Lawrence of Arabia? Yeah, he got killed in a motorcycle accident when he was only 46 years old.
What were you trying to say?
What were you trying to say?
Mad Max: Fury Road Comic-con trailer
- Thread starter WorstUsernameEver
- Start date
it only happend because he tried to avoid a 2-headed lizard. Oh boy Alec 
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
I wasn't trying to ~say~ anything, I was trying to get you to, and you did; my point is proved.Lawrence of Arabia? Yeah, he got killed in a motorcycle accident when he was only 46 years old.
What were you trying to say?
*You'd know this if you had read further down the wiki article.
The answer you've given is a lot more telling than you might expect; and sure, he had the misfortune to die in a mundane traffic accident, but that was almost a cosmic joke... as if Achilles had survived, returned home, and died on a rusty nail in his yard.
Last edited:
He did what other humans do in life: fart around. And then he died a stupid death as do so many. He also helped shape the East to what it is today and is therefore responsible for all the crap originating in that region like, say, terrorism. He's no hero. He's a poster boy for governments. Somewhat asinine to assume that he is anything like what was depicted in Lawrence of Arabia or even how he depicted himself in his books. Literature is all about lying.
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
Thank you, you've expanded upon the earlier proof ~which was nothing about TE Laurence. As to the movie [Mad Max]... well I will be shocked if it exceeds any of the original three in anything except excess and profit.
I am dieing to learn what your actuall point is here Gizmo - no I really do! I love to read your stuff and thoughts.
He doesn't have a point, I thought that was painfully obvious. He's just really pissed that I am right and he is wrong, so he choose the 'Ha, I got you!' routine. He forgets that I've been on these boards for more than a decade. If he really had a point, he'd do what all other human mongrels out there do: explain it in full detail and boast about how intelligent his scheme was.
Last edited:
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
No... my point has been your last three posts.
*Although when I [first] mentioned TE Lawrence it was simply a response to your comment about a "realistic picture of what a normal mortal can cope with". The train wrecks they caused, some are still there.
But then your answers started to come in; and each one seemed more petulant [to me] than the last, and so I let them come ~to prove a point. When I had asked about TE Lawrence, it seemed to me that a person would either know or not know, and if they knew, then they would understand; if not, then they would look it up ~and then understand...to have read even just the wiki should have made it obvious. He survived several large battles and a plane crash that killed both pilots (and who knows what else ~unreported)... But you responded with quick summary of the first paragraph of his wiki page, and seemed not to understand why I would have mentioned him in response to your post... worse, you made the answer seem like you knew it already ~and his age at the time of death; but if you knew, then why seize on the mundane circumstance of his death in a traffic accident and [feign?] obliviousness to why he should be mentioned at all? Was it just because Max and some of the others had miraculously (and fictionally) survived crashes but that Lawrence was killed by one?
Throughout the [Mad Max] films, max always seemed human; though he was the hero (and was safe), he never seemed protected... not in the way that Jason Statham [Transporter] or John Wayne seems protected, and lets watch the new film and see if we don't see a scene vaguely similar to this somewhere in it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnceaTY15EQ
This is what I'm hoping we get spared, but it's what I think the industry considers ~wanted. IMO the best they could do is to use CGI when they must, but only minimally, and to simulate a real danger that a stunt driver should not risk for a movie... but not to sensationalize the event into the realm of the nearly surreal ~simply because it's CGI and they can. Those stunts in Mad Max were impressive because there was no CGI, and a lot of it was done at great personal risk; those same stunts re-done with [impeccable] CGI would probably not come off quite as impressive. Surely no one was impressed with the Transporter scene of removing the bomb with the crane hook.
*Although when I [first] mentioned TE Lawrence it was simply a response to your comment about a "realistic picture of what a normal mortal can cope with". The train wrecks they caused, some are still there.
But then your answers started to come in; and each one seemed more petulant [to me] than the last, and so I let them come ~to prove a point. When I had asked about TE Lawrence, it seemed to me that a person would either know or not know, and if they knew, then they would understand; if not, then they would look it up ~and then understand...to have read even just the wiki should have made it obvious. He survived several large battles and a plane crash that killed both pilots (and who knows what else ~unreported)... But you responded with quick summary of the first paragraph of his wiki page, and seemed not to understand why I would have mentioned him in response to your post... worse, you made the answer seem like you knew it already ~and his age at the time of death; but if you knew, then why seize on the mundane circumstance of his death in a traffic accident and [feign?] obliviousness to why he should be mentioned at all? Was it just because Max and some of the others had miraculously (and fictionally) survived crashes but that Lawrence was killed by one?
Throughout the [Mad Max] films, max always seemed human; though he was the hero (and was safe), he never seemed protected... not in the way that Jason Statham [Transporter] or John Wayne seems protected, and lets watch the new film and see if we don't see a scene vaguely similar to this somewhere in it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnceaTY15EQ
This is what I'm hoping we get spared, but it's what I think the industry considers ~wanted. IMO the best they could do is to use CGI when they must, but only minimally, and to simulate a real danger that a stunt driver should not risk for a movie... but not to sensationalize the event into the realm of the nearly surreal ~simply because it's CGI and they can. Those stunts in Mad Max were impressive because there was no CGI, and a lot of it was done at great personal risk; those same stunts re-done with [impeccable] CGI would probably not come off quite as impressive. Surely no one was impressed with the Transporter scene of removing the bomb with the crane hook.
Last edited:
mhmm, you defintely have a point here your serene Highness, I have to bow down to your logic Mr. Alec and recognize your incredible intelect. But, much to my shame, I have to admit sir, that you made a very tiny, but nonetheless very important, mistake:
Gizmo, with all respect of course, is not your typical human mongrel, your highness. As he managed to amuse the plebs at the court, and beat a many knights! And slaying the trolls. Exceptional even! one might say. If even ol mighty twinkie was very impressed by him, and you know how hard it is to impress him, then this means something! I am sure.
*Edit, I was not disappointed!
Last edited: