Livefyre Profile

Activity Stream

Never understood the Sonic attraction.

They are all one trick games and that one trick is speed.


The whole Mario Vs Sonic debate I just never could work out how they are even comparable to begin with.

Mario had some amazing level design, imaginative power ups, awesome boss battles. Mario 3 pretty much cemented Mario as THE platforming genre high bar.

Then along came Sonic and there was nothing to the levels other then going fast and doing loops, etc. They were dull games. Every level was the same, just different graphics. You could run trough a level in seconds. Yeah they tried to pad it out with bonus stages, it's just a shame the bonus stages were better then the main game.

Yeah I too was blown away by Sonic when I first saw and played it. But one the initial shock of the colorful graphics and speedy game play sunk in. The wow factor quickly diminished. 

You required no skill to play Sonic, none at all.

3 years ago on Sonic Memories


Just wanted to say I'm from the UK and d'loaded the proxy previously mentioned.

Works a treat.


Note for James...

One of the early Friday The 13th (3 or 4) films references Zaxxon too.

3 years ago on The Vindicator - Movie Review


 @Count Dantes  I agree.

SW was hardly "original" to begin with. So to claim something rips off SW...but what did SW  "rip off" first?

3 years ago on Eragon (2006)


This is a pretty bad sequel. However Exorcist III proves a good sequel could be made. Though it was originally written to be a sequel to Exorcist at all and only included characters from the first film as an after thought.


Still despite how bad this film is... Linda Blair was damn fine to look at at least.

3 years ago on Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977)


Lots of inane explosions?

So this is where Michael Bay got his ideas from.

3 years ago on Infra-man (1975)


Is it really that important where the turtles come from?

I mean, they come from space or they come from "ooze". Both origins are pretty stupid to begin with.


Are they going to kick ass is what really matters.

3 years ago on Michael Bay's TMNT from Outer Space?


 @Macmeister I am from the Atari age. First console I ever owned was a 2600. Yes I am that old.


I recall playing Space Invaders on the 2600 and thinking, it can't get any better then this.


It really is staggering to see how games have evolved over the years. Not just in terms of graphics, but also the many genres and sub genres. From how we have gone from single screen games where the only objective was to get a high score. To open world, free roaming worlds with mulitple objectives, etc.

Online multiplayer.


It would be nice to see someone do a restrospective on gaming.

Though it would be a hell of an undertaking if they did it right.

3 years ago on Atari Jaguar Part 1


 @Laurent David D In his T-shirt draw at home?

3 years ago on Cinemassacre Mailbag #2


Dolph Lundgren Vs Tge Alien would have been a better title.

3 years, 1 month ago on I Come In Peace (1990)


T2 is one of the worst written sequels made.

From gaping plot holes, inconsistant rules, terrible characrers.

As a sequel, it actually does not work at all.

3 years, 1 month ago on Terminator 2


"People cared more about graphics and less about gameplay".


Years later an nothing has changed.

3 years, 1 month ago on Atari Jaguar Part 1


 @Mssnor It may have been freeroam, but it was still shit.

3 years, 1 month ago on AVGN: Superman


Raiders on the 2600 was an awesome game.

Yeah by today's standards it's a bit "WTF". But back then it blew people away. It came out in the midst of standard gameage like Pac-Man, Space Invaders, etc. Games in which there was no goal outside of getting a high score.

Then along came Raiders and you actually had a plot to follow, puzzles to solve, you had to think.

I recall me and my brother taking months to play the game and figure it all out back then. Taking notes, making maps.

It took a while, but we did complete the game. Back then there was no guide or internet to find help. It was tough yeah, but it was worth it in the end.


Without Raiders on the 2600 there never would have been a Zelda or other games of it's ilk.

3 years, 1 month ago on Indiana Jones Trilogy


 @abcdefghq11 There are 4 films.

3 years, 1 month ago on Indiana Jones Trilogy


Wish I could shoot a duck by saying fuck.

3 years, 1 month ago on Nes Accessories


Or the Nemisis/Graduis series, Contra.

3 years, 1 month ago on Nes Accessories


 @timatkins5 I wonder if he used the power glove?

3 years, 1 month ago on The Wizard and Super Mario Bros 3


 @EXPLODA! What a cunt.

3 years, 1 month ago on Christmas Carol Part 1 - Home Alone 2


 @the_pieman ET is coming, it's the main plot device of the movie.

3 years, 1 month ago on Texas Chainsaw Massacre


James, you are crap at this game.

Where did you learn to fly?

3 years, 1 month ago on Independence Day


Why is the cover "offencive"?


Reminds me of Die Hard...which it is supposd to do, right?

3 years, 1 month ago on AVGN: Die Hard


 @Arlo I don't know why people complain about load times back on the C64, Speccy, etc. Yeah you had to wait 10 mins to load a game, but once it was loaded, it was loaded.

Compare that to games now they load with everything you do. Enter a building, exit the building, load new missions, load cutscenes, etc.

If you were to add up your average loading from a game now all those little bits would add up to much more then laod times back in the day.

3 years, 1 month ago on Sega CD


 @Hugoso  Or did he just use an empty bottle filled with water so as not to throw away beer?

3 years, 1 month ago on Spiderman


 @Lance7 He's not on the ceiling, he's on the floor. The posters are just upside down.

3 years, 1 month ago on Spiderman


 @Macmeister  No, it didn't.

3 years, 1 month ago on Ghostbusters Conclusion


"acording to the bible Noah put 2 of each animal in the ark"

No, the bible never states this at all. In fact the bible says he gathered animals in various number, mainly by 7.

3 years, 1 month ago on Bible Games


I don't gotta take a shit though.

3 years, 1 month ago on A Nightmare On Elm Street


Almo is the most irritating, whiny character since Luke Skywalker...and he was a bitch.

3 years, 1 month ago on Elmo in Grouchland (1999) Commentary


 @MarkCanner Of course there has been no new episodes.

James is a little busy making a movie.

We all knew this would happen when James started the movie.

3 years, 1 month ago on Angry Nintendo Nerd Outtakes


This really is one of the very best films made.

It works on so many levels.

Great kids film...but just the right side of naughty for the adults.

The best collection of stars ever in one film.

A fantastic story well told and directed by one of the best in the biz, Mr Bob Z. BttF, Forrest Gump. This man is one of the true greats of family cinema.


I heard Bob wants to do a sequel.

Just as long as he keeps it old school animation.

3 years, 1 month ago on Who Framed Roger Rabbit


Forgot to say. James mentioned the game Kung Fu being similar to GoD.

Kung Fu was infact based on Bruce's original idea for GoD...hence the similarity.

3 years, 1 month ago on Game of Death


Game Of Death was not Bruce Lee's "last film".

Enter The Dragon was his last film.

The footage featuring Bruce in GoD was filmed before EtD.


In fact GoD is not a Bruce Lee film at all, it's just a film that features footage of Bruce Lee.

3 years, 1 month ago on Game of Death


But that was not a "horror" film.

Point being made was which slasher/horror film started those trends.

3 years, 1 month ago on Black Christmas (1974)



The original hardly had great acting and a great script either.


So what you are saying is, the remake did a great job of recapturing the style of horror film at the time?

3 years, 1 month ago on Black Christmas (1974)


There was no gas in the burried DeLorean. You would not store a car for that long with gas still in the tank as the gas would damage the car.

Even Doc mentions he had to fill it up with gas before sending Marty to 1885 from 1955.


Another way to view it it...

What if by uncovering the burried car in 1885 it becomes damaged somehow. Meaning Marty can not use it in 1955 to get to 1885.

3 years, 1 month ago on Back To The Future Part 3 Movie Review


Was there 2 DeLoreans in 1955?

Kind of. In fact there were 3 at any one time in 1955.


There was the one from the original film (1).

The one Doc and Marty return to 1955 in BttF II from the alt 1985 (2).

Finally the one Biff used to go from 2015 to 1955 (3).


How James looks at it is also right.

There is the one from the original film (1).

The one burried in the cave (2).


However there are not 4 at any one time as some think as the one in the cave can not exist until the very second Doc is sent to 1885. By which time the one Biff used has been returned to 2015.

3 years, 1 month ago on Back To The Future Part 3 Movie Review


Old Biff does return to an alternate 2015...there are several subtle clues. One being Biff having trouble upon his return to 2015.

As Doc explains, the time line changes around the time travellers anyway. This is why Doc and Marty do not notice anything "different".

3 years, 1 month ago on Back To The Future Part 2 Movie Review


Hoverboards have existed for years, look them up.

3 years, 1 month ago on Back To The Future Part 2 Movie Review


T2 is terrible and contradicts previous rules and events.

While T3 is not perfect, it tells a better story then in T2 and even fixes many of it's problems.

3 years, 1 month ago on Terminator 3


 @Kurvos Being a perfect continuation and being "as good as/better" are not the same thing.

By perfect continuation, James means it flows from the last film perfectly continues.

The quality of the film is a different matter.


Two very different things.

3 years, 1 month ago on Rocky 2


First Blood is an amazing flick. One of the very best action films made. Great characters.

Rambo II is just terrible. Well it was written by James Cameron so that'll explian that problem.

Rambo III is just unwatchable.

Rambo IV (yes I call it IV) is amazing. Horrible to a good way. The Rambo character is back.


Watch the first flick and skip to this one. The other 2 have nothing to do with Rambo as a character.

3 years, 1 month ago on Rambo 4


The problem with this film's NOT a "Die Hard" film at all.

Die Hard has depth, emotion, great bad guy, multi layered plot, a everyday cop in a bad situation...this film has none of that.


This works much better as a sequel to The Last Boy Scout than Die Hard.

The PG-13 rating did not bother me either. The lack of character and plot did though.


The original Die Hard was a well written hiest flick with a great plot and more a suppense/thriller then an action film. yeah it had great action in the film but it was not the focus of the overall picture.

This film had none of the charm, heart or inteligence the first film had.

DH4 is just a summer action flick...nothing more. And it's a pretty medicore one at that too.

I have no idea what character Bruce was playing in this flick, but it was not John McClane.

3 years, 1 month ago on Live Free Die Hard



A GOOD writer would have stated Vader "destroyed" your father...not out right KILLED. As then when Obi revealed the truth to Luke, it would not had been contradictory. Yet still to us the viewer and Luke, it meant his father was still no more due to Vader.

Another example was the sub-plot love story between Luke and Liea. You know, the brother and sister love story.

Or even more so, SW ends, there no wiggle room for a sequel. The Death Star is destroyed. Bad guys lose, good guys win. There is a nice big ceremony where everyone is rewarded. It's the end of the story.

The ONLY shread of a continuation was Darth Vader spinning off into space...which is not much to base an entire futher 2 films on.

Lucas may have wanted and thought of more to the story than just one film yes. But he NEVER planned the entire saga out as people think, which was my point.

Want more "proof"?

The prequels and now how George keeps tinkering with the originals to make them fit into the whole story.

If the first three were planned, then no tinkering would be needed at all.

3 years, 1 month ago on Star Wars movie review - Part 1


@Hugoso This game is VERY shitty as AVGN showed.

3 years, 1 month ago on Michael Jackson's Moonwalker


I think I may be one of the few people in the world that really does not like SW that much.

I enjoy the first flick and admire it's mythology...but after that the films were just dull and suffered some ass-backward writing, especialy Obi telling Luke about Vader killing his father...and how what he told him was right, "from a certain point of view."

Clearly Lucas did not "plan" the series as people think.

Even as a kid I only enjoyed the first film and disliked the sequels, still do to this day.

3 years, 2 months ago on Star Wars movie review - Part 1


To be fair Action_Bastard never said Cameron had anything to do with Alien.

They just mearly pointed out that the two Cameron films (T2 and Aliens) they found the originals better.

3 years, 2 months ago on Terminator 2



It's not about being "factual", I have no problem with a FICTIONAL film breaking real world rules. Which is why I never once brought up how none of T2 could happen in the real world.

It's about T2 breaking rules set up in the first film and even breaking rules set up in T2 itself.

T2 is a horrible mess of a sequel not as it's not "factual", but due to the fact it basicaly tells the fans of the first film you wasted your time and everything was a lie. It contradicts the first film in many ways, it features inconsistant characters and writing within T2 itself.

As a sequel, T2 fails on just about every aspect, especaily from a story/plot agnle and character development view.

As I have previously mentioned. People bitch about Highlander II breaking all the rules and set up of the first film. Yet T2 does EXACTLY the same thing and it's often called one of "the best sequels ever"? How/why?

It's a terrible sequel. Good stand alone flick yes (yet still flawed...a LOT), but as a sequel it just does not work.

I'd love James to do an Overanalyers of T2 as I know it's a fave film of his...yet it's so full of bad writing I just wonder how James would view it.

It's really if a film that does fall apart when analysed.

3 years, 2 months ago on OverAnalyzers #12


Here's another one.

Kyle quite clearly explains in the first film that the humans had won and Skynet lost. He also goes on to point out it's only him and the T-800 as nothing or no one else can come through.

The ONLY reason there is a T-800 sent into the past (from the POV of the future) is a last resort by Skynet to kill John Conner.

As the T-800 failed to kill Sarah (and John), then Skynet lost.

So how/why are there any terminators in the sequels if Skynet had lost?

We have been told nothing else can be sent.

Not only is it a plothole the T-1000 used the portal (dispite being "dead"), the T-800 also should not have been able to have been sent either.

It's a double plothole, two for one there.

I have heard people ASSUME the other terminators were sent earlier in the future timeline. If this is the case, why was Skynet sending more advanced machines BEFORE the T-800 from the first film? Skynet used the T-800 over the T-600 in the first film as it was more advanced...yet the T-1000 and TX are more advanced then the T-800. Makes no sense.

If Skynet can send machines through as and when it wanted before the T-800 in the first film, why not send an army of more advanced machines to kill John? Send in a fleet of HKs that'll do the job.

For a highly intelligent, self-aware computer...Skynet was really stupid eh? Either that or James Cameron's writing is inane.

Also, if Skynet can sent machines through all the time, how was the T-800 "sure" it's mission was complete at the end of T2?

It's mission was to protect John, not destroy the T-1000. So "realisticaly" Skynet could have sent more machines through to kill John and the T-800's mission was not complete at T3 proves. So in T2, the T-800 failed it's mission.

Did James Cameron even pay attention to the rules he set up in the first film before writing T2, or was he just hoping no one would notice these HUGE plotholes?

The first film works as it's a singular threat (as explained), nothing else can come through.

Then along comes T2 and it's like a big middle finger to the fans of the first film. Everything we were told was a "lie"?

Cameron pulled a Highlander II alright.

3 years, 2 months ago on OverAnalyzers #12



Yeah I understand the rules.

Point it the T-1000 is nothing but "dead", there is no organic matter surrounding or part of the T-1000 so it can not time travel, ergo a HUGE plothole in the film.

But if the rules have been changed, of which there is no mention within the film anyway...but IF the rules had been changed, why not bring some future weapons?

Also, seeing as the T-1000 can mimic clothing (see the cop at the start of the film) why is is "naked" to begin with?

Skynet has no knowledge of human clothing dispite the fact it's sworn enemy is humans?

T2 is a film that is so badly writen with HUGE plotholes and inconsistant rules,I fail to understand why it hailed as a "great sequel" whe it does to the original what Highlander II did to Highlander.

3 years, 2 months ago on OverAnalyzers #12


They should do one of these for T2.

Like how the T-1000 can use the portal dispite the fact nothing dead can use it. Or if the rules have been changed, why is the T-1000 "naked" or why not bring some future weapons?

Really what is the point of a "naked" T-1000?

If the T-800 has to follow John's orders as explained in the film, why does the T-800 not follow his orders later when John orders it not to go at the end?

Speaking of which, the T-800 will go against it's mission parameters to save Sarah (cos John orders it to) therefore risking John (and the T-800's mission) and actually taking hm into danger. Which leads me to the question as to why future John would even program the T-800 to follow a 10 year olds orders in the first place...not a smart move.

Why does John ask the T-800 to "swear" not to kill of which the T-800 would not understand what that means as John does not even explain it when John could just order it not to kill, and why does the T-800 not kill anyone in the opening bar sequence (before swearing not to kill), yet it was willling to kill the guy that came to HELP John?

If the T-1000 can only mimic things of equal size, how does it mimic the hospital gaurd and even Sarah who are clearly not "equal size".

Then when it does mimic Sarah at the end, why does it not kill her (as explained it would earlier) to get to John. Even more so, why does the T-1000 as Sarah to call to John when the T-1000 can mimic voices?

In The DC there is a scene in which the T-800's chip is removed to set it to "write" mode so it can learn, dispite the fact it had already been learning previously. Even more so, why would the T-800 allow it's chip to be removed, therefore taking it offline meaning it's not capable of doing the mission it is programed to do. What if the T-1000 had turned up?

Yet on the same point, why would SkyNet even build the T-800's chip with a write option, then as defualt set it to read only?

Wow, is T2 ever a badly writen film.

3 years, 2 months ago on OverAnalyzers #12