- Welcome to Badmovies.org Forum.
Recent posts
#1
Off Topic Discussion / Re: How's the weather?
Last post by Alex - Today at 11:27:40 AMAlmost twenty years ago we went through a period of having incredibly warm February's, which were then followed by very cold and wet summers. Happened three years in a row.
Hopefully, you aren't in for the same thing.
Hopefully, you aren't in for the same thing.
#2
Bad Movies / Re: How many of these Dracula'...
Last post by zombie no.one - Today at 11:24:32 AMI could be fooled into thinking that photo of Gary Oldman (G5) is actually Jonny Depp...
#3
Bad Movies / Re: have I bought a bad movie ...
Last post by Alex - Today at 11:24:25 AMJust out of curiosity, does it have an age rating on it?
#4
Off Topic Discussion / Re: Alex's even longer post th...
Last post by Alex - Today at 11:17:10 AMSo problems only wargamers and model collectors have.
Please note, that unless you have a thing for certain tanks nothing below will be of any interest to you. You've been warned.
Recently, someone at the gaming club on camp was talking about doing a large (6000 points per player. Most games of Bolt Action go to 1000-1250 points) game, which got me curious as to just how big an army I could make. Since I have more Germans (and what WW2 gamer doesn't?) than any other nation, I figured I'd start with them. Yeah, I made 6000 points just with my infantry. No tanks, no transports, no artillery, not even a light mortar or medium machine gun etc. Last night I decided to look at the vehicles and support weapons side of things. I discovered I have more King Tigers (Tiger II), than Tiger tanks (3 to 2). The Germans made somewhere between 1400 to 1500 Tiger I's and iirc less than 500 King Tigers (compare this to a bit shy of 50,000 Shermans made by the USA or nearly 60,000 T-34's made by the Soviet Union). Anyway, my brain went like this:
First thought: We need another Tiger to make up the numbers.
Second thought: No, Tigers outnumbered King Tigers 3:1, you need to buy 7 more Tigers for the correct historical ratio.
Third thought: No, you need to buy a grand total of 2,000 Tigers and King Tigers in the correct ratio to represent their numbers accurately.
At that point I stepped in and overruled the mental conversation with a I'll go with the first thought, maybe. That's it, no more! I am not sure just how much space 2,000 1:56 scale tanks would take up (beyond the answer a lot). My brain wants to start working it out, but I'm holding the veto there and refusing to even consider working it out despite the relatively simple maths. I mean, what if having established those numbers the same internal voice then decides, well you have these tanks accurately, but what about all the other types of tanks that were used? Maybe I'd get away with it because the Tiger is most likely the most iconic tank of all time, it might be satisfied with just that one type, but I don't think it's something I really want to find out.
No. Just no.
I swear it is almost as bad as when Kristi has a conversation with me, but supplies both sides.
I do not need that many tanks. They'd never get used in a game. Hell, I have more infantry than I need already and do not feel the need to field enough soldiers to represent the entire Wermacht and Waffen SS.
Please note, that unless you have a thing for certain tanks nothing below will be of any interest to you. You've been warned.
Recently, someone at the gaming club on camp was talking about doing a large (6000 points per player. Most games of Bolt Action go to 1000-1250 points) game, which got me curious as to just how big an army I could make. Since I have more Germans (and what WW2 gamer doesn't?) than any other nation, I figured I'd start with them. Yeah, I made 6000 points just with my infantry. No tanks, no transports, no artillery, not even a light mortar or medium machine gun etc. Last night I decided to look at the vehicles and support weapons side of things. I discovered I have more King Tigers (Tiger II), than Tiger tanks (3 to 2). The Germans made somewhere between 1400 to 1500 Tiger I's and iirc less than 500 King Tigers (compare this to a bit shy of 50,000 Shermans made by the USA or nearly 60,000 T-34's made by the Soviet Union). Anyway, my brain went like this:
First thought: We need another Tiger to make up the numbers.
Second thought: No, Tigers outnumbered King Tigers 3:1, you need to buy 7 more Tigers for the correct historical ratio.
Third thought: No, you need to buy a grand total of 2,000 Tigers and King Tigers in the correct ratio to represent their numbers accurately.
At that point I stepped in and overruled the mental conversation with a I'll go with the first thought, maybe. That's it, no more! I am not sure just how much space 2,000 1:56 scale tanks would take up (beyond the answer a lot). My brain wants to start working it out, but I'm holding the veto there and refusing to even consider working it out despite the relatively simple maths. I mean, what if having established those numbers the same internal voice then decides, well you have these tanks accurately, but what about all the other types of tanks that were used? Maybe I'd get away with it because the Tiger is most likely the most iconic tank of all time, it might be satisfied with just that one type, but I don't think it's something I really want to find out.
No. Just no.
I swear it is almost as bad as when Kristi has a conversation with me, but supplies both sides.
I do not need that many tanks. They'd never get used in a game. Hell, I have more infantry than I need already and do not feel the need to field enough soldiers to represent the entire Wermacht and Waffen SS.
#5
Bad Movies / Re: Generate Movie Poster with...
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 11:10:19 AMUgh, Copilot the prude refused to make "The Psychedelectable World of L. S. Dee," then made a tame poster when I removed the word "naughty" from the request but blocked it before I could download it. I get the need to be careful given that Musk's Grok is churning out actual kiddie porn, but jeez, let's not go overboard, guys. (It also refused to make the sequel "Mrs. Tetsuo," which is more understandable because of copyright, even though it previously allowed me to make multiple "Eraserhead" sequels).
I like that it threw in a hippie-love-bus for no reason.
I like that it threw in a hippie-love-bus for no reason.
#6
Games / Re: Answer the question with a...
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 10:32:56 AM
Which side will win the battle?
#7
Games / Re: Movie Title Chains
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 10:30:21 AMFast Times at Ridgemont High
#8
Bad Movies / Re: Antonio Margheriti & The J...
Last post by Trevor - Today at 10:07:23 AMQuote from: LordGraal on Today at 08:31:43 AMQuote from: Trevor on Today at 01:41:10 AMPity they didn't include TIGER JOE in this collection.
That's more a Namsploitation movie. These three are Raiders rip-offs.
I got you. 😊👍🐢
#9
Entertainment / Re: What have you been listeni...
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 10:00:30 AM
Eh.
#10
Good Movies / Re: Recent theatrical viewings
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 09:17:46 AMI figured. 
EPIC: Elvis Presley in Concert: It begins with a quick documentary overview of Elvis' career through the period where his movie career ended, then segues into a series of previously unseen Las Vegas performances with the King at the height of his showmanship, intercut with rehearsals and interviews. Baz Luhrman atones for his limp "Elvis" biopic with this peppy, smartly-edited concert documentary that oozes charisma. 3.5/5.
EPIC: Elvis Presley in Concert: It begins with a quick documentary overview of Elvis' career through the period where his movie career ended, then segues into a series of previously unseen Las Vegas performances with the King at the height of his showmanship, intercut with rehearsals and interviews. Baz Luhrman atones for his limp "Elvis" biopic with this peppy, smartly-edited concert documentary that oozes charisma. 3.5/5.