.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I want a full-on period piece Captain America movie: with Indiana Jones fighting the Soviets now I want Cap to fill my quota of Nazi bashing. I look forward to seeing who they cast (Brad Pitt would be great if he were ten years younger) and I also want a good exploration of the Red Skull (Hitler's pupil and all that). I'd love some historical context: maybe Steve took the formula to help his family survive the Great Depression? What if Americans objected to the government creating a superhero to interfer with a "European war"? (Remember, Cap was created a while before America entered the war, and Joe Simon and Kirby received angry letters for creating a propaganda tool).

As for Thor, I believe it could be awesome but I'm disappointed Marvel wants to make it a Rings epic rather than base it on their version of the character: a god in modern times. Imagine a bystander screaming, "Jesus Christ!" And Thor saying, "No, Thor." He is the literal depiction of the tradition superheroes hark back to and I would be excited to have a Norse take on the usual Christ story seen in comics, where a man discovers his duty as a god. That'd be really unique.

Glad you loved Iron Man, and I concur the Hulk effects are still looking mixed (some fantastic shots, some "thin"), although the Abomination looks amazingly real. Still, hoping for the best with all the summer's blockbusters. Alientraveller (talk) 08:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

TV

I'm working on a new Manual of Style for television articles, wondered what you thought of it. It's not really that much different then what we already have (pretty similar to the one on films), but I'm hoping to make it an official Manual of Style when I'm finished, as what the television community has right now isn't a guideline at all.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm sure the prose will be tightened up when more eyes look at it. I already saw that you swapped out Kendra for Spike. lol.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Revised Dollhouse trailer

http://www.dollverse.com/trailer/ Enjoy.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 19:17, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but it's only gay in the sense that it's awful. Not in the sense of look! lesbians!.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Willow "body switch" portrayal

Thanks for your input in the discussion, quite a few of the buffy character articles (ie:Angel_(Buffy_the_Vampire_Slayer)) have the same problem with body switch episodes being listed as portrayals. I'd edit them out myself, but I don't feel it would stay changed for very long if I did.64.230.43.230 (talk) 18:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Jack images...

Right, I wanted to add a picture of Jack in other media. I think I could swiftly justify Image:Almostperfect torchwood.jpg, but I feel that it doesn't get across the "other medianess" of it the way a comic book image might (a la Image:Nofuturecover01.jpg). Do you think I could justify using this image found here with some rationale crediting the artist/author? Also, have you read the AMAZING Buffy #15 previews? OMG, witchfight! And poor Renee. :( ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 13:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a look! Yeah, since turning 18, I'm rarely even home! Woo reality.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 15:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

It really is! We went gay clubbing, and I had fun, but RealBrighton.com haven't put up any of the pics of me they took yet. And then, we went a couple more times since then. Made some new friends, saw some old ones, and worst of all realised my ex's new bf is cheating on him. What can you do? C'est la vie. LOL. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 15:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Wowza, here's a great interview about the casting process and character creation of Martha Jones.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 18:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

More

How do you feel about the header "audio drama", the merging of the "characteristics" and "character development" sections on the Jack page? Do you feel we could include another image of Jack, perhaps this one or this one of the new toys? ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:16, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

"Turn Left" looks great. I think this is going to be an amazing 3-parter. Oh, and Gwen and Ianto are *confirmed* for "Journey's End" now.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

In trying to find a source of the Jack's romantic connection to the Doctor (perhaps "The Sound of Drums" DVD commentary is a best bet), I stumbled across this NYTimes source where Moffat calls Jack "the James Bond of the future".~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Here's a (transcript of an) interview with Ray Holman, which I can source to Torchwood Magazine #5 about Jack's clothing. If only I could find out more specific details about the segment.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 01:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Buffy #15

So, while I haven't bought it yet (doing so after my exams tomorrow), I have read it. I'll say I hope Whedon officially declares Buffy's orientation, because strictly heterosexual not so much. Is Whedon saying Buffy is "not 100% heterosexual, but not gay" tantamount to calling her bisexual, then? ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I disobeyed myself and read bits on scans_daily. Willow's a bad, Xander's a sad and Buffy's... rad? That didn't go well. Stop at "sad". But yeah, there's some Willow stuff which someone on Whedonesque is commenting might have to do with the temple in "Grave". There's some Dawn stuff which is laugh out loud amazing. And Andrew, to boot! ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, the final page has all that. Maybe you're right about Xander, he is awfully hardened by Renee's death and is rather mean to sweet old Dracula. Would be better than it being Riley! Plus, for Xander to turn out more powerful than Buffy AND Willow, that would kick ass.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, he can after what happens to him and the Japanese vampires in #15. Very noble, that Drac! Righteeho, off to bed now. Exam tomorrow! xxx ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikiwoes: I just wrote a brilliant (if I do say so) two paragraph summary of "The Long Way Home" for its article, discussing how the arc has a dual role to get us up to date and introduce new plot elements, ideas, Twilight, Renee, Satsu... and then I clcked the little x on my tab by mistake! I cannot be bothered to type all that out again!~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I haven't read Angel yet, the wackiness of WatG went perfectly to counterbalance any of the heaviness in the issue. Goddard handled Renee's perception of her own death really well. MechaDawn was hilarious, and needed no more explanation. I hope the Japanese vampire group can reappear one day, as they do seem like an efficient band of anti-Scoobs.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 15:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

There's also a new New York Times profile on RTD which discusses the cultural significance of Jack. Guhh, remind me to add these sometime. Oh - reformatting at Ianto Jones. I will eventually get around to deleting the whole television section and writing it much more compactly. Key notes would be "Cyberwoman", "They keep Killing Suzie", mentions of mourning Lisa and the last two episodes. Then a second paragraph would discuss their more recognised and overtly displayed relationship, some focus on the change in the character and "Fragments", before a "Journey's End" mention.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Jason takes the Death Star

That's just Lucas. According to a rumor that began back in the 80s, he wrote a treatment for 12 stories total. He's retracted and stated new opinions every year since it began. I think he does it to keep the talk going and keep the popularity up. As for Friday 8, I actually like the movie. I think the ending was ridiculous, but as far as the look of Jason and the overall story of the film, it's decent for a Friday film. Better than Jason X, IMO.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I think X had a good story that was poorly executed on screen. Way too much CGI used where you don't need to. Too many changes to Jason's physical appearance. I liked the idea of finally introducing a reason for his constant resurrections. I like 9, but I would like it more if it had more of the real Jason. Nice way to give some backstory to characters (except the inexcusable "Vorhees" on the mailbox). I like 7 more than the ones that came after it. I don't know, the way they did Jason, the music that accompanied the film, a cool protagonist (i.e. a protoganist that can actually fight back)...it all just seemed like a step up - though not better than Jason Lives as far as quality Friday films go.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

No no, don't pass off shitty CGI on "B-movie SFX". If the Friday films have done anything, it's establish that you can have a fun movie with "real" effects. Yes, sometimes they can be cheesy, but a lot of the time that look pretty good for such a low budget production. That doesn't excuse the (heavy) use of CGI in Jason X. Notice that there is limited use in FvJ, and it works where it is used. When your spaceship and Old-Earth backgrounds look like children's matte, you've got a problem. As far as the Necronomicon goes, it was a joke for the film. In regards to continuity, technically Ash "destroyed" the book in the first movie. Since Raimi liked to rewrite continuity in that series like he was writing the changing of the wind, and the book wasn't destroyed then it has to be said that the book can never be destroyed. Given that it was present in Midevil times and then again in the 80s, it's a safe bet to assume that it would be present 10 years later in Crystal Lake.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I like the Scream films, and the Summer films weren't too bad either. I didn't see the third one that came out. I read the box for it and it appeared to be nothing more than a remake of the first one.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, it isn't the same because Ben Willis was never unstoppable. He got injured just like everyone else. A fourth Scream? I thought that was just a rumor.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Come on, Jason got that machete to the collar in Part 2, and he was hung in Part 3 and got an axe to the head. He was kind of supernatural from the start, just not zombiefied till later. I like all the Saw movies. They generally managed to give a great twist at the end that explains everything, and then at the same time opens so many more questions. The last one wasn't as good as the previous one, but it had some good backstory on Jigsaw.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Your story is just as good as the next. I don't believe there is a definitive canon for his backstory. Well, Saw has the most originality as far as twists go in the series. Saw III has the best ending, because it ties in all three films at the end, which is awesome. Saw II has a good twist, especially when you realize how obvious it actually was. I've never seen Ringu. I liked The Ring. I never saw the sequel. I haven't seen any other Japanese horror, or Americanized version of Japanese horror except for The Eye, which sucked.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

He was more "human" in the first four films. Michael Myers is supernatural, but still "human". My opinion was that he never actually died in any of the films until the fourth film. Then he was resurrected for the first time in the sixth film. Some people like to argue that he dies in each film. We don't need any more Scream films. They are planning at least two more Saw films. I don't know how good they'll be though.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Names

It isn't a mere list. Just like Smallville (season 1) isn't a list. There is a list in it, and it "lists" (so to speak) the characters. But it's 80-90% pure prose. It's more or less just an article with a crap load of sections.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I'll probably check it out if it every comes out in paperback.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I really hope your kidding about both the acting and CGI. The damn movie basically lambasted itself, with the overly sexualized couple that just can't wait to have sex...even making such obviously ridiculous comments like "hung like a horse". Come on. What made F13 good was that it didn't pretend to be anything other than a simple slasher film, yet it didn't stoop to the level of making fun of itself either.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:57, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I love the original for the sense of realism that it created. The mask, good sir. Why would you wish Superman Returns on to any film? I don't want a film that cannot decide what the hell it is. I'm kind of cool if they keep it in the timeline, but I'm also cool with a flat out remake that just makes Jason the killer from the beginning. The idea of having Pamela be the killed was ruined after they did it. It wouldn't be shocking any longer. Don't spoil "Sam" for me, I downloaded it and I'm going to read it tomorrow. :P  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:44, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

No, it sucked because it couldn't find it's place in the series. It contradicted itself waay too much, and rehashed the same shit over again. I would rather have a shitty sequel like Superman IV, then have a film that stole from the previous films, acting like a remake, but then tried to say that it was continuing the saga like a sequel. As for the mask, tries these here and here. I like the fact that Jason just slashes people. :D  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

No, I haven't read it yet. But, since I'm staying home from my internship to let my voice heal some more (trying to get over laryngitis still) and to let my knees rest from taking the pressure off of my toe (which has a compression fracture and was dislocated), I think I'll read it tonight so that we can chat it up. Those videos (I've watched Halloween, Jaws, and Superman so far) were pretty good. Really catchy. The guy has no life, but it was still entertaining. See this?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

It was pretty good. I don't like how they changed Judith's age to 15, but I did appreciate them giving a connection between Laurie's staged death and Loomis. I also liked how they established that Loomis basically had a history of tracking serial killers.

I was playing basketball and I landed on my toe coming down from jumping into the air. I thought I had jammed it, but when I got home that night I realized that I had broken it. I went to the doctor's office the next morning and the x-rays revealed that it was also dislocated (the 2nd row phalanges was sitting on top of the 1st row phalanges).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:18, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall an age given to her in the original film. I do recall H20 specifically stating she was 17. She looked a little too old, and developed, to be 15. See, I wonder if that was Michael that cleaned up or someone else. Remember, in the comic it states that they sometimes deliberately hid clear sightings of Michael in order to keep the peace. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they did it with Loomis's death, knowing that if word got out that Michael's old psychiatrist had been found dead next to a woman who had been butchered that the town would automatically assume Michael was back and they would panic.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Unless some character said it in passing, I don't believe the tombstone actually had a date on it. I thought my toe was just jammed, so I kept playing. I won two games and was on my way to win a third before I ran out of time. I just limped around thinking that it would eventually numb up and then I'd be fine. Unfortunately, I realized when I got home that it wasn't simply jammed.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:58, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I have no issues with the actor (only seen him in The Mist), but, as you can probably read from my conversation with Alien, I hate the idea of them having Doomsday. He's a "Superman" character, and unless Clark becomes Superman right in the premiere, and we have a nice story arc on Doomsday, culminating in a "Death of Superman" 3 part finale (which I highly doubt) I don't see why we need that character. I also don't like the idea of Justin Hartley as a series regular (Green Arrow). Two primary superheroes is one too many. I understand if they are testing the waters for a Green Arrow spin-off, but seriously, you're taking the focus from your main character in his final seasons. That's just stupid. That right there shows you don't have a lot of faith in your show if you're really "jumping the shark" by bringing Doomsday in, and giving a leading role to another superhero.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

No, I haven't seen it. Alien has...and I think Erik as well (or, he may be planning on it). I'm saving my money for The Dark Knight. Glad you enjoyed it though.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I've already been to the movies this summer. I saw Iron Man. :P  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Help with James Dobson criticism

Paul730, I could use some help with the James Dobson article, and I'm wondering if you'd be interested in providing it. Before I started editing for NPOV, someone had included a rehash of the contents of Homosexuality and psychology, which really struck me as a WP:COATRACK. I removed that text and pointed to the Homosexuality and psychology article, but it feels like good, solid, well-sourced criticism of Dobson's specific views is missing from the article. I'm sure a ton of well-sourced statements critical of Dobson exist in the GLBT community, but I really have no idea how to find and select the best ones to provide a quality rebuttal. Would you be willing to help with this, or, failing that, do you know someone else who might? Thanks! Jclemens (talk) 17:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Smashing summer

I didn't like it, I loved it. And I disagree about Tyler and Roth, the former moved me, the latter was just insane. You're right about Nelson, he was wonderful, can't wait to see how nasty and obnoxious he'll be in (a) sequel, and Hurt was brilliant as General Ross. Also, regarding the CGI, I loved it: about the same photorealism level as the first one, but the animation itself was so much better, I could really see Roth under that CG make-up. What was your favourite moment then? From when Hulk made a thunderclap to fleeing I was ready to light a candle, if you get what I mean! The action was so much better than Iron Man, but let's not fret, I'm loving this movie summer, I'm so excited to finally see Prince Caspian. And how awesome does the Doctor Who finale look, I had shivers down my spine watching this clip. Alientraveller (talk) 15:26, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

What are your top CG creations then? The Transformers, Jurassic Park's dinosaurs and Davy Jones are clearly the pinnacles of the adolescent format (it's not in its infacy that's for sure).

And I hope Tennant sticks around throughout 2010, as it'd be lame if next year's substitution of bank holiday specials for a series was caused by a half-hearted actor. But it's nice to have a finite conclusion to these stories over the past few years. In the Transformers comics, the main story for the past two years has been collapsed from two further limited series to four interlinked one-shots, while the main story has skipped ahead a year to a new status quo. I like reboots (damn that phrase is becoming overused). Alientraveller (talk) 20:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

You have more trouble with the uncanny valley than I do. T2 and JP had Stan Winston's (RIP) animatronics and make-up to aid your suspension of disbelief.

Which companion will die? Probably Jack (lol) but hopefully not Martha, she's been short changed enough. Alientraveller (talk) 21:14, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Vercetti is a character that you project yourself onto though, because he isn't realistic. However, when you meet a realistic creation, you can tell something is missing and it's creepy. Alientraveller (talk) 21:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

sorry

i didn't mean to vanlize the page as you wrote. I just wanted to add a hello, forgot to add to talk pages. fuck thing is hard, sometimes. Thanks though. By the way my name is Boggydark (not in real life though ha). Boggydark (talk) 00:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

It was fantastic

From the start, they did tried an American style of opening (cast in credits, special guest stars immediate afterwards) which was different but nice. And then the stuff with the companions is the stuff of good fanfiction! Jack fixed his vortex manipulator, and there anti-Dalek guns, Martha's promited again ... and the Doctor's in mid-regeneration. Davros' return was quickly dealt with and with some room left for expansion on those mysteries, which was nice. We didn't see HJ's death, leaving it open for shock revelations, but it's fitting she died a hero and a patriot if we take what we saw at face value. Oh, and Jack/Donna and Jack/Sarah Jane was great. Bring on Jack/Jackie! ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 19:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's a fakeout. The regeneration will fail for whatever reason. Hasn't Tennant been spotted filming the Cybermen Xmas ep?~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 19:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Maria would detract from it being a Doctor Who and not a Sarah Jane story, so getting her out the way was essential. RTD's final 3-episode arc really shows a sort of cohesive Whoniverse. Aw I liked that Jack was tracking Sarah Jane's progess! ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 19:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

My mum said it was too confusing for her to handle. Oh, Richard Dawkins, naturally, had it sussed from the start! ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 20:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, Tennant as the 10/11th Doctor. RTD just loves being unconventional: regeneration doesn't have to equal recasting. And Davros was very creepy, and I can't wait to hear more from Caan: it's amazing how this show has imbued with the Daleks with so much personality (sole Dalek was sad, Emperor had god complex, Sec became human, Caan is nuts). Alientraveller (talk) 22:21, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

My idea is maybe the big beetle decided to stick with Donna to seek out another victim, and seeing the energy caused by a regeneration, seizes the chance to make sure the Dalek didn't shoot the Doctor and feeds off the excess. We'll see, but I have a knack for these: I could tell Rose and her mum would join Pete in the alternate universe, the girl in the library was its digital incarnation, and the Master's havoc would have to be reversed. Or something. Anyway, it's 65 minutes long and they'll use the other storylines to buy time and keep the "regeneration" suspenseful. Oh, and I bet the Daleks kill Davros: can't have reality itself gone. Alientraveller (talk) 15:25, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I haven't read Time of Your Life yet, but I quite liked Journey's End up until the fangirl ending with Bad Wolf Bay. I LOVED Doctor Donna, but loathed human Doctor.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

At least it means Tennant can make surprise appearances. I love the idea of Rose with a big shouty Donna-like Doctor. A bit like her mum! And of course, he's very much a Nine/Ten hybrid in the sense he was "born from war"... and will stay that way! Rose could never have loved say, the Second Doctor like she did Ten, and may not have loved Nine as much as Ten.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 01:16, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

It was nice, but a 14-episode season could have had stretched the plot much nicer, with perhaps some long-overdue Jack/Rose interaction. Hello, your fault he's immortal, blondie. Weren't you supposed to be in love with her, Jack? Didn't you watch her as she grew up? The writers forget Jack is supposed to be more than a gay joke except for when they need a gag about alien meat. Jackie I thought was nice - she'd clearly matured a lot as a character. Mickey was great, shame he didn't interact with Rose, and there was no "I'm over you". Shame about there being no Jake Simmonds, not even a reference to him. Loved Tosh saving Ianto and Gwen's asses from beyond the grave. The Rift can be used to do ANYTHING, clearly, but I don't care cos it's Doctor Who - it won't be that functional in Torchwood. Mickey will make a great temp in Torchwood. Donna was sad. Maybe a one-off episode in two years can give her a happy ending. Libraryverse with River Song, comes to mind.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 01:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

But Jake was hot! 1) Doomsday, 2) Journey's End, 3) The Parting of the Ways, 4) Last of the Time Lords. Whereas it's probably 1) Stolen Earth, 2) The Sound of Drums, 3) Army of Ghosts and 4) Bad Wolf for the penultimates. Night! ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 01:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I accidentally posted my commentary on Zythe's page, but yes, I loved it. And now onto the Cybermen this Christmas... Alientraveller (talk) 20:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Freema Agyeman has a black belt I believe, so I hope we can see that eventually (I believe she only appeared in Torchwood to make the rest of the team look good). Perhaps we'll see Tom Milligan again and perhaps there'll be a love triangle with Mickey. Ah, the possibilities. And those Whovians calling the clone a doll better not talk to me about the ethics of genetic engineering then, clones are as alive as anyone, moving on... I hope we see Donna again too, and maybe Wilfred can hop into the TARDIS, Bernard Cribbins has been excellent. Alientraveller (talk) 22:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Technically there is no companion in the Christmas special, just supporting characters, and I suppose this trend will continue until 2010. Jenny will return for sure, but she might just be in a Jack/Martha-like capacity. River Song? Ugh, great episode but all the character's potential is lovey-dovey-mush, and I didn't mind Rose! Alientraveller (talk) 22:42, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm still waiting eagerly to get out the house and buy me some Buffy. I read some scans. The Kennedy interactions seem in-character for her, being the show's militant lesbian. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 20:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Considering their articles are still a big fansitey mess, want to help me with this project?~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 21:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree, but it's hard finding the balance between "the spin-off media offers this characterisation...", or "this characterisation is offered (in spin-off media, bla bla bla canonicity)..." approaches. Since books aren't necessarily as accessible as TV episodes in the Youtube age, I felt it needed a quote, but if I could paraphrase it I would prefer that.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Hell no. I think I heard it obliquely referenced somewhere, and thinking it might be useful if it existed, I crawled through annoying livejournal fangirl communities scrawling for a transcription. I don't read Torchwood Magazine either, and did the same thing for the costume reference (because I needed a source for the line about Jack's greatcoat).~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:43, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

My experience with TV tie-in books so far has been the Charmed and Buffy novels, none of which were worthy reads. I have read some good things about the second batch of Torchwood books, particular The Twilight Streets for its characterisation (although I don't like that I hear it retcons Bilis Manger and Abaddon into a more heroic light). I'm doing the quote box thingy now.

But the grey box ...is so much uglier with that quote. I don't know how {{rquote}} will look on Jack's article, though.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:59, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

"[Being bisexual is] the worst of any world because you don't really belong anywhere, because you are never sure of yourself or those around you. You can't trust in anyone, their motives or their intentions. And because of that, you have, in a world that likes its nice shiny labels, no true identity."

—Ianto in The Twilight Streets by Gary Russell
Torchwood literature further explores Ianto's characterisation.

“ [Being bisexual is] the worst of any world because you don't really belong anywhere, because you are never sure of yourself or those around you. You can't trust in anyone, their motives or their intentions. And because of that, you have, in a world that likes its nice shiny labels, no true identity. ” — Ianto in The Twilight Streets by Gary Russell,
Torchwood literature further explores Ianto's characterisation.

If it's important, I'd rather they were consistent too. Take a look at this, though.

“ I wanted kids to like him, and I wanted women, men, I wanted everyone to like him. But first I wanted people to hate him. I wanted them to think he was arrogant and pushy and too sure of himself. And I wanted them to follow the arc of the change he went through in the final episodes of Doctor Who. ” — —John Barrowman

In naming the character, executive producer and head writer Russell T Davies drew inspiration from the Marvel Comics character Agatha Harkness, a character whose surname Davies had previously used in naming lead characters in Century Falls and The Grand. Jack's original appearances in Doctor Who were conceived with the intention of forming a character arc in which Jack is transformed from a coward to a hero, and John Barrowman consciously minded this in his portrayal of the character. Following on that arc, the character's debut episode would leave his morality as ambiguous, publicity materials asking, "Is he a force for good or ill?"

The character's introduction served to posit him as a secondary hero and a rival to the series protagonist, the Doctor, simultaneously paralleling the Doctor's detached alien nature with Jack's humanity and "heart". In another contrast, where the Doctor is a pacifist, Jack is more inclined to see violent means to reach similar ends. John Barrowman has described Jack as the Doctor's "muscle and guns man". Whereas in the classic series the female "companions" were sometimes exploited and sexualised for the entertainment of predominantly male audiences, the producers could reverse this dynamic with Jack, citing an equal need amongst modern audiences to "look at good looking men". John Barrowman linked the larger number of women watching the show as a key factor in this.

Does that look alright? Cquote and Rquote on both pages or quotebox on both? *conflicted* ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

It does look better now, I think. As for the Martha Jones article - should the television section be in two paragraphs or in three? ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, okay, I admit that needs working on. And I thought so too - one for 2007 and one for 2008, since it wasn't that many episodes either show or a full season between them - but it kept getting undone.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:54, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Sections for each season is simply stupid. A line for each season saying "in season four..." is much neater. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 01:02, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Hitchhiker

I just finished watching Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2, and I'm more convinced now than ever that the Hitchhiker and Chop Top are one in the same. Specifically, both carry the same red scar/birthmark on their cheek (same pattern and all), and they both carry that straight razor (which both of them use to cut at the back of the escaping final girl). What were your thoughts on this?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:40, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

His head was crushed, but that would simply explain the metal plate that is in the head of Chop Top. Nightmare was solid, but it was Freddy that degenerated throughout each film. I didn't really care for the Jacob storyline. Plus, if all of Alice's friends died...how the hell did she manage to make more? I wouldn't want to be a friend to the girl that has a habit of losing friends to mysterious deaths.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I responded and then closed it instead of saving it. In the film, Chop Top has no backstory. That part in the article I assume was from Hooper's commentary. The film itself presents Chop Top in a manner that looks like the hitchhiker. They must have been identical twins, because I don't know fraternal twins that have identical birthmarks.

If they were Dan's friends then where were they in Part 4? Dan was hanging out with a bunch of jocks...so how did he swap over to this group? Plus, they seemed to hover around Alice more than Dan. I don't really have any minor characters that come to my mind. Chop Top is definitely hilarious in TCM 2.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

TCM 2 picks up 13/14 years after the events of the first film. Sally Hardesty told the police all that happened and they went searching for the family but found nothing. The closed the case. Sally's uncle (played by Dennis Hopper) went in search of the Sawyer family, tracking them all over Texas. One night a radio station captures the murder of two boys driving down the road. This forces Chop Top and Leatherface to go there to destroy the tape and kill the DJ that played it on the air in an effort to bring them out. Leatherface takes a liking to the DJ (who is a woman). The uncle, who is a Texas Ranger (or former Ranger), uses the DJ as bait so that he can find their hideout. He begins tearing down their home with his own chainsaws; he an Leatherface have a chainsaw duel. ..That about sums up the movie for the most part.

Comics are always useful like that.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:23, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I consider it to be the only "sequel" to the original. TCM 3 is its own thing. Tone wise, it's a little heavier in the dark humor, and not as "realistic" at the first film was meant to be portrayed. Haven't heared anything about the Evil Dead musical.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

III is odd. I don't recall it mentioning anything about the previous films - it's basically its own story just like Next Generation (neither are connected to each other either). That doesn't make III bad, because it wasn't horrible...at least not to the degree of Next Generation. I liked III with the exception of Leatherface's mask.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

III is fine by itself. I'd watch Next Generation just to say that you watched it, and then run far away. As for the other thing, my suggestion is to erase all memory of said event and not bother responding. They are trolling, and right now you're falling into the same trap that I fell into the other day. I've stopped responding because it isn't worthy my time. No need to play into their hand any longer.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

your logic

About a fictional character and the films makes no sense. The same as bignole. You say things that contradict the whole thing. According to what I just read by you, there should be a citation at the end of every sentence. Verifying it, because you think the movie should not be used as a reference. In which case almsot everything in the artciles about should mostly deleted. Also the most of the sources on movies like that are original research sources, which should make even moe of it deleted.Swampfire (talk) 17:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Also you state "Bignole has provided a source above in which the film makers discuss Paul's death" That isn't true, what he prvovided was the words from them on Paul not dying. In fact the mere fact that he talked about what his "intent" was proves the fact that Paul's survival being being retconned into part 3. bothers him. But the fact of the matter is he should of killed him if he wanted him dead. Because the next filmaker and screenwriter made it clear he was alive. The same as they do at the beginning of almost all of the series. When pointing out exactly how many were killed in the last, A FACT i have already pointed out. Along with the fact logical decisions are based on facts, and not the lack of facts. And the retconned FACTS included in part 3 is Paul lived. Where as there was lack of facts in part 2 stating one way or the other.Swampfire (talk) 17:44, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

And I never said I couldn't provide a link, to the fact that it clearly states 8 retconning Paul's survival.Swampfire (talk) 18:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

You just proved your own bias. Because you said this "There's a difference between stating the events of the film, and stating your own interpretation of the film. Paul didn't survive; he disappeared and his body - alive or dead - was apparently never recovered, judging from the news report." You said Paul didnt survive, without any basis for that. Also Paul was with Ginny and she was found, So you can;t assume aliens magically removed Paul. The facts from the report is 8 bodies, the same as in part 2 in the beginning they talk about the number of bodies in part 1, which is exactly the ones that died. They do it in part 1 they state 2 killed in 1958, in part 2 they state the seven killed and then state ms voohees too from part 1, in part 3 they state the 8 killed at the camp in part 2, in part 4 they state 10 killed in part 3 and then say it was 7 kids and 3 bikers. In all of those they use EXACT numbers. And yet without facts you assume Paul didn't survive. That's the same as assuming Tommy's sister died after part 4, because she didnt return in part 5 with Tommy. The thing is you can't assume she is dead without facts. And in the case of Paul there is NO facts he didnt urvive, There is only facts that he did.Swampfire (talk) 02:25, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

See you did it again, you state in your own opinion what you think it could mean. If you going to do that then you might as well say, Since Paul wasn't mentioned and only 8 bodies found, that aliens landed and scooped him up. Because it is the same thing that you are saying. Because you basing something AGAINST what the facts state.Swampfire (talk) 02:46, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually it is not an opinion, the facts cleary state 8. Any assumptions made other than than the eight already shown dead would be an assumption.Swampfire (talk) 03:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Your personal attack is in [2]. Swampfire (talk) 03:17, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually no one has the right to remove anything inside wiki's domain just because they choose to unless it is vandalism. Which the discussion was not. Also he removed the warning for making personal attacks, only to return to my page and make another attack. Of which he was warned my someone else too. WP:NPA is not a guidleine, It is a POLICY.Swampfire (talk) 03:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

You need to read things before supplying them because the page you supplied is neither a policy or guideline, in fact it even states in the opening that "This is an essay, a page containing the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. You may follow it or not, at your discretion" That was just a page created by a user on his opinion. Not a policy or even a guideline.Swampfire (talk) 03:32, 8 July 2008 (UTC)