Page 162 of 467

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Thu Jun 06, 2013 9:36 am
by Jungle Rat
Probably

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 6:07 pm
by AugustWest
no reason except this is funny as hell...


Image

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 6:12 pm
by Bklyn
since we're doing those things...

[youtube]cLPm_IUx-Kc[/youtube]

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 6:19 pm
by AugustWest
heh.

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 7:56 pm
by Bklyn
So there is no confusion by eCat...
First, there is no point comparing this to the Max Brooks book of the same name. This is not an adaptation of the book. It's barely related. This is a case of a studio liking a title and building a brand-new high concept around it after they buy the rights.

Read more at http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captured/r ... sEkRWK5.99

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 8:52 pm
by AlabamAlum
Hard to believe Chris Farley and Adam Sandler were fired from SNL.

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 8:54 pm
by Bklyn
Not really.

Sandler did not hit his full stride until later (although he had plenty of strong flashes). Rock sucked. Farley was unreliable.

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 9:11 pm
by AugustWest
Farley was unreliable

yeah doing incredible amounts of coke will do that to you. When he was on he was great. I wonder how many times over the course of SNL Lorne Michaels has had to say "Flush the coke, lose the hooker and get the defib team in here asap"

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 9:25 pm
by AlabamAlum
Bklyn wrote:Not really.

Sandler did not hit his full stride until later (although he had plenty of strong flashes). Rock sucked. Farley was unreliable.

A dead Chris Farley is funnier than some of those cast members from that era. Hell, I hate Sandler and he was better than many who were left.

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 9:38 pm
by Jungle Rat
The only Sandler movie I ever liked was the one with the kid. I think Tommy Boy was my favorite Farley one. Blurry era for me though. Tough to remember back then.

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 9:48 pm
by AugustWest
Both were better in small doses.

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 10:27 pm
by eCat
Bklyn wrote:So there is no confusion by eCat...
First, there is no point comparing this to the Max Brooks book of the same name. This is not an adaptation of the book. It's barely related. This is a case of a studio liking a title and building a brand-new high concept around it after they buy the rights.

Read more at http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captured/r ... sEkRWK5.99
I watched a 4 minute preview of it tonight and I'm having my doubts. But I'm still going to see it.

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Sat Jun 08, 2013 12:28 am
by Bklyn
Just so you all know, I eat a lot of pussy, but I don't swallow. Cancer free.

Yeah, I've been drinking. Being here is better than posting on Twitter. #PeaceToHizzy

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Sat Jun 08, 2013 12:32 am
by Jungle Rat
What's twitter?

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 12:06 pm
by hedge
Preview of Ghost Tits...

[youtube]dNHb3lZobt0[/youtube]

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:00 pm
by BigRedMan
NIce.

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2013 7:58 pm
by T Dot O Dot
Yike, Man of Steel is now rotten :

Image

never really paid attention to Rotten Tomatoes but I have a couple buds who like/hate the same shyt I do who swear RT has never led them astray

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2013 9:15 pm
by AlabamAlum
I wouldn't say 'never' - but it's pretty good. I have used it for years. Compare the critics score and the audience score on action/summer popcorn movies for a better idea.

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:02 pm
by hedge
Better idea of what? The critics opinions vs. the public's? Who should one trust in that case? One still must make a choice....

Re: UCLA Bruins

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:15 pm
by AlabamAlum
A better idea if the movie is worthwhile.

Critics are notorious for giving tepid reviews to many of the popcorn flicks. Most people know it's not going to be art, but yet some critics give it a bad review and will lament things like, "the protagonist's motives are not clearly defined and the angst felt by Vin Diesel's character is never fully explained" (or whatever) when all I want to know is are the fight and chase scenes good and does it hold your attention.

With those type movies, I will take the critics score and the audience's score in account, and lean more toward the audience.