Riku21Terr

At the end of this survey in the "Anything else you would like us to know" section, tell them that they should have James Spader voice Xehanort: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/8L8WHJR

At the end of this survey in the "Anything else you would like us to know" section, tell them that they should have James Spader voice Xehanort: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/8L8WHJR

At the end of this survey in the "Anything else you would like us to know" section, tell them that they should have James Spader voice Xehanort: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/8L8WHJR

Christopher Lloyd is Dr emmett Brown of Back to the Future! Which btw i should add we are currently living in the year that Back to the Future Part II is set in! He and Frank Welker would be good choices to replace Leonard Nimoy (Please, NO Corey Burton). But if the following guy did the voice, it would be pheonomenal: JAMES SPADER aka ULTRON! Serioously, Watch this trailer for Age of Ultron: I can REALLY hear him as Xehanort! Imagine his voice saying "These lifeless keys used to be full of power"

Be the best version of myself that I can be

I know I do not come on often but i will try to participate more in the site. You guys have been good to me and you desrve mor active participation from me

Divergent fans, With a little less than one month till the Insurgent movie, we need to make sure that it does well enough to warrant the 2-Part Allegiant movie and Four spin-off film. Divergent’s movie was successful enough, and although the series is in a fairly safe boat, we cannot get cocky and assume that Insurgent’s movie will necessarily be a success. I have personally learned the hard way more times than I care to admit to NEVER assume anything; I cannot even begin to tell you how much I have suffered through assuming things. As it stands, there are many factors that could lead to Insurgent not doing that well: 1) While Divergent’s movie was successful, it got fairly low critical reviews. If Insurgent gets around the same score or lower, then the series could be hindered. A lot of audiences including those that did read the books really liked it and gave it high scores, but there are quite a few who did not like it. 2) It opens a week after Cinderella (at least in North America). With Cinderella being a very popular Disney Princess, and it including a Frozen short film, there could be damage done to Insurgent’s success, particularly among the core female audience. As well, Chappie also opens two weeks before, which could take away the potential core dystopian audience. Furious 7 opens two weeks later and those movies are quite popular. Home also opens one week later, and it is a family and kids movie from DreamWorks, whose movies have always been doing fairly well. 3) Divergent’s movie was not a huge hit. Compared to its low budget, which I think Insurgent has the exact same total of, or perhaps a bit more, it did well, but it only grossing $280mil could mean that audiences did not like it THAT much. Then again, there are others like myself who did not see the first movie in theatres/have become new fans of the series, which is still very popular in book form. But even if there are book fans, unless they can accept the differences between book to film and look at the movie as its own thing, then the movies may not do that well. The first movie was pretty loyal to the book, and the second/onwards is promised to be just as much or possibly more as well, but will it be enough? 4) The Insurgent book and others in the series onwards do not seem to be as popular as Divergent’s, which is part of what made Narnia Prince Caspian’s movie not do so well. As well, some fans have actually told me that they think the Allegiant movies will suck if they do NOT change it because of the sad SPOILER that happens. But if the movies are never made, how will they know if it will be changed? As well, it seems as though a lot of 2nd installments run the high risk of discontinuing series as of late. After all, look at The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Its series is now discontinued and we are getting ANOTHER Spider-Man reboot. 5) Some may still look at Divergent as just a Hunger Games knock off, and with Mockingjay Part 1 having a slightly lower gross and critical praise than Catching Fire; it may mean that the dystopian future craze could be diminishing. Now, while we do need people to go and see it, we cannot be harassing towards them. We need to let them know about it casually without making it seem like we are forcing them to. Try talking to people/making posts about the movie in the following ways within a casual and not excessive tone: - Express general excitement about the movie, and why you love the series so much. - Express the differences between it and Hunger Games and what it has to offer; do not have an “it’s better” argument. A good tip is to express the themes of belonging and one’s identity that are strong, intimate and universal themes that all can relate to. - Show them Divergent (if possible, pay for it through On Demand services, or buy the movie on DVD/Blu Ray if you do not have it already or even buy a new copy and give it to friends as a gift). Perhaps offer to treat them to the Insurgent movie if possible. - Another thing to note too is that the Mocking Jay Part 1 Blu ray which comes out on March 6 contains a sneak peak of Insurgent. If you know any Hunger Games fans, please tell them about that/possibly buy the Blu ray for them - Another good tip is, if it is possible, when going to the movie, do not buy anything other than the ticket and convince others to do so too. I know that it is a part of one’s movie going experience, but it seems like the excessive buying is what is making people so picky about going to see movies in general. If they have less to spend, then they will more likely go. - Of course, try to see the movie as many times as you can, all in 3D if possible. If you or another do not like 3D, see it as early as possible to see the movie in non-3D, because the later the movie stays in theatres, the sooner it gets rid of the non-3D show times (at least at my theatres). - Perhaps put together a slideshow, video etc. explaining to people why they should see it. Make it personal and relatable to them specifically i.e. if they are similar to a character or have gone through similar thematic elements/experiences etc. Remember, we cannot “make” people go see Insurgent, but we can “help” them. Try your own ideas too and see what works ☺ 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj4AR1ph700

THE KHRP is giving us an opportunity to request what we want to see in his newest video for his ambitious project. Watch here for more info: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj4AR1ph700

Please check this out if you love the Spider-Man movies:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5nNx3rLEVE&spfreload=10

Guys, if you want to support the remaining movies, please check this out:

thanks hey i was just drawing too! Recreating pictures from my childhood that i through out quite stupidly years ago

I am surprisingly not sad by the loss of people that I have worked with before.

dont cha wanna read about yourself, Tiger? For anyone that cares, there is a petition here to keep Garfield as Spidey, which as I've pointed out above could work out with Marvel's plans for Spider-man. Please sign and share for us fans who care: https://www.change.org/p/keep-andrew-garfield-as-spider-man-don-t-replace-andrew-garfield-as-spider-man

Thank you could you please explain HOW my comparisons are flat? The ASM & MCU films are both doing the shared universe model in a very similar way; as most have pointed out, there are straight comparisons between Iron Man 2, and ASM2 in both story and how they are focused on franchise building. Same with my comparisons between Captain America First Avenger and this film.

Andrew Garfield IS Spider-man: https://www.change.org/p/keep-andrew-garfield-as-spider-man-don-t-replace-andrew-garfield-as-spider-man

Are the ASM movies REALLY that bad? To be honest, I personally found that they were more focused in vision and more coherent as an actual movie way more than most of the MCU, especially the last 3 leading up to Avengers. Those felt waaaaay more like they were franchise building than telling an actual story. The first Captain america in particular felt more like it was a spin off, with way too many references to Thor and Iron Man that distracted from the over all focus of what the film was. Now I LOVE cross overs to pieces, but what makes cross overs so special and exciting is that YOU DO NOT KNOW EVERY LITTLE DETAIL OF HOW THEY ARE CONNECTED! Seriously, by the time we get to Avengers WE ALREADY KNOW THAT THEY ARE PART OF ONE UNIVERSE! Don't get me wrong, Avengers is still a spectacular treat, but I mean, we have already had "Crossover" elements be established in the previous films. With nick Fury showing up at the end of EVERY movie pretty much it gets derivative and repetitive. I personally cannot look at these movies as their own thing, and it makes my head spin with all of these distracting connections that regardless of whether they relate to the story or not, it just does not seem like I am watching an actual movie. I know that since they are part of a universe that there needs to be connections, and from a business perspective it makes sense, and I do know that connections like these happened in the comics and in the TV shows, but its gotten to the point where its ridiculous and again, I am personally shocked that people gave ASM2 such crap when the MCU has given us mostly sub parr movies so far. Business notwithstanding, perhaps its the audience who could be wrong. Maybe (most of) the MCU movies are in reality "bad" and people are just going to see them because they are different, and yet when another movie/studio tries to copy its model, people trash it even if it may be more well done. Fact is, the only reason why IM2 perhaps did better than this one was because it came first and because unfortunately, the ASM movies while doing (most) things better than the Raimi films, they got crap because despite living in an age where things are repetitive and to quote a You tube comment made to me, "That's the type of world we live in", people cannot accept the fact that things are repetitive. They play the SAME COD game (or any type of popular video game and or sport for that matter), do the SAME thing pretty much every day of their lives, whether it be the SAME task, or having the SAME conversation EVERY time you run into someone, and yet the cannot accept formulaic style of film making. Yes, they could have been more creative and certainly done some things very differently, but there is only so much one can do. Things need to be recycled or rebooted, thats whats keeping the entertainment (and quite frankly, our own real life) world alive. If it were not for that, then society, like the days of the cavemen, would have died out long ago. You do realize that we just as easily could have stayed savage and caveman like to this very day, it was just one's choice in the past to evolve and change. Getting back on topic, While the MCU certainly did some things better than the ASM movies, I personally found that they stayed, for the most part on course, instead of being sprinkled with codas and references like the MCU films did. To speak of the criticism about the movie: - People complained about the "cliff hanger" ending: Well, fyi some of the MCU films had waaay more of a bigger cliff hanger ending with their codas and stingers. Even with or without. The first CA, first Thor, even the second Captain America had more of a "cliff hanger" ending than ASM2 did. ASM2's ending actually tied itself quite well, successfully combining set up with a natural end. I mean, book ends do not ALWAYS work, but in this case it was neat to see the movie ending and beginning with the Rhino battle. Thats actually one of the main things that i liked about ASM2: It actually showed what life is generally like for Spider-Man as opposed to other superhero movies, including the past spider-man movies, being more "plotty" only focusing on plot. The Rhino is a villain for hire, he is supposed to be portrayed as hammy, and he connected well to the overall plot and theme of Oscorp's involvement and set up S6 well for the type of villains that Spidey will be facing, let alone showing the problems that he faces every day of his life. He was also a very deliciously fun character to enjoy by a great character actor As well, you already basically know that spider-man is going to bust him and eventually defeat the S6, right? My younger brother already knows that. - "Too much on franchise building" - I've already done my piece on that above. Again, going to Rhino, or even Electro's involvement in the film, there is more to a movie than just its story. Not to contradict what I said about MCU, but MCU constantly referencing across the universe is getting rather dull and annoying and to the point where it takes you out of the movie. Electro was a brilliant villain in this movie; he showed what Spider-man could have been like without all of the support. Both are outcast losers who are mistreated by people that get these great powers. Personally, Electro's motivation is one of the best motivations I have ever seen in a villain. Would you not go crazy with people treating you like *beep* all the time when you try so hard and get into situations that you have no control over? He was just as effective or more and had a reason to be in the story as much as Lizard in the first movie. Heck, Lizard's motivations were more poorly executed /not clearly explained than Electro's. - "Why didn't Peter give Harry his blood" - this is one of those things that makes me question the intelligence of the audience, as in "thinking critically" about it, it was made quite clear, even to those who have not seen the first movie just how dangerous it is to mix the DNA. The mentioned the Lizard events earlier in the film and as Spidey has all of these abilities, he also knows how unpredictable it would be to give to Harry. It shows care and compassion and that he is looking out for his friend. Plus, you saw how, albeit playfully Harry came off as a bit of a jerk to Peter, well peter knows that and since Connors came off as a bit of a jerk and went crazy in the first film, then Peter knows what could happen. He himself is a bit of a jerk but at least he actually tries to do the right thing and can control what he does unlike being able to control these other people. - "Too much of a focus on romance" - Well if you ask me, Raimi's movies were waaay too focused on romance. Pretty much all Peter Parker ever does in those movies is whine about MJ. At least in this film there is other things going on like the mystery of his parents, etc. For the record, Spidey got more screen time here than in SM3, and at least in Garfield's context, I believe that Peter and Spidey are actually the same person. In any case, he and Gwen share a real passion for each other and she is more than the damsel in distress. She actually has brains and gives him ideas that can help him ,especially in this film - "Peter parker is a jackass" - Peter Parker in this movie actually acts like a real teenager and in this context is more of an outsider that is still a nerd but who actually tries to fit in per this attitude (in case you have not noticed, most if not all people, especially those in high school, not to mention university, are perhaps bigger *beep* than what Peter is here. Like Uncle Ben said in the first movie, they were stupid and reckless and grew up to be smart and wise. Its a cliched pun, yes but it is indeed true. Garifield's spider-man can crow up to be a great, wise leader of the Avengers that could even help the other heroes see things in themselves to make them bigger people. Its his experiences being reckless that will teach him otherwise. Besides, this is how they explained young Charles grew up to be Patrick Stewart in the X-Men films. Garfiel'd spider-man, to quote a review that I have read, is made on a similar style to the MCU films: "it is what a Spider-Man movie would look like if Marvel Studios made it, basically — by which I mean the tone, the “living, breathing comic book” quality, the humor and charisma and chemistry of the cast, is all here. It’s what you get when you combine the best elements of Raimi’s Spider-Man 2 — namely, its comic book sensibilities plus quality villain portrayal and imaginative, vibrantly colorful action sequences and lovely cityscapes — with the best elements of Webb’s The Amazing Spider-Man — meaning very faithful to the comics, great performances from actors who really encapsulate the characters perfectly, a Spidey who is lifted right off the comic pages in the way he looks and moves and speaks, and an attempt to actually tell a more complex story with honest emotions. Several other reviews complain that the story was muddled, or that it’s just a CGI-fest, or that there are too many villains, or that it tries to do too much, and to all of that I just have to say, “Wrong!” I really am not sure why anyone would think the story is muddled. It’s a nicely complicated (ahem) web that all ties together in the end, there are a few good twists that add to Spidey’s origin, and it’s all going somewhere in the future, too. There are reasons, in other words, for everything that happens, and even seemingly minor elements end up mattering. Plus there’s some nice character-building going on — even Aunt May has an arc and some changes in her life to deal with. "- http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhughes/2014/05/01/review-amazing-spide r-man-2-is-the-spider-man-weve-been-waiting-for/ In life, we all deserve another chance. I'd like to point out that most thought that the first two Harry Potters, especially number 2, were not that good and then they got a new director for the third which "fixed" it and made it better for a broader audience. Whats to say that the same thing cannot be done here? The baggage would actually attract a larger audience. After all, one of the main reasons why these ASM movies have not done so well is because of people not liking the reboots and preferring the originals. Well, the same thing is going to happen here. A friend of mine to this day still refuses to watch the ASM movies and likely will never watch another spider-man movie because of her love for the Maguire movies. Another thought it was “too early” for there to be a new spider-man movie. Judging by the financial success of the ASM films, most people seem to feel the same way The way that the ASM movies were left, with Peter no longer having a love interest, could tie into what Marvel wants to do with the character. University is a time with even greater and challenging responsibilities than in high school, and those things were the elements that were portrayed well with the 2nd Raimi Spider-man, which is considered by many to be the greatest superhero movie of all time. The baggage would benefit the movie, as it would add even more fans and interest that would also increase revenue for Sony and marvel because of the connections Besides, they could always do like First Class and "soft reboot" the series, where they keep some continuity but retcon some other things. They do not have to keep referencing things, and as pointed out before, they can just say that Spider-man busted the Rhino and then the S6 plan changed which could tie into Hydra or Civil War/Infinity War. Disney actually owns some of the merchandising rights to the ASM movies, so they already own the movie in a way. For the record, they continued a franchise that was made by another studio when they bought distribution rights to the MCU. Yes, Paramount & Universal were only distributing, while Marvel Studios was actually producing the film, but regardless, one can tell that the Marvel films released after Disney’s purchase seem to have a different overall feel to them. In essence, the studio involved with distributing the movies have as much say or more than the actual production company. On that note, while Marvel was not as directly involved in the Spider-Man films, many key marvel players like head Kevin Fiege (who is also involved as a main producer on Fox’s upcoming Marvel Deadpool movie) were involved with the movies, even after starting the MCU. The opening credits of Spider-Man 3 list a “Marvel Studios” production as opposed to a “Marvel Entertainment” Production which is what is credited for ALL other non MCU Marvel films. Even if starting over in a new continuity, Andrew can still reprise his role. Sony’s own other top franchise, the James Bond films, have featured Judi Dench reprising her role as M in the rebooted Bond films, when she had previously portrayed the character in the Pierce Bronson films. Her character’s name in the Bronson films was Barbara Mawdsley, whereas in Daniel Craig’s rebooted movies, her name is Olivia Mundsfield. Although just a voice, Peter Cullen reprised his role as optimus prime in most if not all incarnations of Transformers, even those that have different continuity and timeline from the rest. To anyone reading this, please consider what I have said. For once, please think naturally towards what you think about these movies instead of just going by what the majority says. Thank you for your time and have a wonderful day

Please check this out, its NOT done by me btw: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/472/153/437/

Xehanort Saga on one console: http://xbox.uservoice.com/forums/251647-gaming-achievements/suggestions/6166226-please-make-a-kingdom-hearts-awakening-collection

You may wanna check this out: http://xbox.uservoice.com/forums/251647-gaming-achievements/suggestions/6166226-please-make-a-kingdom-hearts-awakening-collection

Shailene Woodley is a very natural and versatile actress. She is able to make the most cliched roles relatable; as such when you see her perform these roles, you cannot help but fall in love with both her and her character, for she makes these roles seem fresh and realistic, as if a real person in that role would act (for example, her role as bookish nice girl Aimee in The Spectacular Now seems quite different from how that role would commonly be portrayed in most media, even those that like Spectacular Now strive to avoid the cliches in that the character seems like a real person that could very well be something more than just a "nerd"). This, among other amazing attributes that she conveys, makes her ideal for the role of Mary Jane in the Amazing Spider-Man movies. Her real life morals, especially those pertaining to there "being more to a person than just one thing" (very poignant for a superhero movie), staying true to oneself, and not suffering from temptation would provide a great appendix vesseled through a character. These morals would flow through the Amazing Spider-Man Movie Universe quite well with its already deep morals of identity, hope, humanity, and redemption, among others. The role as Mary Jane would offer her variety from her role in Divergent, as like Jennifer Lawrence with her Hunger Games & X-Men roles, she gets to play a kick ass leading protagonist in the former, and a major supporting character, who has just as much significance or even more, in the latter. J Law was able to get her scheduale to work out so she could play both roles, both of which are very different characters, and are what helped make her who she is today, her being well known to two franchises of different genres, added onto her already being famous among critics for her indy film roles. Shailene is following in a similar suit, and could have a similar deal made, as she is currently only doing the Divergent sequels, and they only take about 4-5 months; They could always make the Spider-Man filming scheduale so that her scenes get filmed first, like how they filmed Scarlett Johansson's Avengers: Age of Ultron scenes first in order to accomodate her pregnancy. This has similarly happened with most actors in Hollywood who take on multiple major roles, like how Robert Rodriguez was able to film Antonio Bandaras' scenes for the second Spy Kids first, completed in a week, as "he had to go and work on another movie", and how they got Kevin Spacey's Superman Returns scenes (of which he was almost in arguably more than the S-Man hiself) to accomodate his duties as a theatre director. Mutually, Jack Nicholson's movie scheduales have to always be accomodated so he can always attend a home game of his favourite basketball team. Her good friend and co star, Miles Teller, was able to accommodate filming so that he could star in the Fantastic Four Reboot, and reprise his supporting role as Peter in the Divergent sequel,The Divergent Series: Insurgent, when both were filmed in different States, in around the same scheduling time frame. The Amazing Spider-Man movies already have a terrific range of acting and great chemistry among the actors as one of its major highlights, of which is even greater than its already impressive action sequences. Shailene would make a great addition to the team, and coincidentally, she was already casted in the role, with the film makers and herself all stating that they LOVED working with her/together, so why let her go? If they keep her on, they can always reuse some of the footage shot for Amazing Spider-Man 2, like how they reused a deleted scene from The Avengers in Captain America: The Winter Solider, and some shots of Tortuga from the first Pirates of the Caribbean in the second one. This would save time and money. It helps that Shailene also looks the part, closely resembling MJ's looks in the comics and Ultimate Spider-Man cartoon (it, alongside the comics in which it is based on provides a huge inspiration for the Amazing Spider-Man films). Like MJ, Shailene is feisty and is never afraid to be herself, always challenging others just as much as she challenges her own, making others perhaps discover a way to make them better people. Mary Jane also believes in a lot of the same morals that Shailene conveys, whether she be an actress or news reporter, remaining true to her dignity, and her many aforementioned morals, showing in some of her iterations that she can be more than a damsel in distress. She could be a great help to Peter with these morals, and as Shailene is someone who naturally endulges in these morals, they will feel authentic, piercing not only Peter's heart and mindset, but the audience's too. Peter could always use someone who is lively and fun, especially with the frustration in his current life; Shailene has experienced this personality portrayed to her character in The Spectacular Now. It is now her turn to portray it, already having showcased some of that in her other roles. On that note, many fans have stated that her performance in The Fault in Our Stars proves that she can pull off the role of Mary Jane. Her role in Divergent also dictates that she can pull off the self defense fighting that MJ is known to have, which at times have helped Spider-Man defeat his enemies! Thank you for your consideration, and if would please sign and share the petition here, that would be greatly appreciated: https://www.change.org/en-CA/petitions/sony-keep-shailene-woodley-as-mary-jane-in-the-amazing-spider-man-movies

Would u n others not want them to take their time with KHIII? They should b trying to make EVERY GAME count and the best that it can possibly be. Looking at todays Yasue Article, I feel very angered that they cut out things from 2.5 in order to focus on getting 3 done faster. Yes it is just a collection, but what about those who do not have a DS and want to PLAY Re Coded? Those who can play BBS online instead of what KHRP describes as "co op, or local multiplayer". We coulda played a similar to COD version of Mirage Arena through the PS3's amazing online capabilities Online on PSP just does not cut it. I would also want 3D to b playable on a console too to at least play all MAJOR KH titles on one console. On that note, to quote KHRP, they shoulda had ALL titles be major and thus playable, So what if it takes longer? It will be WORTH it overall, even if it does mean replaying games. conisdering most other remastered collections were stated as "a joy to play again" like Legend of Zelda Orcarina of Time, etc. Good things come to those who wait, right?

You never know my friend, try telling that to all the other people who were recasted, most of which we have no idea why they were. some of which, like Tate donovan for KH1 were not really working on anything and perhaps wanted a break.