mmu1
Dec 30 2005, 06:08 AM
Anyone see this? It's got it all - the pitfalls of not being able to trust your employers, difficulties with contacts and the likelihood of a 3rd party finding out about your activities, irreliability of explosives, strife among team members, and of course, tons of infiltration and wetwork.
Probably more of a SR movie - quite by accident - than anything out there meant to pass as cyberpunk.
Mr.Platinum
Dec 30 2005, 12:23 PM
This movie looks good, may go otu and see it.
Prospero
Dec 30 2005, 08:46 PM
Saw it yesterday and loved it. Though I kept wondering why they were relying totally on one scource for their info - get at least two and cross-check it, I say. Really got me in the mood for running. Though I recently moved away from my group. sigh. No running for me.
Anyway, great movie. Very shadowrun.
Mike
stevebugge
Dec 30 2005, 09:59 PM
QUOTE (Prospero) |
Saw it yesterday and loved it. Though I kept wondering why they were relying totally on one scource for their info - get at least two and cross-check it, I say. Really got me in the mood for running. Though I recently moved away from my group. sigh. No running for me.
Anyway, great movie. Very shadowrun.
Mike |
Did you just move to or from the Seattle area?
FrostyNSO
Dec 30 2005, 11:28 PM
QUOTE (Prospero) |
Saw it yesterday and loved it. Though I kept wondering why they were relying totally on one scource for their info - get at least two and cross-check it, I say. Really got me in the mood for running. Though I recently moved away from my group. sigh. No running for me.
Anyway, great movie. Very shadowrun.
Mike |
Unfortunately you sometimes only have 1 source.
Prospero
Dec 31 2005, 03:59 AM
QUOTE (stevebugge) |
QUOTE (Prospero @ Dec 30 2005, 12:46 PM) | Saw it yesterday and loved it. Though I kept wondering why they were relying totally on one scource for their info - get at least two and cross-check it, I say. Really got me in the mood for running. Though I recently moved away from my group. sigh. No running for me.
Anyway, great movie. Very shadowrun.
Mike |
Did you just move to or from the Seattle area?
|
To the Seattle area (Issaquah, to be specific), from across the state in Spokane. Why do you have a game in the area (he asked with hope and trepidation?)
PBTHHHHT
Dec 31 2005, 06:15 AM
an interesting movie I just saw... syriana.
there's a good example of an operative(runner) that's hung out to dry.
Arethusa
Dec 31 2005, 09:05 AM
QUOTE (Prospero) |
Saw it yesterday and loved it. Though I kept wondering why they were relying totally on one scource for their info - get at least two and cross-check it, I say. Really got me in the mood for running. Though I recently moved away from my group. sigh. No running for me.
Anyway, great movie. Very shadowrun.
Mike |
That's actually not what happened, as Mossad would not really be so stupid as to rely on something so obviously dangerous. Not that it worked too well anyway, considering they still managed to gun down a Palestinian waiter in front of his girlfriend because they mistook him for a terrorist. I haven't seen Munich, and it may be a good movie (though I generally loathe Spielberg and his facile, witless use of cinema); it certainly is an important movie, but do not take it as a source of history. In reality, the guys carrying out hits weren't nearly so conflicted, and the inaccuracies pile on from there. It is fictionalized, and it is intended to be looked at in its social context rather than as a documentary of events.
Regardless, I have seen Syriana, and that is a movie absolutely everyone needs to see. And it's even good if you already know a lot about oil the history and current status of the Middle East. Though, I must say, looking at either of these movies as Shadowrun games strikes me rather distasteful.
Critias
Dec 31 2005, 09:10 AM
Spielberg's big defense for the inaccuracies is the usual "this movie was based upon real events" blurb at the start.
My guess (as to why the Mossad guys are so torn, etc) is he was trying very hard to seem "even handed" with how her covered those events, and ended up tilting a little too far in an attempt to not offend anyone.
Sandoval Smith
Dec 31 2005, 12:19 PM
Or that it makes for a better movie that way. He's gotten official notice from both Israeli and Palestinian sources that they're pissed about the movie. I don't think he was too worried about stepping on toes.
Mr.Platinum
Dec 31 2005, 02:15 PM
QUOTE (Sandoval Smith) |
Or that it makes for a better movie that way. He's gotten official notice from both Israeli and Palestinian sources that they're pissed about the movie. I don't think he was too worried about stepping on toes. |
I think it's funny how people get pissed about movies, it's a form of entertainment, sit back and watch.
Arethusa
Dec 31 2005, 06:56 PM
I think it's funny how stupid people are convinced film is only ever entertainment. Enjoy your bread and circuses.
Lazarus
Jan 1 2006, 05:30 AM
Wow that was rather harsh. I was going to say something about people cutting other people down with quick, snappy blanket statements, but nah. I guess I'll go back to my cheese sandwich and watch my Ringling Brothers DVD.
mmu1
Jan 1 2006, 08:27 AM
QUOTE (Arethusa @ Dec 31 2005, 05:05 AM) |
Regardless, I have seen Syriana, and that is a movie absolutely everyone needs to see. And it's even good if you already know a lot about oil the history and current status of the Middle East. Though, I must say, looking at either of these movies as Shadowrun games strikes me rather distasteful. |
Must you? So who is looking at these movies as SR games? I believe that I simply posted that the movie had a lot of elements you'd expect to see in a SR game... and left it there, since this isn't the time or place to get into real-world politics.
And as far as Syriana goes... I don't think I've ever seen a movie that was so well filmed and acted, and at the same time, such an utter failure as entertainment. I'm able and willing to read, I don't need a director to preach at me for two hours in what he pretends is a movie. (something Spielberg is also often guilty of, but I generally find enough redeeming features in his movies)
Cynic project
Jan 1 2006, 09:25 AM
Like his inability to have a even remotely sad ending?
hyzmarca
Jan 1 2006, 09:58 AM
QUOTE (Cynic project) |
Like his inability to have a even remotely sad ending? |
Two words for you, AI. If that wasn't a sad ending I don't know what qualifies.
Shadowrunners and everyone else should take one thing away from Munich (and all the other movies based on the same events). Don't fuck with the Israelies.
RunnerPaul
Jan 1 2006, 10:05 AM
QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
Two words for you, AI. |
To be nitpicky, those are letters, not words.
Arethusa
Jan 1 2006, 05:14 PM
QUOTE (mmu1 @ Jan 1 2006, 04:27 AM) |
Must you? So who is looking at these movies as SR games? I believe that I simply posted that the movie had a lot of elements you'd expect to see in a SR game... and left it there, since this isn't the time or place to get into real-world politics.
And as far as Syriana goes... I don't think I've ever seen a movie that was so well filmed and acted, and at the same time, such an utter failure as entertainment. I'm able and willing to read, I don't need a director to preach at me for two hours in what he pretends is a movie. (something Spielberg is also often guilty of, but I generally find enough redeeming features in his movies) |
You came close enough to make me a little uncomfortable, but I mostly said that in response to to some of the stuff people said later.
And for Syriana, where, exactly, is it written that film must be entertaining? And I hardly found it didactic. If anything, it does a remarkable job expressly avoiding such witless structure (something I wish, for example, Spielberg had found himself capable of past the first 15 minutes of Saving Private Ryan).
PBTHHHHT
Jan 3 2006, 07:18 PM
QUOTE (Arethusa) |
You came close enough to make me a little uncomfortable, but I mostly said that in response to to some of the stuff people said later.
And for Syriana, where, exactly, is it written that film must be entertaining? And I hardly found it didactic. If anything, it does a remarkable job expressly avoiding such witless structure (something I wish, for example, Spielberg had found himself capable of past the first 15 minutes of Saving Private Ryan). |
What is wrong with looking at the movies and recognizing elements that can be used in a Shadowrun game? I know what the material is about and I'm also respectful for what it's trying to tell us. However, you're on the shadowrun forums, people will be thinking about thing shadowrun related regardless. If you don't like that, well, don't let it get to you. Second is that people use outside materials for resource materials. Sure we can use movies and other outlandish stuff from fiction for uses in shadowrun, but there's also stuff from real life situations too. In SOTA '64, they are going more for the political spy craft game. The shadowrun world in the Shadows of Asia covers about middle east, some stuff about governments, other organizations, some of which are likely inspired by real life. In the extreme interpretation of what you've said, why shouldn't we look at the materials for srun inspiration?
That's impossible to prevent people from doing so. To say that it's disrespectful, well, I can name so many other things then that we should not look at then also because it might be disrespectful for some group or some individual. I think Syriana is a great movie to show how government, politics, corporations and other elements might work together in something to prevent something from happening. That said, I enjoyed Syriana not because it's 'entertaining', but because of what it tries to tell us. How easily things can be for those said elements to collude. But you can't say that it can't be used in Shadowrun, oh no, that's perfect for what I've said along with the sourcebooks that have been released.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.