Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Indy Jones Movie

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    C'mon, Hammy, ol' buddy, climb in - we'll get there yet!!!!!!!!!
    Dude, I've been there for quite some time. You have some catching up to do . . .

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian
    replied
    Re: New Indy Jones Movie

    Originally posted by Marlow
    It will make a ton'o'money, but it is soooo exactly what-we've-seen-before. It's the Baby Boomers' edition of Indy. Everyone is old I keep cringing every time he fell - I was sure a hip was gonna go any second. I liked the Indy series, but this one was actually kinda sad, like when boxers hang on too long and just get pummeled.

    Iron Man was 20 times better than this.

    Non-boomers have neither the money nor the inclination to spend it on these things.

    Last few issues of Rolling Stone: covers had 1. Eagles; 2. Look back at 2007 montage; 3. Rolling Stones; and sometime before that, Springsteen.

    Still like RS, but simple economics: the cover image sells the mag and the covers are aimed at the folks with money to spend. Same with the "guarantee" of x-amount of $ in the first weekend to make a movie financially worth making.

    If in doubt, go "old."

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    I see that your transmogrification was not a progression towards enlightenment . . . :P


    C'mon, H(obbes)ammy, ol' buddy, climb in - we'll get there yet!!!!!!!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Did your ears ring when EVERYONE here all agreed I was right about the 1600/Mile thing??!! Ya shoulda been here - it was awesome!
    Yeah, I saw you beating that dead horse again. I see that your transmogrification was not a progression towards enlightenment . . . :P

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    http://www.newyorker.com/images/2008/05 ... 8_p465.gif

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Hey bad hammy, I thought you had given up on us - weren't you gone for a while? :wink:
    Had to show up to slap you around a bit . . .
    Aren't there plenty of those around already?!

    Did your ears ring when EVERYONE here all agreed I was right about the 1600/Mile thing??!! Ya shoulda been here - it was awesome!

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Hey bad hammy, I thought you had given up on us - weren't you gone for a while? :wink:
    Had to show up to slap you around a bit . . .

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by SQUACKEE
    Hey Mar, is this old Indy as pathetic has the last Sean Connery/007 movie with his toupee so obvious it was even funny?
    I actually LIKED that one! Connery has been bald going back to his later Bond days, it's OK. (he said, blatantly padding his post count total! :roll: )

    Hey bad hammy, I thought you had given up on us - weren't you gone for a while? :wink:

    Leave a comment:


  • SQUACKEE
    replied
    Hey Mar, is this old Indy as pathetic has the last Sean Connery/007 movie with his toupee so obvious it was even funny?

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    But I will do my part: Alan Webb - Winner or Loser??
    That depends. Is Gabe in the race?

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Well, at the time there was exactly one non-Marlow post, that coming about 90 minutes after he created the thread. Not exactly the most hyper-active post around here.

    But I will do my part: Alan Webb - Winner or Loser??

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Inflating post counts by propping up your own dead threads by replying to your own posts?? That's reminiscent of that tafnut guy who used to overpost here . . . .

    :lol: :wink:
    Dead thread? The entire thread is only 15 hours old from beginning to end as of right now. :roll:

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Inflating post counts by propping up your own dead threads by replying to your own posts?? That's reminiscent of that tafnut guy who used to overpost here . . . .

    :lol: :wink:

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    The WSJ did a recap of initial comments:
    * Richard Corliss in Time magazine: “smart, robust, familiar.” [Time]
    * USA Today: “Even with the ponderous dialogue, it’s hard not to have fun on this adventure, and it’s good to see that Indy, though slightly weary, still has the goods.” [USA Today]
    * Entertainment Weekly says Harrison Ford is “terrific — and re-energized” but adds that the film “threatens at times to crumble under the weight of all the impersonal zigging and zagging loaded on for the sake of special effects.” [Entertainment Weekly]
    * Reuters: “Charmless.” [Reuters]
    * New York Post: “On a satisfaction scale, it lands squarely between ‘The Temple of Doom,’ and ‘The Last Crusade.’ ” [NY Post]
    * Los Angeles Times: “It avoids being an anticlimax and is entertaining in its own right.” [LA Times]

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by guru
    Looks like someone needs to go see "You Don't Mess With The Zohan". :wink:
    yeah, sounds . . . uh . . . fascinating :roll:
    In You Don't Mess With the Zohan, a comedy from screenwriters Adam Sandler, Robert Smigel (Triumph the Insult Comic Dog), and Judd Apatow (Knocked Up), Sandler stars as Zohan, an Israeli commando who fakes his own death in order to pursue his dream: becoming a hairstylist in New York. Dennis Dugan directs.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X