MisterD Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 Just saw LXG and can't wait to see you guys create CHAMPIONS versions of the characters My take on the team NEMO: Inventor / Martial Artist HYDE: Multi-form brick SAWYER: SKilled Normal QUARTERMAINE: Skilled normal DORIAN GREY: Martial Artist (sword) with a healing factor that would put Wolverine to shame MINA HARKER: Scientist / Vampire ???Forgot the Name???: Invisible / Skilled normal OT: I had Dorian Grey as a character in a Western Hero game (the other players were a Quai Gan Cane like martial artist, A trickshot artist and an inventor so the Grey character was not too out there) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent X Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 Re: LXG Originally posted by MisterD Just saw LXG and can't wait to see you guys create CHAMPIONS versions of the characters My take on the team NEMO: Inventor / Martial Artist HYDE: Multi-form brick SAWYER: SKilled Normal QUARTERMAINE: Skilled normal DORIAN GREY: Martial Artist (sword) with a healing factor that would put Wolverine to shame MINA HARKER: Scientist / Vampire ???Forgot the Name???: Invisible / Skilled normal OT: I had Dorian Grey as a character in a Western Hero game (the other players were a Quai Gan Cane like martial artist, A trickshot artist and an inventor so the Grey character was not too out there) What did you think of the movie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCoy Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 Re: LXG Originally posted by MisterD ???Forgot the Name???: Invisible / Skilled normal Skinner. Line I wanted to hear but didn't: "Sawyer, Thomas Sawyer." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwdemon Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 I, personally, liked the movie a lot. However, I will say that I never read the comic and I don't tend to be a psychotic purist, so the more militant among us may or may not care for it... From the view of someone who went into the movie with no idea of what he'd see, I can say I enjoyed it immensely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tombstone_Frank Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 I liked it The CGI was a bit much sometimes, and the story was a bit light, but I liked Hyde being a suit instead of CGI 3 stars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ndreare Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 Although not as good as the Hulk this movie totaly rocked. Every character with a name is a character from clasic literature. They are all but kicking characters of some sort or another running around in the latter part of the 1800's. (I have already started making them using 350 as a base. And remember Allen was more than just a skilled normal. I would place both him and Thom at the end of Luck. As for Allen he also has the Blessings of africa so he cannot die which I would consider a significant power.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Shrike Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 The movie was really well done. I had misgiving going in due to rumors of difficulties between Connery and the director, the damage to thier sets during the flooding in Prague last year, and some of the previews. I was particularly worried about Hyde, but damn they did a good job with him. I thought Richard Roxburgh wasnt given much of a chance to really shine. The guy is a really fabulous scene-stealing actor and it seemed like the director was keeping a tight rein on him. Dorian Grey was handled really well, and Skinner as the Invisible Man was more interesting to me than Griffith the psychopath. Anyhoo, I really liked it, but the critics are raking it over the coals hard-core. Ive yet to see a positive review. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enforcer84 Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 I can't wait to see it. Do you guys think its required "Big Screen" viewing, or perhaps I can wait til the video release? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnOSpencer Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 See it on the big screen Enforcer. Definatly worth it. John Spencer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCoy Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 Originally posted by Enforcer84 I can't wait to see it. Do you guys think its required "Big Screen" viewing, or perhaps I can wait til the video release? The fight scenes, and the baroque Victorian excesses of the sets, really need the big screne to do them justice. The ticket will be money well spent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 Originally posted by Killer Shrike The movie was really well done. I had misgiving going in due to rumors of difficulties between Connery and the director, the damage to thier sets during the flooding in Prague last year, and some of the previews. I was particularly worried about Hyde, but damn they did a good job with him. I thought Richard Roxburgh wasnt given much of a chance to really shine. The guy is a really fabulous scene-stealing actor and it seemed like the director was keeping a tight rein on him. Dorian Grey was handled really well, and Skinner as the Invisible Man was more interesting to me than Griffith the psychopath. Anyhoo, I really liked it, but the critics are raking it over the coals hard-core. Ive yet to see a positive review. Critics, BAH! The critics rake everything over the coals now a days, especially if it's a movie that's actually entertaining. I loved the Hulk and Pirates of the Carribean and the critics raked both of those over the coals as well. Really the only good movies, if memory serves, of late that the critics actually liked was the Lord of the Rings and, I belive, the Harry Potter movies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Shrike Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 Actually Pirates is getting really good reviews. The main concern is that if the critics attack a movie, it seriously impacts box office, and low box office means no sequel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Liaden Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 Ebert and Roeper both stuck their thumbs up for Hulk. I haven't seen their review of LXG yet, but it would be nice if it's positive - they're probably the most widely-quoted film critics. Not that it matters to me. From the clips I've already seen I'm going to this movie whatever anyone says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Worldmaker Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 Originally posted by Twilight Critics, BAH! The critics rake everything over the coals now a days, especially if it's a movie that's actually entertaining. I loved the Hulk and Pirates of the Carribean and the critics raked both of those over the coals as well. Really the only good movies, if memory serves, of late that the critics actually liked was the Lord of the Rings and, I belive, the Harry Potter movies. Ahem. I gave the Hulk 4 stars out of my 5 star rating system, and not only gave Pirates of the Carribean 5 stars out of five (a rating it shares with only the two Harry Potter Movies, the two Lord of the Rings movies, Phone Booth, and Down with Love), I opined that its too bad that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences don't give acting awards to this type of movie, because Johnny Depp deserves one. I gave LXG 3 1/2 stars out of 5; I love the concept but think the execution could have been a bit better. However, I think its still a very enjoyable film so go see it several times. In fact, my only niggling problem with the film is the fact that Tom Sawyer, having been born in 1837 according to the book by the same name, should have been just over 60 years old during this movie, and obviously he's not. But then what do I know... I'm just a film critic... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 Originally posted by Worldmaker Ahem. I gave the Hulk 4 stars out of my 5 star rating system, and not only gave Pirates of the Carribean 5 stars out of five (a rating it shares with only the two Harry Potter Movies, the two Lord of the Rings movies, Phone Booth, and Down with Love), I opined that its too bad that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences don't give acting awards to this type of movie, because Johnny Depp deserves one. I gave LXG 3 1/2 stars out of 5; I love the concept but think the execution could have been a bit better. However, I think its still a very enjoyable film so go see it several times. In fact, my only niggling problem with the film is the fact that Tom Sawyer, having been born in 1937 according to the book by the same name, should have been just over 60 years old during this movie, and obviously he's not. But then what do I know... I'm just a film critic... My apologies. I didn't mean to lump all film critics into the same boat. I guess where I live we're just infested with film critics like the kind I described in my earlier post and am sensitive on the subject cause of that. My bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectrum Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 I thought it was a pretty decent movie. I was iffy on it at first but found it to be a fun movie to watch, although I think it's one that if you must see it in the theater, catch it durring a matinee when the tickets are cheaper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graviton Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 My wife and I both really enjoyed it, as did two non-gaming friends of ours. I thought the fight scenes could have been better directed (the camera as an observer rather than seeming to be a participant), but overall I thought it was very well done. Here's another one to ponder along with Sawyer's age: how the heck did Mina Harker keep wandering around during the day? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent X Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 Originally posted by Twilight My apologies. I didn't mean to lump all film critics into the same boat. I guess where I live we're just infested with film critics like the kind I described in my earlier post and am sensitive on the subject cause of that. My bad. Dude, think about it. You're apologizing for criticizing critics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WhammeWhamme Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 Originally posted by Graviton My wife and I both really enjoyed it, as did two non-gaming friends of ours. I thought the fight scenes could have been better directed (the camera as an observer rather than seeming to be a participant), but overall I thought it was very well done. Here's another one to ponder along with Sawyer's age: how the heck did Mina Harker keep wandering around during the day? Oooh! I know! I know! Well, maybe not. But my Best Guess is that if she's a Vampire, she's a Vampire in the Dracula mold; weakened, but not killed by sunlight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Escafarc Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 Originally posted by Worldmaker In fact, my only niggling problem with the film is the fact that Tom Sawyer, having been born in 1837 according to the book by the same name, should have been just over 60 years old during this movie, and obviously he's not. But then what do I know... I'm just a film critic... Two possilble answers to this: A: This is Tom's grandson, they never use his first name in the movie. B(My first choice) this is the Tom from that live action/animated cartoon from the Bannana Splits Show who when he finally got out of those caves found himself some 30+ years in the future I also liked the fight scenes mainly because they didn't use the slow-motion/wire-fu stuff which I just don't carefor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 A few months ago, I was thinking "the top movie this summer is going to be Hulk! LXG and T3 definitely look good too, but they are going to be playing catch-up to Big Green!" OK. So I was mistaken. Don't get me wrong. Hulk was good movie. Nowhere near SpiderMan or X2 or Matrix, but enjoyable and entertaining. It made a little more sense on second viewing. I use a 1-10 scale: I gave it a 6. T3 gets a 7, while SpiderMan and X2 both got 10. LXG gets an 8. The only reason I didn't bump it up to a 9 was because it was too dark. I don't mean grim - I mean TOO DARK! I felt like I needed Night Vision to follow most of what was going on. I realize the action was meant to be at night, but there are ways of using cinematography to get that across without making most of the action impossible to see. So far LXG is the best movie of the summer. Pirates is next on my list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireg0lem Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 My only real complaint about the movie was the Jekyll/Hyde character. All of the others were more-or-less as they appeared in the literature they were drawn from. Not exact, as pointed out with Sawyer's age for example, but close enough. Hyde, however, was not even close. Hyde was supposed to be a younger man than Jekyll, and stunted (because Jekyll had repressed his dark side), not the Hulk. A better choice, IMHO, to fill that position, would have been Frankenstein's Monster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Arrow Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 Originally posted by Fireg0lem My only real complaint about the movie was the Jekyll/Hyde character. All of the others were more-or-less as they appeared in the literature they were drawn from. Not exact, as pointed out with Sawyer's age for example, but close enough. Hyde, however, was not even close. Hyde was supposed to be a younger man than Jekyll, and stunted (because Jekyll had repressed his dark side), not the Hulk. A better choice, IMHO, to fill that position, would have been Frankenstein's Monster. Towards the end of Vol. 1 of LXG, Jekyll comments that Hyde used to be much smaller than him. I read a quote somewhere from the actual story that suggested Hyde was getting bigger (possibly on Jesse Nevins's excellent website). About 12 years have elapsed between the original story and the events of Vol 1 of LXG (and the timescale for the film puts it about the same time as Vol 1 of the comic, I believe). The implication is that Hyde (who does indeed appear to represent Jekyll's repressed dark side) has continued to grow. The more bestial acts Hyde commits, the bigger and stronger he becomes and Jekyll wastes away and becomes smaller and ineffectual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spence Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 Originally posted by Killer Shrike Anyhoo, I really liked it, but the critics are raking it over the coals hard-core. Ive yet to see a positive review. All I had to go on was the movie critic's and so far they have all hated it (that I've read/seen). Keeping this in mind I went in expecting a REALLY GOOD MOVIE. I was not disappointed. I really enjoyed it. Over the years I have developed an extreme dislike for movie critics that seem to think people go to movies for ethical/moral education. For myself, I go to be entertained. If the movie is scifi, fantasy or adventure/war related and the critic's hate it, it's usually good. Now if they say they like it before the first weeks box office is in (and they can see how well everyone likes it), it will probably be a really crappy show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCoy Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 OK, my first attempt with Hero Designer, lets see how this goes. Character is based partly on the movie, partly on the source material. The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde Dorian Gray Player: Val Char Cost 15 STR -10 20 DEX 30 15 CON 10 10 BODY 0 13 INT 3 20 EGO 20 20 PRE 10 20 COM 5 3 PD 0 3 ED 0 4 SPD 10 6 REC 0 30 END 0 30 STUN 4 6" RUN02" SWIM03" LEAP0Characteristics Cost: 82 Cost Power END 52 Desolidification , Inherent (+1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Persistent (+1/2), Invisible Power Effects (Fully Invisible; +1) (130 Active Points); Custom Modifier (-1), Cannot Pass Through Solid Objects (-1/2) [Notes: Must leave "real body" behind. Painting is in effect the real body, any damage done to it will be done to the character.] 49 +15 STR, Reduced Endurance (1/2 END; +1/4), Custom Modifier (+2) (49 Active Points) (added to Primary Value) [Notes: Affects Physical World] 2 50 Life Support (Eating: Character does not eat, Immunity: All terrestrial diseases and biowarfare agents, Immunity: All terrestrial poisons and chemical warfare agents, Longevity: Immortal, Safe in High Pressure, Safe in High Radiation, Safe in Intense Cold, Safe in Intense Heat, Safe in Low Pressure/Vacuum, Self-Contained Breathing, Sleeping: Character does not sleep) 8 Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1d6 (plus STR) (vs. PD) (15 Active Points); IAF (Focus, Sword cane; -1/2), Real Weapon (-1/4) 1 Powers Cost: 159 Cost Martial Arts Maneuver Brawling 4 1) Punch: 1/2 Phase, +0 OCV, +2 DCV, Strike 5d6 5 2) Roundhouse: 1 Phase, -2 OCV, +1 DCV, Strike 7d6 4 3) Low Blow: 1/2 Phase, -1 OCV, +1 DCV, Strike 2d6 NND 4 4) Disarm: 1/2 Phase, -1 OCV, +1 DCV, Disarm; +10 STR to Disarm roll 4 5) Kidney Blow: 1/2 Phase, -2 OCV, +0 DCV, Strike 1d6+1 HKA 1 Weapon Element: Blades 1 Weapon Element: Shotguns [Notes: Never an avid hunter, Dorian has participated at country house shooting parties. He does not carry a shotgun, but can use one if he comes across one.] Martial Arts Cost: 23 Cost Skill 4 Language: French (completely fluent; literate) 6 Language: English (imitate dialects; literate) 9 High Society 16- 11 Seduction 17- 3 Disguise 12- 3 Stealth 13- 5 PS: Piano 14- 4 PS: Violin 13- 4 KS: Fine Arts (painting, opera, drama) (INT-based) 13- 4 KS: Perfumes (INT-based) 13- 5 KS: music (INT-based) 14- 5 KS: Gemstones & gemstone lore (INT-based) 14- 4 KS: Textile, embrodery & tapistries (INT-based) 13- Skills Cost: 67 Cost Perk 5 Money: Well Off Perks Cost: 5 Total Character Cost: 336 Val Disadvantages 10 Distinctive Features, extremely good looking; blond, blue-eyed, clear complexion, boyish features: (Concealable; Noticed and Recognizable; Detectable By Commonly-Used Senses) 5 Distinctive Features, always dresses well: (Easily Concealed; Noticed and Recognizable; Detectable By Commonly-Used Senses) 15 Reputation: saytr 14- 5 Reputation: bisexual 8- (Extreme (Known Only To A Small Group)) [Notes: This is conjecture, partly based partly on Alan Campbell's unreveiled vice that led to his suicide, partly on Oscar Wilde.] 15 Psychological Limitation, will do anything to safeguard his portrate: (Uncommon; Total) 25 Psychological Limitation: Hedonist (Very Common; Total) 25 Psychological Limitation: Lecherous (Very Common; Total) 20 Psychological Limitation: Total disreguard for feelings/wellbeing of others (Very Common; Strong) [Notes: Not quite sociopathic, but a lack of empathy headed that way.] 15 Psychological Limitation: Jaded (Very Common; Moderate) [Notes: Seen it all, been there, done that twice.] 15 Hunted: Lower aristocracy and upper middle class 14- (As Pow; Watching; Extensive Non-Combat Influence; Limited Geographical Area; PC has a Public ID or is otherwise very easy to find) [Notes: Dorian's ancestory (grandson of Lord Kelso) and old money (well-off, but not fabulously wealthy) make him a person cultivated by the Better People. His alley-cat morals make him a person shunned by the Best People. Both groups keep and eye on him and will readly exchange any gossip.] Disadvantage Points: 150 Base Points: 200 Experience Required: 0 Total Experience Available: 0 Experience Unspent: 0 Note 14 points available for additional knowledge skills or contacts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.