Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mayberry Lounge' started by Dragonlordxxxxx, Jul 20, 2016.
I'm OK with it as long as they treat the Pokemon humanely.
Ryan Reynolds as a live action Pikachu....
I don't mean to sound crass, but on what level exactly? The Pokemon level? The Ryan Reynolds level? The level where you're excited as a parent because your kids are huge fans? Don't get me wrong. I love the Pokemon. And that week when Pokemon Go was a thing? People left their houses and went outside. There was sunshine. A friendly community of activity. It seemed like a heaven before this hell wherein Trump got into office and everything became either a natural disaster, complete social upheaval, and the exact opposite of everything you ever wanted. But I digress.
Like you -- even if any of these levels excited me, this .... this whatever it is .... is sheer confusion. Live-action Pokemon? But Pikachu is barely more than a pentagon. Why do we need performance capture for a literal shape? Let alone a topline actor doing it? I don't understand anything that's going on?
Why do you need an a list actor to play a character who can only say his name ?
Why does Pikachu need to carry this CAN actor? Wonder who he bent over for to get the role..
They ruined the movie with the casting.
Should have got the guy from SuperBad..
It's mainly a nostalgia thing for me. As a youngin' I was a huge fan of Pokemon, and like most 90's kids it played a big part in my childhood.
As I've gotten older my interest has obviously dwindled, but this being the first live-action Pokemon movie is what interests me the most, even if it doesn't seem like a traditional Pokemon movie. I'm curious to see how they pull it off because I have a hard time picturing it.
My daughter is a bit too young to grasp the concept of Pokemon at the moment, but by the time this comes out she will be old enough where I can take her to see it at the cinema, and it won't seem so weird going to see it as an adult lol.
Let's hope there's a little bit of this: