[quote=“Sebastian”]
not sure if he will go that far, but nowhere in the book does it say that every movie that deals with WW2 has to be a Spielberg-type gorefest with lots of tears, crying and realism… I wanna go to the mvoies and have fun, too.
[/quote]
I really hope its not an overly sentimental “soldiers telling stories about their moms at home” war film. I want it to be just what QT said a “modern, in your face movie”. Great direction/cinematography, Violence, comedy, pop culture fun, cool music (we havent even heard that yet).
The Shosanna movie theater sub story sounds like it will be filled with film geekery too, which is cool to hear.
It’s really annoying when people post about how other posts are useless, because those very posts are even more useless. If people want to discuss something, let them. What’s with all the hostility recently towards other members, topics, posts etc? Do you guys know what a “forum” is even for?
Im not hostile about anything. I just wonder why people open topics that really have nothing to do with the movie. Adam Sandler isnt in the film, why does he get a topic?
It just makes sense to keep things together, in order. Just so 8 months from now you guys who work so hard in here (Seb) dont have to delete a bunch of irrelevant crap and sift through the topics to find out what was even the topic was about.
If we’re talking about a movie, theres no need to talk about a book that has nothing to do with it. Theres a Book section. Talk about it there. People just need to focus a little and things will be cool.
Like if you hate this movie, why not a) play outside with your friends or b) just open a topic where you can bash it to hell? INSTEAD of ruining the enjoyment of the other people who want to see the film in the reg topics that are supposed to be about positive, interested reaction. I know why: You want to start a fuckin argument! You know thats why you guys do it.
Its just about being smart/courteous instead of dumb/rude. Its very easy to do. You can spare everyone a big headache if you just think a little and have some courtesy. Youd probably be happier too.
Here’s a link to Pegg’s official MySpace where he confirms in his blog that (surprise, surprise) due to scheduling conflicts he’s wont be appearing in IB:
[quote]Much to our mutual disappointment, I won’t be appearing in QT’s forthcoming Inglorious Bastards due to insurmountable scheduling difficulties. We really tried to make it work but in the end, it just was not possible without severe ramifications elsewhere.
I’m trying to remain upbeat, as Tom Selleck said “Who the hell is Indiana Jones anyway?”[/quote]
In a way, if this is true, I’m happy, but I’m just hoping he isn’t replaced by someone WORSE. I’d be over the moon if this was Eli Roth instead…and Pegg could stay.
yay! i love pegg but that wudve been weird… omg i hope he wont repalced but some other comedy freako^^ well hes supposed to be british innit, wut about someone from guy ritchies movies
In a way, if this is true, I’m happy, but I’m just hoping he isn’t replaced by someone WORSE. I’d be over the moon if this was Eli Roth instead…and Pegg could stay.
[/quote]
It’s a shame Pegg won’t be Hicox, he was really right for the part. Eli Roth having scheduling conflicts?! Yeah right.
I hope he gets a bigger name than Pegg and doesnt go below him popularity wise. Qts got some smaller names, he really should get some actors now that are more well known and not just TV people. Kick this up a notch!
