[Image, link, or media — original content no longer available]
Micah’s pick is gonna be great, and so is mine. I expect no one to argue his and many to argue mine.
Nick, you’re killing us here, i cant wait for this to start, it’s another slow day at work and this draft is the best thing to happen since i put in my letter of resignation. i had edited my last post on the the replies to the second draft and must have missed it by mere moments. i’ll just have to get to chud faster next time
Quote:
| Nick Nunziata -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Carl Cunningham So, what happens when someone chooses “C.H.U.D.”, which would effectively kill this entire draft? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No, we’d just be surfing on CHOMPS.com. Cinematic Happenings: Our Motion Picture Site. |
This man is a GENIOUS!!
quote:
Originally posted by Kirby Drummond
And Slater, again, things make sense.
Isn’t it cool when that happens?
That’s actually pretty funny.
I’m still in shock that “Shakespeare in Love” was chosen. I would have thought that film would either be under everyone’s radar or actually be a film people chose to support. Then again, my major in college was English Lit with a focus on Shakespeare, so I found that film to be very enjoyable (despite some flaws).
And Z, I’m sure you are aware that the writer of “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead”, Tom Stoppard, was one of the writers for “Shakespeare in Love”. That may be why certain turns of phrase ring pleasingly in thine ear. Or something.
And I guess I’m one of the few people who thinks Terminator was superior to its sequel. *sighs*
Anyone who thinks T2 is better than The Terminator is really whack.
I though you were Mr. Cool, Kirbs.
You misspelled “wack,” man.
That ain’t cool.
That ain’t cool at all.
I always waver on the “wack” spelling. I’m not sure if there’s a definitive spelling. I guess it comes from “wacky” but then I’ve also heard it was derived from “whack” as well. Educate me.
Well, wacky comes from whack so I think either spelling is acceptable.
Nick’s next pick IS good. But unlike him I can’t imagine too much debate over it.
Quote:
| Originally posted by Kirby Drummond I always waver on the “wack” spelling. I’m not sure if there’s a definitive spelling. I guess it comes from “wacky” but then I’ve also heard it was derived from “whack” as well. Educate me. |
All the reason you need to never use the one with an “h” in it:
Tobacco is Whacko.
Good christ, Goldberg. You realize that your pick means we also have no WALKEN.
You’re insane Goldberg. Killing two masterpieces just so that a studio could survive. Pfeh.
And the picture you put up is perfect. Just looking at that still makes my stomach clench and I get all anxious. Amazing film.
Gotta roll wit’ the crowd here, Matt. Insanely wrong pick there.
Quote:
| Originally posted by Guttenberg Fan Club Good christ, Goldberg. You realize that your pick means we also have no WALKEN. |
Walken’s a SURVIVOR. The man can do anything, any film, and walk out without a scratch.
And Blunt, both those films are far crys from “masterpiece” and I think saving UA and saving the artistic integrity of young directors is well worth the price of offing such boring, pointless, self-involved, trite film.
even though i dont go out of my way to watch this movie again, i own it but really have a hard time sitting down for such a heart break of a movie, it should have made it. the russian roulette at the end is past a classic scene and it’s emotions run deeper than almost anything since. it’s a shame to see it go
Quote:
| Originally posted by Matt Goldberg boring, pointless, self-involved, trite film. |
Wrong. in. the. head.
Quote:
| Originally posted by Micah Robinson Gotta roll wit’ the crowd here, Matt. Insanely wrong pick there. |
Maybe we can talk it over at an hour-long wedding scene which still fails to make its characters interesting.