Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Before I leave I figure I'd Post The First Review of HARRY POTTER & THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS!!!

Hey folks, Harry here... In about 40 minutes I head to the airport on my greatest adventure yet... And as I'm pondering Chinese mountains, Gordon Liu, Sonny Chiba and David Carradine... I come across this being sent in from Walkabouter... Now Walkabouter has been with me for years... is as solid a spy as we get... He's so inside he scares everyone at Warner Brothers... He was dead right about the first HARRY POTTER and dead on about SCOOBY DOO... He is the man! And what he describes below... well it sounds like a film that is still being worked on, still in the early stages, not yet with score, not yet finished... But he's the only person out there that has seen it.... that will talk on the record and to the point. BEWARE OF SPOILERS.... See you from China hopefully!

HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS

Hey Harry,

Walkabouter has returned.

Last time I dropped you a note, it was with my "Scooby-Doo" pan...which obviously didn't effect its box-office grosses. It's commercial success hasn't surprized me (I predicted it would make about $150 million, and it looks like it's gonna exceed that figure a bit). As I said, I liked Matt Lilliard a lot as Shaggy, and while the tone of my review, in retrospect, was more bland indifference than crucification, it was still a pan.

Makes you wonder just what purpose I have in writing these damn little notes for you and the world to read. I can scream "This movie's GREAT!" or "This movie's TERRIBLE!" 'till I'm blue in the face. Sure, people may read it, post feedback, give the film a positive or negative "buzz", but when a movie's released, it's fair game. What's past is past.

But the real measure of a movie is something even the box office receipts can't tally: time. Take BLADE RUNNER. THE RIGHT STUFF. Carpenter's THE THING. THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION. FIGHT CLUB. All tanked commercially upon their initial release, yet all are powerful films just the same. Geat even. (Funny how in the case of SHAWSHANK, the prison movie nobody went to see, became, after video rentals and TV screenings, one of the highest-ranking films on IMDB.com., higher than the likes of FORREST GUMP and PULP FICTION, the two initial favorites of that same year. And BLADE RUNNER? The sci-fi "flop" is now one of the most influential films of all time, even far beyond the sci-fi genre.)

How many films nowadays can we honestly see ourselves watching, over and over, in 10, 20, 30 years' time? (LORD OF THE RINGS is the only major "studio" motion picture of the last 2 years that comes to my mind....though certainly the likes of Peter Jackson, an independent, eccentric spirit, had EVERYTHING to do with its deserved success.) I'm not saying everything has to aspire to be a masterpiece, I'm simply stating that, as much as I might enjoy a movie like RUSH HOUR, once I've seen it, I have no need to see it again.

"Time will tell." How simple, how eloquent that phrase is.

It applies to movies, too. Time can render the biggest blockbuster hit into a fleeting, silly memory of 2 hours we once enjoyed. Sure, I liked INDEPENDENCE DAY. I liked HOME ALONE. I liked JURASSIC PARK, MEN IN BLACK, TWISTER. I liked them all. But I do not need to see them again.

For a great film, however underappreciated or overlooked, time can be a true friend. Warner Bros. might have screwed up the release of THE IRON GIANT...but, thank God, time came to its rescue. People who've seen it have loved it. It will endure.

I doubt the same could be said for SCOOBY DOO.

Time for me to move on to another subject...and to the real reason why I've written to you now. After an extended stay abroad, I've finally returned home. And it feels great. I can relax, I can hear the pounding of the tides less than two blocks away, and I can finally write at my computer. (God bless my Macintosh, but I hate my labtop. The keys are too small for my fingers.)

I'm now going to review HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS.

Sorry, Mr. Columbus. Sorry, Warner Bros. I've tried to keep my mouth shut the last two weeks. I tried REALLY hard but I can't help myself. I know I promised. Sorry, I'm an addict. I like teasing people. I'm the "Deep Throat" of your wizarding movies; I lead people on and hint at things, but for my own safety (and conscience) I can't fully divulge. Spilling it all this early just wouldn't seem right. So I'll spill only a little bit. It's no secret that I liked the first film, PHILOSOPHER'S STONE, a lot. None of us really had any idea what exactly was going to be done to the book in its translation to the screen, as the potential for disastrous "creative liberties" was great. Rumours of a CGI feature. Haley Joel Osment as Harry.

That the final film stayed true to the book was largely why it was so successful. Cinematic landmark? Masterpiece? Flawless? No, no, and no...but it WAS a wonderful movie, and one obviously made by people who gave a damn.

(Thanks Mr. Heyman, Mr. Kloves, and Mr. Columbus for giving a damn. And, just in case they think I've been picking on them, thanks to Warner Bros, too -- believe it or not, I'm sorry for any headaches I may have caused you guys.)

So what of Harry's second adventure? Is it bigger and better? Scarier? More mature? Will audiences flock to the theatres a second time 'round?

Before I answer those questions, let me say here and now that I will not be giving away any major plot points or spoilers. The book is out there, on every continent on the planet, and most of you who are going to see the movie probably already know what it's about. For the rest of you, I presume this will make you all the more skeptical about my review, and, well...what can I say? Blast me with your conspiracy theories and criticisms....That's what the bloody message boards are for. Bring it on.

The film is still coming together, though from what I've seen, the cut looks pretty refined in terms of editing. Some VFX completion work is in order, and will likely be in progress all the way through October. I think the predub has come along well, though sadly I was not able to hear the film with John Williams' new score. Damn. But as it is all still a work in progress, I'll keep my comments to a broad overview, and not ruin it for either the filmmakers (who deserve to keep their secrets until they're completely ready) or for audiences (who don't like spoilers but are inclined to read them, regardless).

HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS has some things REALLY going for it. There are improvements, there are smiles, and there are scenes of fancy. But there are drawbacks, too, though few and far between. SECRETS seems to have taken three steps forward but one step back.

Okay, so that doesn't make any fucking sense. Time for another analogy.

SUPERMAN. A film made with love and care. A respect to the character. Wit, humor, charm, and innocence. SUPERMAN 2: faster, more energetic and exciting. Funnier, wittier. Great performances. Better defined. But at the same time, it's a little sloppier around the edges, and lacking the sincerity of the first.

SECRETS is rough around the edges, especially in the final act. I think they've also tried to condense everything, making it move faster and faster, while skipping over some nice details. In the movie's defense, purists might say the very same thing about the books. SECRETS shoehorns much more into the story -- new characters, funny scenarios -- than PHILOSOPHER'S STONE had, but for a newcomer, it is surely to be a little overwhelming. I thought the ending was a BIT much, but as I also felt that way about the book, I could hardly chastize the filmmakers.

If there's one significant difference between the films, however, it concerns the actors. Harry, Ron, and Hermione are all back...a little older, probably not much wiser...but very different from before. (And no, I'm not trying to dwell on the issue of puberty, here. These young actors have enough to deal with...especially since the breaking of their voices has already made front page news.)

In the first film, Harry was an outsider, a symbol of wide-eyed innocence coupled with soulful restraint. Here, Daniel Radcliffe is MUCH more...shall we say...playful. There's a devlish twinkle in his eyes that wasn't there before...he's a little on edge and a LOT more mischievious. Mind you, he's still good old Harry...a nice kid, but now he's not always quite so nice.

The film's mid-section really plays off this fact, especially when all the other students grow suspicious of Harry in something pretty spooky going on at Hogwart's. It seems as though a mysterious, evil force is dwelling within the school, and petrifying things in its path. (When one of the leading characters succombs to the unknown entity in the third act, you know that the books are beginning to take on a more sinister tone....But that's something that PRISONER OF AZKABAN should REALLY deliver for us...In time, guys...in time...) Having become a hero in the first movie, and admired by other students at the beginning of SECRETS (there's a cute subplot of Harry grumpily shrugging off the affections of Ron's little sister, a new student at Hogwart's), Harry suddenly finds himself abandoned all over again. He even begins to doubt his own feelings -- he's paranoid that he ALMOST got into Slytherin (that's the EVIL STUDENTS' house of Hogwart's, for the uninitiated), and is afraid that maybe, just maybe, there's an evil dark wizard lurking inside him. (One can recall young Jonathan Scott-Taylor of OMEN II here...a young, angelic face with a possibly satanic personailty. Of course, the big secret Rowling has in book five is that Harry was actually born of a jackal without his adopted parents' knowledge.)

Rupert Grint's performance delivers more comic relief than before. Though it's not RON WEASLY AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS, Grint seems to like putting on a show by trying to steal every scene he's in. And for the most part, he does. It's easy for us to like Ron, and it's easy for me to like Grint in the part.

Alan Rickman, sadly underused in the first movie, isn't really given much more here, but he has seething sinister snares down to an artform, and for that we should be grateful. Rickman seems to enjoy being bad, but with a campiness that makes him rather charming.

Hermione is as prissy as ever, but I found Emma Watson quite sincere and adorable this time 'round, especially in her swooning reactions to the new dark arts teacher, Gilderoy Lockhart.

Oh yeah...Lockhart. He's played by some guy named Kenneth Branagh -- you know, the bloke once married to Emma Thompson?

Seriously, now, for those of us old enough to recall a time called 1989, remember the young, fair-haired prince who burst onto the screen at a ripe old age of 27? The one who redefined a Shakespearean role, out Olivier-ing even Olivier? Branagh's triumphant HENRY V was not just a smashing performance, but a work of a master director full of energy, of vigor. Then his comic turn in MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING made him seem unstoppable. Everyone seems to have forgotten those days once FRANKENSTEIN hit theaters. It was so eagerly anticipated (featuring one hell of a movie trailer) that when the handsome, ambitious project failed, Ken seemed to fail with it...at least in the eyes of the public.

Well, dammit, I for one still think Ken Branagh rocks. I can forgive him for FRANKENSTEIN...I can admire his 4 hour HAMLET (even if I didn't always connect with it)...

I still think he has genius within him.

I still want him to go back into directing a major, epic studio film someday.

And if he had more screen time in CHAMBER OF SECRETS, I think Ken Branagh could get another Oscar nomination.

He's smug, vain, pompous and charming. He's foolish and clever, witty and bumbling. This is not just Branagh doing Lockhart...It's Branagh spoofing Branagh.

CHAMBER OF SECRETS is at its best during these lighter moments. The silliness Branagh shows seems contagious with his actors. (There is a CLASSIC scene at the end with Harry and company challenging Lockhart -- the terrified look on Branagh's face, and the playfully sinister look on Radcliffe's are priceless.) It also works as it gets a little darker. There are some chilling moments throughout the film, and there's more mystery and tension.

The film starts off great, with a hilarious opening with Harry vs. the Dursleys. But then Harry encounters a house-elf named Dobby...

OK, I'm on another track all over again. Dobby Dobby Dobby Dobby Dobby...

Dare I say the words to compare?

Jar Jar Jar Jar Jar Jar...

Well, no, Dobby's not THAT bad. He's quite charming, actually, in a deflated-whoopie-cushioned-voice sorta way.

Dobby is more like a cartoon: a caricature, a creature of artificiality, somehow both annoying and endearing at the same time. He's an important character to the story, though, and by the end, I was rather endeared to him.

(Others might not be, but I doubt to the extreme of another CGI creation... It's safe to say we won't see www.death-to-dobby.com out there.)

There's so much more I can write about...A faster, more thrilling Quidditch match...Robbie Coltraine's lovable Hagrid under some dubious suspicion himself...freaky spiders, snakes, and whomping trees (oh my!)...

But I'm tired. I need sleep. My trusty dog has his head perched on my left foot, and it's time I end my day.

CHAMBER OF SECRETS is turning out to be a really good flick. In some ways it is superior to its predessessor, with its young cast coming into their own. (It's impossible for me to imagine anyone else as Harry, Ron, and Hermione now.) It's funnier, spookier, and a little more complicated...but as there's so much crammed into the film, one can't help but think that it's both too much and not enough. It's not that there's anything missing -- all the ingredients are there. But perhaps there's some flavor lost when you don't let the food simmer long enough.

As I said...time will tell.

Until November 16th,

Long live HENRY V.

I remain

THE WALKABOUTER

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6 a.m. CST

    Sounds Promising

    by guess

    Chamber of Secrets was always my favorite book and hope they do it justice.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6 a.m. CST

    first

    by Nobbi

    i don't know if you, dear walkabouter, will write back.. but how long was the movie? sure it's a rough cut, but will it be longer as is the book. "Oouu you hit me in the ear!"

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:09 a.m. CST

    Why, oh why?

    by Frankenweenie

    Why couldn't there be a Tim Hunter film instead...

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:15 a.m. CST

    Sounds good...

    by AliceInWonderlnd

    Not a big fan of the first one - it was "okay". But this sounds a bit more like it. Then again, I'm jonesing for Prisoner of Azkaban too.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:16 a.m. CST

    I still just dont get "it"

    by pogo on my own

    that is pretty much it, collor me uninterested

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:55 a.m. CST

    I haven't read my favourite Potter book yet

    by Buck Teeth Soh

    cos I think that series still has more to deliver. Sure, PS read like Enid Blyton, but it keeps getting better.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 7:11 a.m. CST

    A word to the wise

    by idleboy

    All things are relative. J. K Rowling seems O.K until you discover Terry Pratchet, then you realise how formulaic, derivative, and poorly plotted the Harry Potter books actually are. If you've ever read any Philip K Dick then you'll know what it's like to encounter a page teeming with ideas, the same goes for Terry Pratchet. I just dropped in to see what condition my condition was in .

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 7:21 a.m. CST

    by SilentType

    The more time goes on, the less I like Philosopher's Stone (what's with you American's changing the title to Sorcerer's Stone?). I'm not excited about this at all! Bring on Gangs Of New York!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 7:28 a.m. CST

    Bitch, Branagh's HAMLET is the BEST HAMLET EVER!!!

    by Cash Bailey

    Well, apart from Jack Lemmon and Robin Williams. Apart from that it is pure 70mm glory that desperately needs a deluxe DVD treatment.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 7:33 a.m. CST

    I disliked like the first

    by KONG33

    very strongly disliked it, just stereotypical book crap combined with stereotypical movie crap. So you work at Warner Bros.? Do the nightmares of the day play out in your mind at night?

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 7:37 a.m. CST

    Kenneth Branagh

    by KajiC

    I will happily pay money to see Kenneth Branagh playing a comic character. I think his timing is wonderful. With his serious characters it's about a 50% chance for me. And I never again need to see him baby-oil wrestling Robert DeNiro.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 7:48 a.m. CST

    jeez

    by cockknocker

    This guy has a bigger ego than harry! I hope the new harry potter movie is good, i liked the first. It wont exactly bother me if it's bad though.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 8:24 a.m. CST

    What I am really excited for...

    by chanjumar

    ... Is Clive Barker's ABARAT. That's going to be a classic "kids" fantasty film. Enough with Potter.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 8:28 a.m. CST

    That's-A-Dud...

    by AliceInWonderlnd

    Said wrestlage took place in Frankenstein.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:01 a.m. CST

    Terry Pratchett???

    by Buck Teeth Soh

    You're joking, right? Britain's answer to Piers Anthony, who churns out endless airplane novels ripping off whatever he can from popular culture and pop myth? Sorry, idleboy, that stuff's trash. Now you may have something with Phil Dick, but if you think Pratchett shows any originality at all, you're living in a box with a slot for food and water. If TP ever bothered to write a well-constructed story around the throwaway gags, it'd probably be really good. The man clearly has some talent, but he hasn't used it since he wrote The Carpet People first time round. Nobody's claiming that Rowling is literature, but she's dragged enough kids away from the Nintendo to deserve some respect.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:07 a.m. CST

    I'm with Frankenweenie

    by Juggernaut125

    Let's see a flick about Tim Hunter.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:17 a.m. CST

    WHAT IS IT ABOUT REVIEWERS AND ARROGANCE LATELY?

    by Commando Cody

    Just off the cuff I gotta say one thing. And I notice this trend more and more with people posting their Talkback reveiews. It

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:17 a.m. CST

    ATTENTION ALL REVIEWERS

    by MrBabbage

    Could you PLEASE cut out the five paragraph ramblings of your life story and just cut to the chase? I care about the movies, I don't care so much about you. And that goes for you too Harold ;)

  • Harry Potter a wonderful movie? Hardly. A lot of people were let down by that wank. I can't see the next one being as successful as Number One.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:20 a.m. CST

    Harry Potter is the Devil's work!

    by Linda-Mason

    Here is a film that tells children to abandon the Church and embrace Pagan rituals and Satanic black masses. This is precisely the kind of tripe that we need to expunge from movie theaters. I don't know why so many people are opposed to my ideas. I'm not saying that these movies shouldn't be made. All I'm suggesting is that the Church be allowed to view them and remove anything objectionable. Although in Harry Potter's case, the film itself my have to be banned. I have been on an active crusade in my town to remove the Harry Potter books from schools and libraries. In addition, I have lobbied to ban the books of C.S. Lewis, L. Frank Baum, J.D. Salinger, Ernest Hemingway and J.R.R. Tolkien from our schools. We have to stop peddling this FILTH to our children. Books like these are a direct link to promiscuousness, disrespect for figures in authority and Godlessness. If you think I'm wrong, then you're part of the problem.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:20 a.m. CST

    On Chamber, Branagh, and more...

    by Lucan Goodman

    My first words on AICN: (Hope I make you proud Harry) Not sure we should be comparing Rowlings to Dick or Pratchet. We celebrate Rowlings' works because of the theme of the underprivilaged child who wakes to celebrity and strives every day to do what's right. And of course, she's created a wonderfully imaginative world accessable to all ages. Try to get a grade school child to read Terry or Phil. Don't worry, they'll get there in a couple of years. I'm hoping Kenneth Branagh is harnessing his chi for another director's job soon. Something with a little less studio in it. Much Ado made me love Shakespeare. Thanks Ken. Dead Again was one that made me love movies. Thanks Ken. Harness that chi. My verdict is still out on this yearly release of a sequel thing. Am I surprised to hear that the second Potter may not be as good as the original when I saw the original less than a year ago? Not really. Will I be surprised to hear the same thing about Two Towers? Not really. Can we really make a quality modern film in less than a year???...I guess we'll see. Lucan Goodman

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:24 a.m. CST

    Enjoy this one, it will be the last decent one

    by Heywood Jablowme

    1. Rarely does a sequel equal its predecessor, but a 3rd installment is always the worst. Go on, try to think of one. Godfather 3, Superman 3 (hah!), Jedi, Jaws, Lethal Weapon...they are all pale compared to the #2s. One exception: Indy 3, Connery saved that one. 2. Second reason why this will be the last decent one: the actors are going to be what 15, 16 by the time it gets made? The actors are going to lose some of their appeal, e.g. they're not cute little curious kids.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:28 a.m. CST

    Why I love Harry Potter talkbacks

    by Super Mendez

    It brings out all the prissy Brits. Welcome to the site governor! A spot of tea for you? We owe you one from the War of 1812, you limey bastards!!!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:51 a.m. CST

    Hairy Chamberpot of Secrets

    by Christopher3

    Unfortunate, that title.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:51 a.m. CST

    ATTENTION JEDI LOOMIS!!!

    by Kieran

    It's really refreshing to find someone so wonderfully clueless as yourself. It really gives me hope. Don't go changing on us now.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 9:55 a.m. CST

    yeah why not

    by Buck Teeth Soh

    Okay, Super Mendez, I'll bite. You Yankees love tea, its obvious. That's why you made so much of it at once in Boston. As for 1812, keeping your mucky colonial mitts off Canada was a pleasure and a privilege for us. Course we were kind of busy at the time stopping a power-crazed dictator from taking over the world, but we're glad you joined the party on later occasions (little late, mind). Oh and its "guv'nor" or just plain "guv". Get yer mockney right.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:18 a.m. CST

    Wait for Azkaban

    by Buck_Turgidson

    This one ain't so good as a book either. However, with Prisoner of Azkaban as the source material and Alfonso Cuaron directing the next, it will go to an entirely different level. Potential Oscar level stuff, I shit you not.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:30 a.m. CST

    I gotta say Linda Mason is a delight

    by OK Then

    ...and gets to be more so all the time.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:31 a.m. CST

    Jedi Loomis

    by wato

    You're trolling is pretty good man. It's a little over the top, but still pretty good. I would have believed it more if you had not included C.S. Lewis. Although I like the books, he's at the top of the fanatical Christian "to read" list for his hit-you-over-the-head Christ allegories in The Chronicles of Narnia. You still kinda sounded like a crazy Christian that makes the rest of us look horrible, but you didn't quite pull it off. I give you a 5.8.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:31 a.m. CST

    did Branagh write this review?

    by BurlIvesLeftNut

    Was he spoofing Lockhart spoofing Branagh?!? Because half of this review was smug trash. And the Sorcerer's Stone was the second crappiest movie of 2001 after A.I. But, I am not even sure what I am doing here, since I am not a Potter fan, nor will I ever be. I guess what I really want to say is: THE TWO TOWERS IS GOING TO RAPE HAPPY POTTERS LILY WHITE ASS!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:32 a.m. CST

    Branagh's Henry V...

    by workshed

    ...may just well be one of THE best films ever made. I saw it four times upon it's original release and I'm not afraid to say so. Hamlet? Close, but nah. Henry? He got the cigar. It's sad to think that Branagh may not direct again.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Jesus Christ get to the point...

    by Russman

    God Damn dude, how's about drawing a line under all the BS you write and make a big note that says, REVIEW STARTS HERE so that we can just zip down and read the review. Dude, it's a website not book. Just drop the info on us, baby.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:45 a.m. CST

    careful BurlIves...

    by TV CASUALTY

    That kinda talk can get a man banned... That said, I'm not going to bother addressing the Potter-haters. It's pointless. You either enjoy them, or you don't, both pobably have good reasons. But those comparing Rowling to Pratchett or Dick -remember folks, the books were written for 10 year olds. Dick and Pratchet are for an older demographic. You should be THANKING Rowling for helping foster an interest in the genre that will someday lead the older kid to pick up the authors we love as adults. Anyway, I'm looking forward to it. The first movie is by no means a masterpiece, but I still enjoyed the hell out of it. The books are great fun, no, they're no Lord of the Rings, which is both a better book series and a better movie series. But I still like Potter. You are actually allowed to like both, you know. And for all you eeeeeenglish whiners out there - go back to repressing the rights of the Irish and bitching about the weather.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:52 a.m. CST

    What's he that wishes so?

    by Movietool

    My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin; / If we are mark'd to die, we are enow / To do our country loss; and if to live, / The fewer men, the greater share of honour. / God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more. / By Jove, I am not covetous for gold, / Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost; / It yearns me not if men my garments wear; / Such outward things dwell not in my desires. / But if it be a sin to covet honour, / I am the most offending soul alive. / No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England. / God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour / As one man more methinks would share from me / For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more! / Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host, / That he which hath no stomach to this fight, / Let him depart; his passport shall be made, / And crowns for convoy put into his purse; / We would not die in that man's company / That fears his fellowship to die with us. / This day is call'd the feast of Crispian. / He that outlives this day, and comes safe home, / Will stand a tip-toe when this day is nam'd, / And rouse him at the name of Crispian. / He that shall live this day, and see old age, / Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours, / And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian.' / Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars, / And say 'These wounds I had on Crispian's day.' / Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot, / But he'll remember, with advantages, / What feats he did that day. Then shall our names, / Familiar in his mouth as household words- / Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter, / Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester- / Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red. / This story shall the good man teach his son; / And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by, / From this day to the ending of the world, / But we in it shall be remembered- / We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; / For he to-day that sheds his blood with me / Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile, / This day shall gentle his condition; / And gentlemen in England now-a-bed / Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here, / And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks / That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:57 a.m. CST

    Eeeeeeeeenglish whining

    by Buck Teeth Soh

    Catch the news sometime, TV CASUALTY, these days the Irish are perfectly good at repressing each other's rights without our interference, funded by you guys. Oh but wait, funding terrorists is a bad thing, isn't it?

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:59 a.m. CST

    HARRY POTTER was the most overrated movie of the year!

    by David Fincher

    Do you remember when the first HARRY POTTER movie came out everyone was pouring over it calling it "an almost perfect film" and shit like that? But then some time past and LORD OF THE RINGS came out. And it was like "Harry who?" Now that almost a year has past since HP it's clear to see that it was so overrated it's just a joke. Sure, it's a good little movie, but nowhere near what people were calling it upon its initial release.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11 a.m. CST

    You have been deceived!

    by Linda-Mason

    You all believe that storytellers who use Pagan imagery are vessels of the teachings of the Church. You have fallen under the spell of the Deceiver of Men! What you must understand is that books like "Harry Potter" and "The Lord of the Rings" are BRAINWASHING our children. I've been working hard to get them removed from our local schools and will continue to do so. The next step is to take Hollywood back from the hands of the Devil and make these films safe for our children.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11 a.m. CST

    Solid review Walkabouter...

    by Dru

    Oh yes, oh yes, oh yes, yes, YES! I have faith now; faith + a whole lotta impatience. I have been worried about this movie since I saw the 1st one, concerned that it wasn't going to live up to what the 1st movie was (a fear that doesn't extend to the Two Towers... hmmm, I wonder why?!) I am still skeptical, as this book (+ therefore, perhaps, the movie) is/will be the weakest of the HP series. But I got the faith now boys n' girls, I got the faith! Branaugh will be wonderful; Rickman is 1 of the most underrated actors out there today; + the Quidditch match that so many of you bitched about last year didn't look half as bad as ya'll said it would. See you at the movies, kids! Out.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:04 a.m. CST

    hey fuckheads...

    by TV CASUALTY

    I'm not an American, fellas. Don't get me started on the particular offenses of that country. And geez - don't get so defensive, I was just having a little fun, albeit at your expense. LIMEY FISH!!!!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:20 a.m. CST

    TV CASUALTY

    by Buck Teeth Soh

    relax, I was just responding at a similar level and not being defensive. Okay, I made an assumption, but limey is an American term. Other countries have their own cute names for us, usually featuring the word "bastards".

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:22 a.m. CST

    Linda-Mason a.k.a. Hitler

    by music maker

    Are you even aware that Tolkien and Lewis were both respected aplogists who firmly believed in and devoted to Christianity, but even that is beside the point. Take your little neo-facist agenda elsewhere and leave talkback alone. We don't like you and your message smells of pig entrails.....

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:32 a.m. CST

    ACT YOUR AGE NOT YOUR SHOE SIZE!

    by ROBE

    Sorry but Harry Potter is based on Ian Potter a childhood friend of JK Rowling

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:35 a.m. CST

    Well..

    by Buck Teeth Soh

    We did civilise the bits that the Romans didn't get to. What I don't get is the Australians! We send them to a desirable piece of real estate, free trip on a luxurious ocean cruise, with a chance to start again, and what happens? They beat us at cricket, export their daytime TV, send Mel Gibson to make films that show us up as evil and sadistic, and they won't even let us emigrate! They should be grateful, damn their eyes! What the hell is a pommie anyway?

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:36 a.m. CST

    spaceperve, 242

    by TV CASUALTY

    Limeys, bastards, kings among men - potAto, potAHto. Although 242 - the swearing thing, if you're serious? Kind of wasting your time. trying to get a bunch of internet movie geeks to watch their language? Uh, no sir. Besides, if this was a kids' site, you might have some justification. But it's not. So... FUCK FUCKITY FUCK FUCK FUCK. WHEEEEEE!!!! Lastly, those who are taking the Linda Mason thing a little *too* seriously - guys, go find a REAL issue to get outraged about.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:43 a.m. CST

    The Seduction of Linda Mason.

    by Nordling

    She walked in the room, with those "Fuck me" eyes, wearing those orthopedic shoes that I find just so sexy. She smelled of Ben Gay, that tantalizing hospital odor that just gets me so frezekay. I put on good old Barry White. "Would you like something to eat, baby?" I said. As I served her the Deep Dish Stuffed Crust Italian Sausage and Extra Cheese Pizza, she devoured it with relish, never taking her eyes off mine. It was amazing, the amount of food she could fit into her hot sexy mouth. I was looking forward to that mouth, believe me. 2 minutes later, after she had finished the Extra Large, she gave me that look. You know that look. The look that says, "Take me, anyway you can." Well, either that or "Get me a beer." I have trouble with it. Anyway, I was ready to ride the ripple. I applied lotion to her hot body. It took 3 bottles. From head to foot. "Lotta cushion for the pushin'," I said in a soft voice. She mooed in pleasure and agreement. We lay down on the bed, which broke under our loving. That or our weight. No, it was definitely lovin', although I hadn't really started yet. "Should we read the Bible?" she asked. I was all for a little bit of Psalms, you know what I'm sayin', dog? But she was all about the Revelation. I can understand that. "The dragon is coming," she intoned, and I could not help but agree, considering the position I was in. After I disentangled myself, I knelt down to the pearly gates. "Thank Jesus!" she said. I stopped, wondering who "He-sus" was. Was she seeing some Mexican fellow behind my back? Then I shrugged. What the hell, I paid for the pizza. I knocked it out of the park. And as she left, she gave me a good "Amen." She was a sweeeet soul sista. Come back anytime, Linda. We can open the Good Book some more. Next time, let's get into some Acts. You know what I mean, baby.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:47 a.m. CST

    Linda Honey - I love it when you call me a sodomite, I really do

    by TV CASUALTY

    Last night was truly special. The way you bit down on your bible at the last minute and called me King James. That really did it for me... ok, going to hell for that bit.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:53 a.m. CST

    I don't know

    by Harrierthanthee

    A lot of people say the movie was good, but (NoteI like the books I have to say that the the movie din't really reflect the books.Anyway looking, forward to November.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:53 a.m. CST

    How to watch Brannagh's Hamlet

    by 0101010

    Grab yourself your favorite light alcoholic beverage (hey, it's a period piece so try wine, beer might work, but the belching might not fit the mood. For minor's in the audience, try juice, nothing caffinated at all though) plop the tape into the VCR (Why oh why isn't this movie on DVD?) and grab your still pristine copy of "HAMLET" from your highschool days off the shelf (you know it's there), and follow the script of the play along with the movie. It helps, A LOT! Previously I thought it was just a very pretty picture with some interesting moments in it, but having the script right there somehow reinforces the acting. It really does. TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE INTERMISSION. It was put there for a reason, use it. Make it a 24 hour intermission if you have to. But take a break before the end. If you watch WITH the script, I think you'll enjoy it much much more. I had to due it under duress to complete a term paper on time and found myself engrossed against my will (watching four hours of movie with only 12 hours to write the paper is not conducive to sitting through to the end). (I'll stop using parantheses now).

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:55 a.m. CST

    SODOMITE:

    by TV CASUALTY

    (n) one who practices sodomy. ... SODOMY: 1. copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal. 2. noncoital and esp. anal and oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex. Your welcome. Really, I'm just here to teach. To enlighten, if you will.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:06 p.m. CST

    Branagh fans, I've got three words...

    by XFTwitch

    Wild Wild West 'nuff said.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:13 p.m. CST

    Linda-Mason a.k.a. Hitler

    by music maker

    I'm slow, but evetually I catch on....

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:15 p.m. CST

    Branagh fans, I've got three words...

    by music maker

    that's five words!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:16 p.m. CST

    So THAT's where the loonies went!

    by StarlingUK

    I've been to a lot of boards discussing Harry Potter, and I've noticed how sane (well, relatively anyway) people usually are. But now I know why! All the loonies are on here! Harry Potter should be American, Harry Potter is a Satanist (go read the book, woman, I thought accusing C.S. Lewis of all people was hysterical, are you going to accuse the Pope next?), Harry Potter is plagiarised, Harry Potter sucks (we've never heard that one before, ooooh noooo). You're an entertaining bunch ... I'll certainly come here more often! Martje. P.S. Reviewers are SUPPOSED to be arrogant! It's in the job description!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:19 p.m. CST

    Attn: Linda Mason

    by Sarah K.

    I fully respect your opinion on Harry Potter and how you believe it is encouraging Pagan rituals. You seem to be an advocate for children by trying to eliminate certain books. Although, I just can't understand how someone that cares so much about the well being of children will try and take out books, some of them classic works of literature, out of libraries everywhere. Children, no matter what their belief, should be exposed to different cultures, ideas, and thoughts. Taking out the books of C.S. Lewis, Ernest Hemingway, J.D. Salinger, and J.R.R. Tolkien, is only leaving a hole in our children's upbringing in our ever-changing world. To impose a certain belief on children and people everywhere is a close-minded way to think. I understand that you probably think your way is the correct way to run our world, but I know there are others out there that think a different way is the right way. Neither way is necessarily right or wrong, it is a matter of opinion. Banning the books of some brilliant authors is not the way to further your cause though. And saying that everyone who has different beliefs than you is a part of the problem is entirely off base. Thinking this way is THE problem. Accepting differences is a part of the solution.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:24 p.m. CST

    are you calling me crazy, Starling UK?

    by TV CASUALTY

    You sodomite motherfucker? I love Harry Potter with, I believe, the right mixture of geeky curiousity and childish glee. But around here, well, I'm just another inmate in the asylum. And 242, think nothing of it. I just like to help out newfound friends. Let me know if you need any other terms defined - dirty sanchez, felching, etc. I'm here all day. Hey, how come no one ever gets called a Gomorrahite? Any of you religious-types know? (that's actually an honest question. seriously.)

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:26 p.m. CST

    SpacePerve & Terry Pratchett... plus I open up a can of worms...

    by The Hillbrothers

    Wow, someone else who feels the same way about Pratchett that I do. I work at a bookstore and Pratchett gets endless praise from the staff & customers alike, and I have always felt isolated in my dissatisfaction with Pratchett's stories. I'm glad someone else feels the same. I would also compare him to Piers Anthony, who will write a well-constructed book and follow it with endless crap, such as that Incarnations of Immortality series. After suffering through that (the first one was good) and the likes of- dare I say it- the Hitchhikers Guide series, I don't have time for Pratchett's prolifery. Now I have to defend myself against the Douglas Adams fans: Those books are half-baked, full of promises never delivered. The whole series is set-up and introduction with no payoff, and often no plot at all. That's not important, you might say, you don't get it, the joy is in the rambling prose itself, not the plotting, and yes, those are good points, but I don't find Adams' contortioned prose as clever as he seemed to think it was, and that's my problem with him and Pratchett and other sci-fi/fantasy/humor authors like them. It's alot of cleverness for cleverness' sake. I like the Harry Potter books. They're not the most well-written childrens' books ever- they often seem awkwardly unpolished, but Rowling's cleverness as a writer comes out less intentionally, and more intrinsically, as part of the storytelling process. Just my opinion, of course, but... Let the Hating begin.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:27 p.m. CST

    Hey SarahK

    by Nordling

    You're giving Linda Mason too much credit. Either she's a troll (in which case I think every male who posts in Talkback should report their own seduction story. Come on. Tell us how she took it in the-) or she's serious. If she's serious, she doesn't deserve your thoughtful discussion, because she's obviously a demogogue who couldn't have an intelligent discussion of religion if she strained really hard and put on nerd glasses. Either way, she's dismissable. She gives great head, though.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:28 p.m. CST

    Please explain

    by Nordling

    "dirty sanchez." I know what felching is, though, please don't explain that.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:30 p.m. CST

    I fully expect Dobby to be annoying as *hell*

    by JTylor

    Cause he was annoying in the book. Meant to be, mind you. Curious to see if Harry's broken arm (and consequences) comes into hilarious (and cringe-inducing) play.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:31 p.m. CST

    Linda Masonnnznzzzzzzzz

    by barkalounger

    First, Linda Mason was fun because you weren't sure if she was for real. Once you figured out she wasn't for real, it was fun to read the reactions from posters who didn't get the joke. Now it's just old.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:43 p.m. CST

    Oy, TV Casualty

    by StarlingUK

    I gave some examples in my epistle, were you in it? I don't think so. I'd like to see it as a "shoe fits" kinda message. However, I do believe that only people who aren't intelligent enough to explain what they really think use copious swearwords in their messages. To the dim amongst us: that was a "shoe fits" comment too. Martje P.S. Look, mum, not a single swear word!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:46 p.m. CST

    P.S. to TV Cas

    by StarlingUK

    About your *ahem* "title" for me. I'm a girl, sweetums! AFAIK the persons involved to the aforementioned sexual act were men. Martje

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 12:59 p.m. CST

    Alan Rickman as Snape looks like Trent Reznor will in five years

    by ThePoleOfJustice

    ...or less. Washed up electro dork (Reznor, not Rickman.)

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 1:02 p.m. CST

    StarlingUK, what in the goshdarned heck are you talking about?

    by TV CASUALTY

    You aren't *actually* insulted by anything I said? For god's sake, anyone can tell by reading my posts that I'm a raving idiot!! I'm not trying to actually insult you. I was KIDDING. JOKING. MAKING JEST. You may not have found it funny, but I'm used to that. Calm down girl. And Nordling - I'm really, REALLY hesitant to define dirty sanchez on a tb board. It's pretty nasty, even for a (chuckle) sodomite such as myself. Are you suuuure? Any kiddies, skip to the next post. Treat that as a spoiler warning. Okey doke, here we go - DIRTY SANCHEZ - While having intercourse with a girl from behind ("doggy style"), quickly insert 2 fingers into her behind, then reach around and wipe the residue on her upper lip, providing her a mustache. Sorry dude, you asked. Sleep tight. I'm not saying a word about the jelly donut, the donkey punch, the screwnicorn or (god forbid) the blunkin though. We got to have some law.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 1:08 p.m. CST

    Attn: Linda Mason

    by Foebane

    Maybe there's your problem right there - the Church. I think it shouldn't have too much power over what people can read or watch, simply because no-one likes censorship - some would say the Church has too much power already. Most of the world's problems have always been caused by religion, rather than solved by them. I am an absolute Atheist and I don't believe in that stuff about God creating the Earth in six days, etc. You KNOW how the Earth and the other planets, as well as all the other galaxies in our universe were created, surely? I subscribe to that wholly TRUE scientific idea, of natural evolution and development. You want to ban not just HP, but also CS Lewis AND JRR Tolkien!? Granted, Christian Fundamentalists (like you, I suspect) have their problems with JK Rowling, but I thought Lewis' and Tolkien's stories were universally accepted by Christianity, basically because of the classic struggle of Good and Evil. If you want to ban even these books, then what would you have us read? The Scriptures? If you dare us to say that you're wrong, and that if we do, we're a part of the problem, then I for one am glad to be part of the problem you seem to think faces the world today. Come to think of it, maybe YOU'RE the problem...

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 1:08 p.m. CST

    Sounds intriguing.

    by Nordling

    Linda, you up for the "dirty sanchez?" Why am I asking - of course you are.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 1:14 p.m. CST

    Those of you taking Linda Mason seriously...

    by SleazyG.

    ...shouldn't be allowed on the interweb. Honestly, they must have run out of irony, humor and sarcasm years ago and let people keep breeding anyway. Reread it, rethink it, and ask yourself: have I ever encountered satire before? If the answer is "no", if none of what I said makes sense, you're not just on the wrong website--you're on the wrong web. Geez Louise.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Attn: Linda Mason, or, How To Be a Better Troll.

    by TV CASUALTY

    since I'm on this educational kick, Linda darling, your trolling was much better when you would post more than once in the same talkback, instead of just commenting and then disappearing. Where's the self-righteous response? Come ON woman! You got the lord on your side, so belt him in and put your pedal to the metal! I don't expect you to respond to the disgusting posts by heathen piggies such as Nordling, filthy man that he is. Dirty, dirty boy. Dirty, needs to be cleaned, needs a bathing needs scouring needs to be... whoa. sorry, got a little off track there. I think I'm channeing weedy mcmokey there, if not Linda herself. Where was I? Oh yeah - we need some responses. Otherwise, the posts are too obvious as trolling.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 1:27 p.m. CST

    CGI was the death of Harry Potter

    by burden_you_bear

    Cave troll - Terrible! Quidditch match - the fakest thing since Denis Rodmans acting. Can't film makers make something thats actually real? Dobby could have been something that looked incredibly real with the right special effects team. How real did the dinosaurs look in JP? The Aliens in Alien? Thats cause they were ACTUALLY THERE. There is no exscuse for making Dobby CGI. None.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 1:33 p.m. CST

    Very encouraging...trailer isn't bad either.

    by minderbinder

    I'm starting to get excited, with HP2 and TTT, should be a great winter for movies. And Lucan, why are you so worried about them being worse? Everything I've heard about both movies sounds like the 2nd installments will be even better than the firsts.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 1:52 p.m. CST

    Pearls to Swine

    by Linda-Mason

    All of you have had such edifying things to say about me, but in truth you've said nothing at all. By indulging in your childish fantasies and locker-room mentalities all you've done is prove my point. There's not one person here who has offered even a whit of intelligence. All they've done is either defend these PORNOGRAPHERS they call writers or simply reduce themselves to name-calling. Well, let me ask you, what is wrong with what I'm proposing, really? Wouldn't you like to live in a world free of violence and evil? Well, the first step towards that is cleaning up the sources of so-called entertainment that fill you to the brim with it. By regulating music, film, art, books and television we can assure our children that they will be receiving the finest level of moral instruction.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:02 p.m. CST

    Applause all round......

    by WeedyMcSmokey

    ..Another stunning talkback brought to you by the princes of talkback - BurlIvesLeftNut, TV Casulty, and Nordling (there are others out there too) - you boys have made my early afternoon. Nordling you saucy tramp, Linda is a vixen, she'll save your sould and break your heart. She broke my heart yesterday - and like you I require new furnishings. Pottermania, what's to say that hasn't been said? Hell, if getting kids to read is all it takes to be respected around here then Penthouse Letters should be up for the Booker Prize. Still, by and large the books (and I've read basically part of the first one) seem imaginative and farily heart-felt and innocent. I neither malign them nor pay them any particular praise - they just ahve seemed to be in the right place at the right time.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:03 p.m. CST

    Adults vs. Kids in the Harry Potter World

    by Knight42

    Folks, What is it about slamming a movie or series of movies that you don't understand? Just because you don't "get it" doesn't make it a bad movie. Harry Potter has managed to make an interesting world for kids and adults alike. When sitting through the first movie in the theatre, for the first time in my life the KIDS were the ones shusshing the adults. I LOVED it! Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone captured a childlike view of the book and translated it to film extremely well. It is one of the BEST translations of a book to a movie ever in my opinion. I am 30 years old and have read all the books. Chamber of Secrets is my least favorite of the 4 but I am still anxiously awaiting this movie release! My wife, who is partially dyslexic, is not only reading the books but takes extra time each day to do so. If J.K. Rowling can get people (kids and adults alike) this into her novels I just hope that Chris Columbus can keep up his wonderful translations! So, for those of you that don't "get it", turn off the Anna Nicole Smith show and pick up a book for crying out loud! Knight42

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:09 p.m. CST

    The third will definitely be the best

    by Bryan

    I would like to make a wager with "Heywood Jablowme" - any good movie fan should know that the third will be the best in this case, even if it's not usually. On one hand you have Christopher Columbus, who made an amazingly watchable movie the first time around but is one of the worst successful directors working today. On the other hand you have Alfonse Cuaron. If you've seen A LITTLE PRINCESS you may have wondered, like me, why Warner Brothers didn't just hire him in the first place. It's also about a boarding school, with great performances from kid actors, and more emotional resonance. In its fantasy sequences it has a very stylized cgi ten-headed dragon that is a far more impressive creature than anything in the first Potter film. And the look is absolutely stunning. I enjoyed Columbus' first film for what it was, but I also thought it was pretty unfaithful to the spirit of the book despite being so faithful to it on a literal level. (Did it bother anyone else how they cut out all references to the kids breaking rules, the dragon baby being illegal, etc.?) I think based on A LITTLE PRINCESS we know that Cuaron can do everything in the Harry Potter world better. He's not a wannabe-'80s-Spielberg who will tone down the darker elements and he's also a better storyteller and visualist. Plus, the books get more interesting in Azkaban.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:12 p.m. CST

    Oh, and Linda, BITE ME ASS!

    by Knight42

    'Nuff said

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:13 p.m. CST

    Goshdarnit heck?

    by StarlingUK

    LOL! I'm perfectly calm, darling, since I wasn't wound up in the first place ... although I still ain't into the swearing thang. Didn't particularly want to know what a dirty sanches was, tho, serves me right for reading it. Martje

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:15 p.m. CST

    in reply to Linda-Mason and all others alike...

    by gamegal

    Woa! Miss Mason, you need to come back to the millenium. I must be the only person who's read your response cause I see no replies. I find it disturbing that people like you still exist. Banning books? That is so, like, 1940's. Authors such as Lewis, Tolken and the such has opened universes of imagination to the masses. It is in my opinion that JK Rowling has done the same by for kids. Kids are reading! To the contrary of what you think, the HP series (and LOTR also) teaches us to accept each others differences, to use our imagination and to never give up. I know this may sound maudlin, but that's the truth! And to read your suggestion that the Church should approve all books... last time I checked, Church and State are separate and for good reasons. The Church has no right to control what we read, write or learn. I myself believe in God and was baptised in the Catholic Church, but I also have free will and I can do to my own conciousness' content. I don't think I'm gonna burn in hell for that. Next, you'll probably want to have all-white schools. Are you sure you should be using the computer? The devil may come out of it, you know! Simply said, You're a freak!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:16 p.m. CST

    I'm dyin' here folks... Weedy, this one's for you.

    by TV CASUALTY

    Oh Linda sweetie - " There's not one person here who has offered even a whit of intelligence. All they've done is either defend these PORNOGRAPHERS they call writers". Pornography? Baby, this ain't pornography. I'll SHOW you pornography, just pop in the tape we made last night. Sure, you praised God a lot, but that's only because it was the easiest word to say around the ball gag. "mmmgggaawwddd!!! rrrrddr!! rrddrr!!!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:22 p.m. CST

    StarlingUK, sweetpea... call me darling again?

    by TV CASUALTY

    About the dirty sanchez thing - I gave you fair warning, did I not?

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:24 p.m. CST

    TV Cas, you randy dog

    by WeedyMcSmokey

    Funny shit dude. Clearly, the kiddies that occassionally inhabit this site aren't the problem, it's us adults who're (Ha - whore) causing the majority of the shit. :)

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:29 p.m. CST

    ALL TALK NO REVIEW

    by NOZZZ4THE666

    You didn't see the movie from start to finish but thought you would give a review on it. Then precede to babble for seven or so paragraphs and give a half ass review. Complete wast of time. Harry you should have never even bothered with this.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:48 p.m. CST

    Linda

    by GypsyTRobot

    The Bible is full of sex, violence, and magic. Miracles are just a form of holy magic. Should we censor the Bible, too?

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:49 p.m. CST

    Just a small caution...

    by Strawhenge

    to those who would casually dismiss Linda Mason as an entertaining, innocuous troll. As impossible as it seems, there are a great many people out there who espouse the same values and beliefs as our Ms. Mason (not that I think she's for real). Lamentably, these are not simply crackpots relegated to the fringes of society. You'll find them in positions of authority and power in places where they can do the most harm. Here in Georgia we fight a constant battle to keep the works of authors like those mentioned previously ON the shelves of our school libraries. As ludicrous as it sounds, many parents in my children's school refused to allow their kids to read the Harry Potter books, deriding them as "heresy", "blasphemy", "the work of the Devil" and other 16th century euphemisms. Most appallingly, we are still arguing over the teaching of evolution in schools, a dilemma that Tennessee solved back in 1925! Lately there has been a push to teach something called "scientific creationism" which is nothing more than religion masquerading as science. Meanwhile, the op-ed pages of our major paper carries letter after letter from supposed adults decrying evolution with the old chestnut, "It's only a theory." Stay vigilant. The real "Linda Masons" are out there.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:56 p.m. CST

    Glad someone else thought Rickman looked like Trent Reznor...

    by Esseilte

    When I watched the first HP movie, I had never read the books, so when that first shot of Rickman happened in the movie, I turned to my friends and said, "Hey, what the hell is Trent Reznor doing in this movie." What's sad is, Rickman's actually better looking than Trent.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 2:58 p.m. CST

    you know what the absolute WORST thing about this talkback is?

    by TV CASUALTY

    That I *still* find the name "assblaster" to be absolutely hilarious. I don't know why. I'm an adult. I'm 27, own property, have a steady, responsible job, wear a tie to work, and find that the user id assblaster just puts me on my (giggle) ass laughing. I'm almost ashamed of myself. But then, if ball gag and sanchez jokes don't make me ashamed, why should that? Oh, and hey, no one ever answered me on the Gomorrahites thing!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:01 p.m. CST

    Okay, to rephrase: Those of you who are taking Linda Mason serio

    by SleazyG.

    ...take your WebTV and stick it sideways, you thick bastards. She's taking the piss, and you're all too dim to be in on the joke, which means you're all too dim to participate in conversations at even the standard 7th grade level where most AICN discourses occur. When you're old enough to actually READ the works of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, feel free to stop back in and grace us with your insightful observations on religion and its place in modern society.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:05 p.m. CST

    TV Casualty

    by Esseilte

    Hey, are you married? Because you sound perfect. ;)

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:06 p.m. CST

    dirty sanchez

    by donaldsutherland

    when you slide your finger in her ass while doing her doggie, get your finger covered in poo, then reach around and wipe it on her upper lip...creating a mexican-style mustache (chuck hestion, touch of evil)...and if she bucks and wails, simply query:"no te gustas?"

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:06 p.m. CST

    I'll say this for Linda Mason,

    by Nordling

    if she's a pre-teen troll, she or he sure can spell. But what am I saying. She's DEFINITELY a she. She is. I swear to God she is. Really. Why are you looking at me like that?

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:10 p.m. CST

    hese Linda postings are pointless!

    by Kampbell-Kid

    I do agree... the entire review was completely arrogant and unncecessary. Hardly a Harry Potter film review in this... 90% of it was rambling about himself and obviously how influential his reviews are to the world and Warner Bros. Which arn't! Being a schmoozer and mostly lecturing to geeks that already know the things your going out of your way to explain as if were clueless makes you as annoying as the "Jar-Jar" you mentioned in your review. Just get to the point!! As for this silly southern babtist Linda Manson stuff popping up, it's just a joke. It's just to get reaction. For example, I remember when this same Linda Manson some months back in the talkbacks that she was in fact a he (like in the Crying Game) and was crucified for tellin Mary and Joseph to bun their knees to suck his cock. She even had the sincerity to politely pull out and blow her "children" all over baby Jesus's face.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:11 p.m. CST

    Linda Mason is REAL!

    by Nordling

    Thank God for Google...hehehehe... http://www.chog.org/NEWS/WCGCBO15.asp

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:13 p.m. CST

    Or this...

    by Nordling

    http://www.firstumclawrenceville.org/staff.html

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:14 p.m. CST

    Definitely this...

    by Nordling

    http://www.wcinet.net/~lfm/

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:16 p.m. CST

    3rd...

    by snowyowl

    I was a bit disappointed by the first HP movie. Too clumsy at times, and not enough of the dry humor JK Rowling put in the book. I don't think I'll go see the second one in the theatre: it's probably just more of the same thing. I'll rent it on video, even if it's only to see Alan Rickman (great actor, they couldn't have found better as snape), and because Kenneth Branagh should be funny. I'll go see the third one in theatres though: it was always my favorite of the books in plot (the first one was funniest and the last one the most adventurous, but the third one was most inventive and surprising. Darker than the others, too. And that's not very common in a kids book), and I'm really curious to see what Alfonso Cuaron will do with it...

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:19 p.m. CST

    Nordling

    by WeedyMcSmokey

    What, no picture? - I thought you found the grail there for a second. Women of the Church of God, huh? I think this would be even better if it really were her. Who knows? Maybe it is. On this site, she is clearly preaching to the preverted. The Devil's in this site, can't you smell it Linda? I can, and it smells so goooooooooooood.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:33 p.m. CST

    linda mason

    by fun guy

    wow. linda mason is for real after all. tell me, what kinda church lady spends so much time participating in these filth ridden talkbacks? SHAME

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 3:36 p.m. CST

    harry potter movies

    by fun guy

    oh, i forgot to say something about the first harry potter movie. it was a disappointment, but still kind a fun to watch. this one will be no different. it'll tide me over until LOTR just like last year.

  • And yes, the name "Assblaster" is undeniably funny. Don't feel shame, now.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 4:13 p.m. CST

    Esseilte...

    by TV CASUALTY

    Not married, but, believe it or not, engaged. Sorry to disappoint ;-) Trust me, I'm very different in the real world. Really. Different. Clean. Nice. Well-spoken. It's Nordling's evil influence. Nordling, I tell you. Dirty, filthy, blunkining Nordling who makes me... oops, sorry. Letting the inside show again. And hey, Vegas - thanks for the support man. I was starting to feel unclean. Ah fuck, there I go again...

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 4:24 p.m. CST

    The internet's so dirty....

    by Esseilte

    There's something intensely dirty about the internet. That's what makes it so appealing. Congrats on the engagement TV Casualty. I have a live-in love, myself, but I can never help pointing out good catches when I see them.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 4:31 p.m. CST

    linda mason, you ever read the bible?

    by I_AM_A_WOOKIE

    see, i got this passage memorised,Ezikiel 25:17, "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you"

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 4:32 p.m. CST

    Esseilte...

    by TV CASUALTY

    Baby, you're the one. Wait, you *are* a girl right?

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 4:46 p.m. CST

    Linda, my precious dear.

    by Enemy Of God

    I do enjoy caressing the faces of the flock through celluloid means on occasion. It is so wonderfully empowering to have a captive audience - primed for my message... desiring it openly in fact. They ask for me every minute of every day. Who am I to deny the human need to be distracted... to be subverted... to be bought and sold on a hourly basis? However, I MUST deny your assertion of my consanguinity to Messrs. Potter and Columbus. These trifling matters of sorcery and multi-processor enhanced trickery of the human eye is certainly not up to MY standard of covert manipulation and ruination of souls. As a soul beholden to the 'Church' as you so amusingly named the cacophony of claimants to throne of life... you can most assuredly recognize literature, film and 'art' in general as the work of man. I merely metastasize upon the root that is cultivated by those who would do my bidding. So, why on YOUR earth would I take a break from my eternal game of Grand Theft Auto III to post in the mortal realm? It's very simple. I'm here to bathe... nay.. luxuriate in your wonderfully regenerating complete ignorance of my true nature. I BEG OF YOU... please keep attempting to ban books... to expunge tripe from film houses across the globe... to preach the doctrine of exclusion,... to label haphazardly... to accept the words of man as the true word of god.... to dutifully lead your fellow sightless and self-important zealots to elevate yourselves to a position of authority above even 'he' that you purport to represent. A modest proposal... organize a home invasion of J.K. Rowling's abode, drag her out onto the front lawn and crucify the godless bitch so the whole of humanity can spit upon her upturned pagan face. Don't be afraid to rein yourself in cupcake. I promise, I'll be holding your hand the whole way. I'm right here Linda - and I LOVE the work your doing. XOXO you sweet, sweet woman.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 4:46 p.m. CST

    more about linda mason

    by I_AM_A_WOOKIE

    is it me, or does Linda mason remind anyone else of Piper Laurie's character from CARRIE? he mane even sounds like a lunatics. if you are on a film website, a website about film, then surely you must have some kind of inner conflict going on, hollywood is not primarily about making more and more money, yet you being all goody goody jesus shagging christian, seem to enjoy and are interested about films that are about money, and money is the root to all evil, therefore, you care about money, or rather, the love of money, making you yourself, evil. evil is good, like the Sphinx (mystery men) would say, if you let morality rule your life, then you rules can never be moral. theyre all gonna laugh at you. theyre all gonna laugh at you. theyre all gonna laugh at you...

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 4:49 p.m. CST

    TV Casualty

    by Esseilte

    Yeppers, really a girl here. Don't let the fact that I used to play D&D, read fantasy novels, or spend a lot of time on line playing Unreal Tournament fool you, I am really a chick. =) Oh, and I cook, too. ;p

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 4:59 p.m. CST

    Esseilte!!!

    by TV CASUALTY

    Engaged? Did I say engaged? Kidding honey, kidding. Certainly not engaged to a woman with no interest in science fiction, confused by my addiction to PS2, bored by LOTR (hell, doesn't even understand what it's an acronym for). Naw, I'm not engaged. Like I said, *you're* the one. Heh. Don't worry though, I won't make you cook. I whip up a mean slice of toast. Um - you wouldn't know the term "blunkin", by any chance? OK, forget I said that.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:06 p.m. CST

    Linda Mason is a "joke account"

    by magic_ninja

    It's pretty obvious people.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:08 p.m. CST

    TV Casualty

    by Esseilte

    Did I mention that I have like 5 console gaming systems in my home? Although I still prefer a PC for FPSs. I'm a bit sad to say that "blunkin'" is a new one on me, but I did know about Filthy Sanchez. Although I generally advocate a nice Italian meal, I totally understand the necessity to eat a bowl of cereal in front of the PS2 during a long session.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:18 p.m. CST

    It's called a 'BLUMPKIN'

    by Enemy Of God

    and 'Dirty Sanchez' is the preferred nomenclature. Neither of these measures up to the Pittsburgh Platter. I would be delighted to provide graphic descriptions by email.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:18 p.m. CST

    on a serious note lindy windy

    by I_AM_A_WOOKIE

    you are not asking for the the church to advise what we see, you want the church to censor what we see, you want us to lose the very thing that the free world is largely based on, freedom of speech.if we lose the freedom to make our own decisions, then we become controlled , if we are controlled, then we are living in a dictatorship. we all know that there is no such thing as freedom from censorship, whe have the official secrets act, d-notices, etc, but they protection for national security. you seem unable to grasp the concept that one person is clever, people, are not, we have the ability to separate ourselves from fiction and morality, religion, society and reality in general.to deprive children, who need to develop their own intelect (as im sure you know), from certain arts, is to dispell such education as mathematics, history and science, simply because you feel that it is harmful. i assume that you have read these books, has it harmed you? has the idea that harry potter appreciated christmas at hogwarts turned you to paganism? however if you have never read them, you have no right to say what harms people. books, especially fantasy stories, encourage childrens imaginations, they help their brains to be used, sci fi does the same, the bible does also. My other point is, what right does the church have to censor, i respect peoples beliefs also, i believe in God myself, but in such a multi cultural society, especially in the US, why should the jewish state not also have the right to censor in t6he same way, or how about those who believe in taoism or shintoism, the buddhists, muslims, hindus, sikhs, Zoroastrians, Baha'i's, Rastapharians? im sure some people believe in the prophet Hud aswell, america is not governed by the church, or christianity, so why should the church tell what all the jewish, muslim, hindu, Zoroastrian, buddhist and atheist children what to read? this kind of censorship is expected in communist of islamic or jewish countries, becouse their society is built of beliefs, but democracy is built on the thory that everyone has a voice. I am not telling you to shut up like other talkbackers, or that would make me a hypocrite, but you seem like a very narrow minded person who seems too intollerant of other cultures, beliefs, thoughts or opinions. so you can see how this LINDA MASON = HITLER comparison has come about.if other beliefs cause a problem for you, the best option is to remove the problem, therefor intolerance, which ultimatelly leads to hatred. geddit?

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:19 p.m. CST

    Esseilte, you're breakin' my heart here...

    by TV CASUALTY

    Wait, I know - you're hideously disfigured, right? Or you're a neo-nazi. Or a prostitute in Calcutta -no, actually, if you were a porstie from Calcutta, you'd probably know from experience what a blunkin is. What the hell, I'm going home to break the news to the little woman, then I'm on the first flight to Calcutta. Jesus, 5 game systems? You *are* a geek. I don't mean that in a bad way. Oh, and magic ninja - thanks for pointing that out to us, here I was thinking Linda Mason was a real person, and that was a real email address. Man, I feel so stupid!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:26 p.m. CST

    Enemy Of God you sick bastard!

    by TV CASUALTY

    I was talking about a blunkin, you know, a mild, pumpkin flavored dish from India; nopt a blumpkin! Jesus Christ, get your mind cleaned up you twisted fuck. OK, I'm lying, sue me. And please god YES, email me what a "Pittsburg Platter" is. I'm dying to know. Whatever it is, can it possibly be worse than the Topeka Destroyer? I await your response.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:26 p.m. CST

    TV Casualty

    by Esseilte

    No need to go as far as Calcutta, I live in Southern CA. Horribly disfigured? Nope. Definitely a geek, and I generally think of that as a good thing. Of course, we could just meet in Vegas to elope. We could go to the GameWorks after the ceremony. ;p

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:31 p.m. CST

    Enemy of God

    by Esseilte

    Thanks for clearing up that misspelling for me. I was a bit perturbed when a search on google (regular and image) produced no results for my search of "blunkin'". Searching for "Blumpkin" produced the desired results, and now I can add a new trick to my repetoire if I so desire.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:35 p.m. CST

    Esseilte-

    by TV CASUALTY

    I can be there by midnight. Seriously, you've been great folks. But I gotta go home, kiss the girl, walk the dog, have dinner and pretend to be normal some more. See, I *told* you I was normal. I'll be back tomorrow morning for more ridiculous, offensive and only slightly funny humor. Esseilte - Bellagio. First tree by the fountain pool. Midnight.... G'night everyone.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:38 p.m. CST

    Esseilte, you wicked thing you.

    by Enemy Of God

    rrowr! TV Cas. - cover your puppy's eyes... description on the way.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:40 p.m. CST

    Man, Harry Pot head sucks ass!!!

    by warpfactor

    Man that Harry Potter shit is so damn gay! Doesent Harry Knowls have anything better to do then type some gay reveiw about that fucked up Harry Potter!?!? I think that Spider-Man is a fuckloadbetter!!! 114 million dollars on the opening weekend, in your face you damn nerd!!! God Harry Potter is just a little fuck that screws around and waves his magic wand around! All of you bastards out there that like that stupid ass Harry Potter crap are just a bunch of fuckin fagets!!! FAGS!!!!!! Anyway as for god ole' Spidey, SWING ON!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:43 p.m. CST

    C.S. Lewis

    by m2298

    "I would have believed it more if you had not included C.S. Lewis. Although I like the books, he's at the top of the fanatical Christian "to read" list for his hit-you-over-the-head Christ allegories in The Chronicles of Narnia." If anyone thinks that some fundamentalists won't censor Lewis go to www.balaams-ass.com/ journal/homemake/cslewis.htm

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:56 p.m. CST

    WARPFACTOR IN THE HIZZOUSSSSEEEEEE!

    by Nordling

    Yo, that was one FUCKED UP Talkback, yo! Damn, you preachin' like a muthafucka. Word to your mutha, boyeeeeeee! Your vernacular is admirable and your insight is of the elite status. Oh wait, sorry. THAT DA TROOF ROOF! Fuck yeah! No flies on you! All eyes on you!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:56 p.m. CST

    Please note the sarcasm of previous post.

    by Nordling

    If not, well, FUCK YEAH MUTHAFUCKA!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 5:57 p.m. CST

    Linda Mason

    by ASMD

    Hey linda computers are a bad influence on kids also, so why don't you boycott computers. TURN YOURS OFF and leave everyone alone

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:07 p.m. CST

    Could someone from America please explain

    by idleboy

    .....what is it with America and religion. The rest of the civilised world seems to have put their medieval superstitions behind them. Personally I suspect inbreeding and the shallow end of the gene pool, but there may be more to it. Ahhh Linda, there's a thin line between irony and idiocy.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:07 p.m. CST

    Harry Potter, gay?

    by Foebane

    How can Harry Potter be a fag? At least he doesn't wear TIGHTS, unlike a certain webslinger we all know...

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:08 p.m. CST

    Uhhhh.... Gee thanks Nordling! I think.

    by warpfactor

    Uhhhhh Yo Nordling thanks for the compliment and everything. I just received a e-mail. Im gonna go check it now. P.S. Niggers are the most stupidest fucked up race in the Universe. Just thought that I would state a fact there. later

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:09 p.m. CST

    Jerry's final thought:

    by laguna_loire

    It seems that at the end of a the day one person's opinion can be misconstrued by so many different opinions and ethical backgrounds. At the end of the day folks, its just a movie. Linda Mason darling, this is the wrong site for trying to preach, and there are far worse things in the world right now than a simple movie, watch the news and pray for people who are in deep pain sister. StarlingUK, I know you from somewhere, who are you? The lack of swearing is a dead giveaway!! Oh, and be good to yourselves (kinda difficult to imagine by the amount of language within the responses here!!), and to each other.......

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:14 p.m. CST

    Defending your fag foebane?

    by warpfactor

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:15 p.m. CST

    I wasn't speaking rap.

    by Nordling

    Glad you could read it. Glad you could read. Otherwise I would have just assumed that you banged randomly on the keyboard and it just happened to turn out that way.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:18 p.m. CST

    Thanks for the description....

    by Esseilte

    Enemy of God, thanks for the e-mail. I learn something new every day. Now, I should get back to work, I have some stuff to finish up before I head off to Vegas tonight. ;)

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:26 p.m. CST

    a b c d e f g..........................

    by warpfactor

    Sure Nordling, Whatever!!! Oh and foebane! Compare Harry Pothead to Spider-man. Lets see Spider-Man has his spidey sense his webshooters his cat like agility, his superhuman strength, his superfast reflexes and I could go on and on with great shit! Harry Potter? uhhhhhh The ability to look like a fucked up fag and uhhhhhhhh thats about it! NORDLING EITHER YOU A DUMB FAGET OR YOU NEED TO GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS!!!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:30 p.m. CST

    oh my mistake! I meant that foebane should get his head out of h

    by warpfactor

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:36 p.m. CST

    Dude

    by Nordling

    Dear fuckhead, aka warpfactor. I'm really sorry I couldn't be there for your birth. I mean, I did conceive you (if calling your mom wiping her crotch on the glass after I shot my load when she did her nasty dance at the strip joint conception, but hey, who am I to know these things? So my sperm was eager to swim up that diseased passage. Hell, if Willard can go up the river to get Colonel Kurtz I guess my sperm can make the same journey. But I digress.), but really, i just couldn't find the time to be there, me baking a cake and watching Ed Wood movies and all. You understand, right? Damn shame about that facial rash, but hey, your mom should have told you about that bestiality thing, she being from Oklahoma and all. Good luck in whatever correctional institute they see fit to put you in next, and remember those aren't tattoos, they're brands. I'm sure the Assfucking Burglars Local 256 won't be pleased if you try to have them removed - they don't take kindly to their chattel trying to run away on them. Remember, when you're licking some guy's asshole? Just pretend it's an ice cream cone. I told your mom that and it went much smoother. Thanks again.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 6:38 p.m. CST

    To any parents interested in seeing HARRY POTTER reviews to rate

    by Nordling

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 7:24 p.m. CST

    GET TO THE REVIEW !!!

    by Jonesey

    I' was so excited in anticipation to read the Harry Potter 2 review, yet while reading, why the hell does the reviewer go off into other stupid "random" things, like Frankenstein...Shit, just get the point of telling us whether it sucks or not....GEESHES!!!!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 7:45 p.m. CST

    The most annoying review in the history of AICN?

    by franko

    You should be proud! You're beating out hundreds of other annoying and rambling reviews!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 8:06 p.m. CST

    I am a Wookie...

    by El_Barstardo

    You accuse other people of not reading the bible, and then you attempt to prove your bible expertise by quoting Pulp Fiction?!?! Please! And anyone who can

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 8:08 p.m. CST

    And here I thought that a Sodomite was someone who came from Sod

    by Saoshyant

    "...Copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal"!!?? Who knew?

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 8:09 p.m. CST

    ?????

    by warpfactor

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 8:21 p.m. CST

    THE FART FILES

    by warpfactor

    VISIT THE FART FILES TODAY!!!!! http://agent_bible.tripod.com/ FOR MOVIE REVEIWS, MOVIE PICTURES AND MUCH MUCH MORE!!!

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 8:33 p.m. CST

    Sodomite...

    by El_Barstardo

    Actually Saoshyant, the term

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:51 p.m. CST

    Three Cheers for Rupert Grint!

    by Leslie__

    I enjoyed Philosopher's stone (movie) quite a bit, but it lacked character development, much like the book. COS looks to be a great film. For me Rupert Grint as Ron was the highlight of Philosopher's Stone, and I'm excited to see him steal the screen again; and for all those who are putting down the Harry Potter books, there are a lot of great classics out ther which I have read, and was not impressed by them at all. Different people enjoy differnt books. End of Story

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:53 p.m. CST

    Re: Harry Potter is the Devil's work!

    by sgamgee2006

    Alright let's get one thing straight here. I'm a very religous person and I have no tolerence for satanic entertainment. However the radical and absured views held by you and everyone else who feels that Harry Potter, LOTR, C.S. Lewis's writings or any other fantasy should be banned are absolutly absured. To start with Tolkien and Lewis were both strong Christians (Mere Christanity anyone?) and your views about them are ridculous. People like you make me so incredible angry. You claim to love God but don't show any love in the way you act or present your views. You're no better then any pharisee mentioned in the Bible. You stated in your talk back that you felt the church should be allowed to scan movies and remove objectional material. That idea is absolutly laughable. Niether the church or any other orginazation has the right to invade a private buisness. I hope that your goals of getting these books banned never ever come close to succeeding. Let me say one final thing to you. You have absolutly none of the love of Jesus in your heart that I can see and if you're a christian then I'm ashamed to call myself one.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 10:55 p.m. CST

    Hmmm...I think I'll steer clear of pissing off Nordling

    by WeedyMcSmokey

    A stunning, direct hit. I applaud your enthusiasm and marksmanship. First you start the insult by describing how shooting all over a glass will eventually lead to his birth, then you manage to squeeze in how he can successfully eat ass in prison. Wow. That's going in the vault, baby! (dramatic slow clap spreads over audience rising in volume in tempo, wait...Here come the cheers....)

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:07 p.m. CST

    Re: Linda Mason

    by xander6981

    Okay, lemme make sure I got this straight. You're trying to ban all works of fiction, fantasy fiction to be specific simply because it doesn't support the church? You're afraid your children are going to run off and start worshipping the devil (I should iterate here that we Wiccians do not believe in the devil. That's a Christian creation. How can we worship a being we don't believe in???) That's warped, for sure. However, what you are doing is brainwashing more and more people to mindlessly follow the church, where the pastors, ministers and priests hold the ultimate power, and breed hate and intolerance all around. That's why I got out, dammit. You should also seriously re-examine your values. I'm not saying abandon your faith in God, but take a closer look at what your religion is telling you. It's not too late. There is a difference between faith and religion. Please don't become another mindless religious zealot. Think for yourself. Be extraordinary.

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:19 p.m. CST

    Sweet J** What Have I Stumbled into???

    by jackburtonlives

    This is one of the weirdest talkbacks i have ever seen. The sexual banter, flirting, obscenity, namecalling. I just got back from talking about Tarkovski's "Solaris" and Welles' "F for Fake" and come into this. I must be a bit out of things; I'm just a Canuck living in Asia, so excuse my ignorance, but is all this emotion over this new film "Harry's Chamberpot"? This isn't the new film Moriarty's making, is it? is it about the Harry from AICN or another Harry?

  • Aug. 22, 2002, 11:42 p.m. CST

    It's a full moon. 'Nuff said.

    by Lance Rock

    In fact, the less said, the better. Daddy Knowles leaves the house and look at all the mischief his lil' geeks get into!

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 12:08 a.m. CST

    Linda Mason IS a Witch!!!

    by Ecuamerican

    Well fuck! I thought Harry Potter and his world was all imagination but I see that it is not so! There IS a witch among us! LISTEN! I try to respect people's opinions and I usually don't care what they have to say about HP and satanism but when bring up my man Mr. Tolkien into the mix well I have no choice but to curse you! There have been plenty of other TalkBalkers saying how wrong you are and giving details so I won't do that. You ignorant and selfish bitch should just go back to your self righteous and mundane lifestyle. Stop looking down on the creative authors and their loyal readers. And do us a favor and stop coming to this site!! Its devil worship to see some of the shit you see here!!

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 1:55 a.m. CST

    It just better be better

    by peter_venkman

    This first movie was nothing more than a collection of half assed stories thown together with the thinnest of plots. Some of these little stories were original, most were stolen from other books. There was even a character in the old comic "The Dandy" called Winker Watson whom Harry must have been based as they are THE SAME fucking thing. I can't understand anyone with praise for the first film or the book. When they said that Voldemort had turned to the dark side - I was Voldermortified! (did you see what I did there?) The second film better be better - thats all I'm saying... BTW: The first Harry Potter movie was known as '...and the philisophers stone' here in the u.k. Why was this changed for american audiences? You guys know what a philosopher is don't ya?

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 1:58 a.m. CST

    Xander6981

    by El_Barstardo

    Yes, Wiccans do not believe in the devil, instead they worship trees and bark. So go make yourself a little scarecrow to bow before, go watch a little Buffy, and then go look up the word Gullible before going to bed. You honestly think that if this

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 2:29 a.m. CST

    This review is BULLSHIT!

    by TheGinger Twit

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 5:07 a.m. CST

    LINDA MASON: Fact AND fiction?

    by Kieran

    Like a lot of you, I automatically assumed that Linda was some 15 year old kid from Ontario having fun yanking the chain of a few overly earnest film geeks. But did any of you follow those Linda Mason links posted back there. It turns out there really is a "Linda Mason" and her life has been stranger than fiction. Her Pastor husband and his girlfriend tried to murder her -- And she wrote a book about it. Now I guess that qualifies Linda Mason as a minor celebrity, and perhaps the 15 year old from Ontario read about her, and decided to run with her persona. I don't know anymore. It's possible that this Linda Mason really is the real deal, and if that's true then she has been through enough shit in her life without anyone here making it worse. So my advice, either way, don't respond -- If it's a kid trolling, then responding gives him what he wants -- If it really is Linda Mason, well what she has been through ought to make us feel pity, and striking out at her is like striking out at a wounded puppy. DON'T RESPOND TO ANY LINDA MASON POST. - - (Once again, here is the amazing link of her story: http://www.wcinet.net/~lfm/reviews.html )

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 8:21 a.m. CST

    This is the weirdest Talkback ever...

    by AliceInWonderlnd

    Really fucking weird. Since I wish to keep whatever vestigial threads of innocence I still possess after every director in the world has raped my childhood, I will not be further researching blumpkins, having been too scarred by the notion of dirty sanchezes, except to wonder why someone would do such a thing. Perhaps the point is that they are having so much sex they can afford to turn a previously willing sexual partner into a psychotic fury intent upon doing them severe scrotal injury. I guess in some quarters that that's fun too. Nordling is the man today, I see.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 9:23 a.m. CST

    LINDA MASON REVEALED! SHE IS ME!

    by Vegas

    And we're not wearing any pants! FAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!

  • Hope it took some of the wind out of her sails. Or are those her bloomers?

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 10:10 a.m. CST

    Back to the story in hand...

    by sambrook

    Sorry if my ramblings on the actual film are going to disract everyone from their insults and attacks on each other, but... Just wanted to say that last year it seemed like everyone KNEW Harry Potter was going to beat LOTR in the box office stakes. But now the fuss has died down about the speccy nerd, and the buzz for TTT has grown so strong (even stronger, in my opinion, than for Fellowship), could it be possible that this year LOTR is going to come out on top? I hope so. Don't get me wrong, I thought Potter 1 was an inoffensive bit of fluffy entertainment, but to become the second biggest grossing film ever? Come on! I know box office doesn't stand for everything but.. well, I think you see my point. Now the novelty of the Harry Potter books on the big screen has worn off, maybe TTT can claim it's position as the critical and commercial victor.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 10:13 a.m. CST

    BTTW - all Brits - anyone else hear about the 12A classification

    by sambrook

    After all the fuss Spider-man caused with it's 12 rating, it seems the BBFC are going to introduce the 12A rating - basically like the PG-13 certificate in the US - where anyone can see the film, but under-12's have to be accompanied. And The Two Towers is to be the first to recieve it. Good news for us, especially those who feared Helm's Deep would be cut in this country to make way for a PG certificate.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 10:14 a.m. CST

    Linda Mason Has Beer...Cheets On Buddy Christ.

    by wato

    twitter....

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 10:24 a.m. CST

    sambrook

    by Buck Teeth Soh

    Nothing on the BBFC website about that. Where did you hear that?

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 10:31 a.m. CST

    12A

    by sambrook

    It was in a newspaper a few days ago - forget which one. COuld just be a rumour, but an interview with the ex-BBFC chairman about a month ago (forget his name too - my memory seems to have gone all Memento) spoke of all certifiactes becoming advisory one day, and specifically mentioned the 12 rating becoming advisory as early as this autumn. Which ties in with this story I read. So who knows? It could still be a work-in-progress, with the official guidlines still being finalised. Didn't say if the 12 certificate itself is still being kept, so I guess the BBFC is still working on the little details.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 10:33 a.m. CST

    Spelling

    by sambrook

    BTTW excuse my spelling and typos in my last post. My country invented the English language, but I guess we can't speak it, huh?

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 10:36 a.m. CST

    Dirty Sanchez

    by Buck Teeth Soh

    Alice, don't rule out the fact that even slightly agile women are probably just as capable of delivering a DS right back, and knowing how dramatic some people like to be when finishing relationships, it might be quite popular. Anyway, just to prove it's not all rampant misogyny, those of you with a stout heart read on... ******* Pearl Harbor - Right after sucking a guy off stand up and spit his jizz right back in his face, then yell "Tora, Tora, Tora!" ******** (variation on an old favourite) Baby Rodeo - When riding your partner who's about to blow his load, give some good pounding strokes and when he's at the point of no return scream out 'Let's make a baby!'. See how long you can hold on, while he tries to throw you. One night stands should only be considered for the more advanced rider

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 11:30 a.m. CST

    Linda, Columbus, Pompousness, more

    by ErrantNight

    1) Linda, you are fantastic. Thank you for sharing your enlightened views with us, and I would just like to go on the record as saying that CLEARLY what this world needs is more censorship, and quite frankly it should be the hardline Southern Baptists who dictate what is suitable or unsuitable for public consumption. Also, if we could go ahead and make required bible readings a part of school, starting in pre-K, that would be great. Also, while we're at it, no more asparagus. I fucking hate that shit. 2) The problem with the first film, and most likely the unidentifiable trait that our pompous reviewer seems to find wrong with film 2 here, is likely traceable to none other then Chrissy Columbus. Now, I really have no problem with him, he just is not a particularly talented director. Combined with a fear of messing things up, and having Ms. Rowling around making sure everything is consistent with her view of the series... any hope of creating a film that stands on its own merits is lost, which is precisely why the Lord of the Rings films work. In attempting to adapt the books as literally as possible, focus shifts from creating a good movie that could properly convey the spirit of the books, into adapting as much as possible as exactly as possible. The books, as short are they are, are too long to be fully adapted without revisions, alterations, and changes... and while some might fault the screenwriter, I would blame the "visionary" behind the picture for not attempting to do more with the movie. Of course, you end up with an acceptable product Columbus's way, sure to not ruffle any feathers, easily marketable, and yet despite the magic of the stories and incredible special effects... the movies are bland, relatively forgettable, and in time will either be remembered as an acceptable adaptation perfet for children, or perhaps, and hopefully, the flawed 2 first chapters in a series of movies that improves just as the books have. 3) For all the good scoops to be found there, the majority of internet reviewers have the same problem of being full of themselves, with perhaps very good reason: they're trying too hard to make a name for themselves. Without widespread public circulation, and with everyone and their uncle reviewing movies (knowledge of film, film history, or proper film making being apparantly totally unnecessary for most), reviewers trying to make a name are trying to make THEIR name with whatever "interesting" (term used very loosely) information about their own lives, or what they feel gives them the proper credentials or experience to review a movie on. Recommendation to any and all such reviewers (and maybe I'm wrong, but here it is just the same): If you can critique a film well, and you know it, you don't need to justify it. If you can write well, and you know it, don't waste your readers' time babbling about the personal details of your life, or the circumstances behind your viewing of the movie, or what have you.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 11:59 a.m. CST

    Again, this flick will open on my birthday, and some loser will

    by furnace404

    Fuck harry potter. $0.02

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 12:14 p.m. CST

    spaceperve...

    by TV CASUALTY

    I see you got into the spirit of things. nice one.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 1:27 p.m. CST

    Kenneth Branagh!!!

    by Maidenjedi

    Yes, so very very glad that he's playing Lockhart. Talk about being born to play the part! Thanks for this preview/review, and thanks for giving the skinny on Branagh's performance - and thank you for actually knowing who he is. Too many HP fans live in dark closets where Alan Rickman is the only adult capable of functioning in an HP movie; they have no idea what they're in store for.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 2:08 p.m. CST

    all righty then

    by I_AM_A_WOOKIE

    talk about a pandora's box, sheeyat! this has to be one of the biggest, opinionated, obsessive and truly offesive talkbacks i have ever seen. most excellent!

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 2:11 p.m. CST

    Linda Mason?

    by Thelma Scumm

    I'm sorry, but can someone clue me in here -- Is Linda Mason for real or is it just a great parody?

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 2:26 p.m. CST

    I AM A WOOKIE...

    by TV CASUALTY

    ... you're welcome, laddie. You're welcome. Enjoy this glorious talkback, because it is near it's end. And Thelma - honestly, I don't really care if she's real or not. I'm having too much damn fun. I mean hell, I got engaged on this talkback. At least, I think I did. Oh crap, I gotta go make a phone call...

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Is this Rowling or Columbus?

    by Halloween68

    Because, "That the final film stayed true to the book was largely why it was so successful. It WAS a wonderful movie, and one obviously made by people who gave a damn." No, no, annnnnd... No. The reason the first movie was so successful was that little kids screamed and cried until someone in their family took them to the theatre to shut them up. Also, moms across the world seem to think Rowling is some sort of champion of unemployed housemums. It was "not" a wonderful movie. It was very flat, lifeless, and uninspired. And I don't get at all that it was made by someone who cares. If it was, they obviously didn't bring that across to the big screen. I'll go see it at a matinee. Sure. I certainly hope though it has more life to it than the first one. If this guy, girl liked it that much, I'd like to hear what someone who recognise the faults of the first film will think of it. Hmmm. Curious.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 2:44 p.m. CST

    HARRY POTTER DOES NOT SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!

    by moontrimmer2001

    To whoever said that Harry Potter sucks YOU suck! You should have read the blue thing on the side of the page:don't be a bastard. Blatant abuse, personal attacks, OFF-TOPIC BS, cross-posting, blatant advertising, and hate speech are all fodder for deletion. In other words, being a jerkwad loser will get you banned. J.K. Rowling rules! YOU are just jealous and pissed off!

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 2:53 p.m. CST

    HARRY POTTER, WORK OF THE DEVIL PLEASE

    by moontrimmer2001

    WHOEVER SAID THAT IS OVER SUPERSTISOUS, HAS NOT READ THE BOOKS AND IS OBSESSED WITH THEIR CHURCH! HARRY POTTER IS NOT PAGAN! THEY DO NOT WORSHIP SATAN OR ANY OTHER GODS! HOGWARTS IS NOT A SCHOOL OF RELIGION IT IS A SCHOOL OF KNOWLEDGE! JRR TOLKEIN'S BOOKS ARE GREAT! THERE IS NO WORSHIPPING THE DEVIL IN ANY OF THE BOOKS YOU TALKED ABOUT AND YOUR IDEA OF HAVING THE CHURCH EDIT THEM, RIDICULOUS! IF YOU DONT LIKE THEM DONT READ THEM OR GO TO SEE THEM! AND FOR OUR SAKE DONT SIT HERE AND SAY THEY ARE THE WORK OF THE DEVIL WHEN YOU DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 3:06 p.m. CST

    it seems some of you haven`t get it!!

    by drjones

    MrBabbage! the philosophy of these reviews here on aicn here IS that the reviewer often tells something about his life and maybe what he did before the film and shares all of the feelings he had with us...that`s the great here...and that`s for me the difference to all of the other ordinary reviews i find in newspapers and magazines. arrghh!!!

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 3:10 p.m. CST

    better late..

    by Sepulchrave

    1- The first HP was handsome and completely lifeless, get rid of Chris Columbus and give it to Gilliam. 2- Gamgee2002 (or whatever) be careful, a baptist would never put the apostrophe in the correct place in "you're". 3- SUCH a good point about the Hamlet DVD, a film that excellent but that long NEEDS a scene selection fuction AT LEAST. 4- Kudos to the pointer-out of the 'well, I scatched my ass for an hour this morning' trend of the reviewers on this sight, not to mention Harry's inability to resist crowing incomprehensibly whenever a studio throws the fat boy a sop.

  • i hate this "this movie IS good" stuff...how about I liked it.... however...THANX for your review!!! :D

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 3:21 p.m. CST

    i belong to those who haven`t read any of the books yet...

    by drjones

    and for the first film: for me personally it seemed to be a lil bit a rip off from other stories but however. i hope the CHAMBER will be better than philosopherer... although i`m not really anticipating it. and judging after reading the TB it seems that i`m not the only one!!!!!!!

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 3:24 p.m. CST

    OH YES IT DOES!!!

    by StarlingUK

    Well, it doesn't actually, but I just felt this sudden desire to use that as a topic ... scuse me. Martje

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 3:35 p.m. CST

    Starling, don't pick on the poor thing...

    by TV CASUALTY

    If she's a day over 13 I'll be shocked. Play nice with the little ones, although this is hardly the right talkback for a youngster (partially my fault, I suppose)...

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 4:03 p.m. CST

    TV Casualty

    by empyreal0

    "Assblaster" is right up there with "ball-giggling".

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 4:07 p.m. CST

    Oh, and Kenneth Branagh may very well be the best thing to happe

    by empyreal0

    Which isn't to say that it was doomed otherwise; it was pretty good. Very much a modern Bedknobs and Broomsticks. Cute kid-magic fun. Glad to hear it's definitely getting darker. But back to Branagh. Anyone here ever see "HOW TO KILL YOUR NEIGHBOR'S DOG"? Great indie flick with a touching message, with ol' Ken once again hitting all the right marks PERFECTLY. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend a late-night viewing with popcorn and a significant other. And a dog.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 4:23 p.m. CST

    Heh...

    by Halloween68

    I've read all the books. I'm hoping, like with the books, the films will get better as they go along. I was extremely disappointed the first time around. The movie didn't capture any of the spirit of the Harry Potter novels. If Columbus is incapable, I hope at least the next guy can nail it (the guy that did the Little Princess; sorry, can't think of his name). It would be ashame though if this one's a dud. I really enjoyed the book.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 4:31 p.m. CST

    What I find nigh impossible to believe

    by Trav McGee

    Is that nobody's yet shown up here with the User Handle "Dirty Sanchez." Great talkback, but really now, somebody's slacking off. If could keep the educational theme going, I don't suppose someone could enlighten me on another act frequently referred to: what the hell is wolfbagging? Teabagging, but the balls get bit off? What? ...Now then Harry Potter, saw it with the nephew, he had a great time so I had a great time. Shrug, otherwise. Except Y Tu Mama Tambien was one of the best films I've seen in years, so #3 oughta be interesting at least. Never read the books but might when they're all out. Now then. Wolfbagging. Gracias.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 4:54 p.m. CST

    Random Potter-Related Thoughts

    by FrankCobretti

    1. An SAT throwback for you: Harry Potter's wizards : LOTR's wizards. Best Analogy? Superman : Superman IV. 2. God bless the Brits. 3. Kenneth Branagh rocks. I dragged my wife all the way out to Agincourt on our last trip to France and made her suffer through my rousing St. Crispin's Day speech, all pretty much because of Ken. Having said that, his Hamlet left me flat. I just finished reading his screenplay of the film, and I realize why: he doesn't love the characters. He understands them, sure, and he loves playing with them, yeah, but he doesn't love them. Flame away, but Gibson brought more to the role. I just plain bought his whole production more, which is a shame, because Branagh's also brought us the brilliant Derek Jacobi. Oh, yeah, and I liked Frankenstein. It brought the book to life. 4. A word about Alan Rickman: has he ever been bad in anything, ever? 5. In War & Peace, Tolstoy wrote that the worst horrors are brought about by those claiming to keep the peace.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 4:57 p.m. CST

    This is THE BEST TALK BACK EVER

    by Bregalad_

    My hat's off to everyone here (especially Nordling)...... this thread has been filled with fake Bible thumping, idiot homophobes, defenders of Alfonso, and a brave new glossary of sexual perversions. Fantastic! And best of all, TVCASUALTY and Esseilte have already booked that room in Vegas for the weekend. When they're done, I hope we get to see the video of their oh-so-naughty Dirty Sanchez!

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 5:25 p.m. CST

    Vegas Sex Fest

    by Esseilte

    Considering I've been in every position imaginable since midnight last night, I just thought I'd log on and say hello. Really, don't knock a midnight Vegas meeting until you try one. And to think, this started as a conversation about Harry Potter.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 5:43 p.m. CST

    I just wanted to say

    by Nordling

    Thanks for all the love (especially you, Linda. I didn't know legs as fat as yours could bend like that) and all the friendly e-mails. I'm here all week; be sure to tip your waitress!

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 5:56 p.m. CST

    STAR WARS

    by warpfactor

    People, lets stick on one motherfucking subject! Theres a bunch of idiots yaking about everyone on here burning in hell because of us being on this shitty Harry Potter page. Theres one slut yakin her ass off about how she got fucked in Vegas. And theres a bunch of little fags that wont shut up about the Harry Potter movies. There has been one guy here that started talking about the Star Wars movies. NOW THERES SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT!!! So for now on instead of talkin about that stupid little fucker Harry Pothead, lets talk about STAR WARS!!! I mean come on! Who would wana yak there stupid ass off about this new shity Harry Potter movie? Its spose to be called the two towers? Well why ould you want to call a movie the two towers after all of that september 11 stuff?!?! Oh wait, thats The Lord of the Rings that is going to be called that. Oh well who cares they both suck ass!!! So lets start talking about STAR WARS!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 6:14 p.m. CST

    I see my work is not yet done.

    by Nordling

    warpfactor, I can see why you would have a problem with the Two Towers. Remember Initiation Day? Huntsville Prison? Ring a bell? Should I describe how you were initiated into the Assfucking Burglars Union? The two guys laying on the bed? The two Towers indeed, my son. I saw you in visiting hours, jaw still hanging agape, loose, like someone just stuffed too much junk mail in the box. Hours upon hours, man. I just went there to talk about how your mom was making "smash" videos again. And you had to burden me with the image of you jumping dick to dick like some human game version of Frogger. As you waddled away, I wiped a tear from my eye. I mean, I felt bad for you man. Remember, counterclockwise does the trick on the man ass thing. The faster they come, the faster you're out of there.

  • Aug. 23, 2002, 10:32 p.m. CST

    Cary Elwes...

    by FlickChick

    Would have been the perfect Lockhart. Yeah, Brannagh is a great actor and all but can he "act" fine? 'Cause I have a hard time believing women would swoon and fawn over him...He's not an attractive man. Oh, and as for that critic for me he lost credibility when he said that he liked Harry Potter and the Soceror's Stone...Eck, that flick was not terrible, but it's definitely not rewatchable. A two-star flick is what it is. I'm holding out until Prisoner and the new director.

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 5:50 a.m. CST

    This talkback is not yet complete without...

    by Zefram Mann

    The mentioning of a few terms not yet elaborated upon. "Cleveland Steamer" - When a man is tit-f*cking a girl and craps on her stomach (not to be confoosed with the...). "Pasadena Mudslide" - When a man is sitting on a girls chest getting oral, and then craps between her tits. "Angry Dragon" - When as you fire your load in a girl's mouth, you smack the back of her head so it comes out her nose. "The Nixon" - When you are doing it doggie style, and as you finish you throw your hands in the air giving the "V" sign and shout, "I am not a crook!". Sorry if I grossed anyone out, but this Talkback is such a lost cause as is that I might as well just fire the shot that sinks it completely and gets us all banned, and inform a few people as to the meanings of these popular terms while I'm at it. Peace!

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 7:28 a.m. CST

    FrankCobretti

    by AliceInWonderlnd

    I hope you are not trying to imply that HP is cooler than LOTR. That kind of thing is very dangerous. It's just asking for a knock on your door at four in the morning. Seriously though, you are on the money about Hamlet - Gibson was much better, as was the whole production. I think Branagh sometimes, as a director, makes things a little too obvious, hammers everything home a little too much, and not everything worked in that production, such as the presentation of Polonius as a debauched hypocrite. Though both films were beautiful to look at, and I think Branagh will be more than adequate to play Lockhart. I also liked Frankenstein, but I also think that he does a fair bit of "over-signalling" there too.

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 11:05 a.m. CST

    huh?

    by AZEROK

    I thought you were going to review the movie, not tell me what it was like. I could have done that? where are the details?!?

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 11:58 a.m. CST

    AliceIn

    by FrankCobretti

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 12:35 p.m. CST

    black magic woman

    by feverishkin

    Couldn't it be said that Jesus practiced the art of black magic?Why do we call them "miracles"? Because "the bible" says so? In my opinion, the bible is the biggest form of fantasy fiction ever made.That's why there are so many versions (read: translations. Like Chauser or Homer) Keep these forms of pagan entertainment out of YOUR home. Stay out of MINE!!!

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 1:14 p.m. CST

    AliceInWondrlnd

    by FrankCobretti

    1. Note to self: beer and talkbacks don't mix. I mixed up the order of my analogies. Let's try again. LOTR's Wizards : HP's Wizards as Henry V : Prince Charles. Any other position would, indeed, merit a 4:00 AM visit by the men with unpleasant expressions. 2. Interesting that you specifically mention Polonius in your comments on Branagh's Hamlet. I pictured that character as I made my initial comments about Branagh not loving the characters in his Hamlet. I still have faith in Ken, though. Anyone who can bring us HV, MAON, and Dead Again must just be in a rough spot at the moment. Ken, we're ready to forget Swing Kids and move on. ARe you?

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 1:19 p.m. CST

    It Aint All About You, Dude

    by Billiken

    Could this review have been any more self-serving, or any more bubble-headed? I particularly liked how he said (in effect) "I dont know why I bother reviewing movies, cause my pans dont affect the movies' box office..." As if he really thought his anonymous rambling, narcissitic "reviews" mattered to anyone. Get a life, dude!

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 3:59 p.m. CST

    Was the title "Philosopher's Stone" changed to "Sorcerer&#39

    by John_Howlett_Jr

    I'm not American-bashing, I'm simply wondering. Even in Canada the title remained "Philosopher's Stone".

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 4:42 p.m. CST

    I rather believe in Greek Mythology than in the *gasp* BIBLE!

    by John_Howlett_Jr

    Lets just say that I don't really trust the credibility of a biography (namely the New Testament) when there are FOUR DIFFERENT VERSIONS of the SAME STORY in the book! Were the Apostles smoking grass or something? They can't even get along on what Jesus' final words on the cross were! The "Holy" Scriptures have been mistranslated, misinterpreted and straight out RADICALLY MODIFIED so many times throughout the last two millenia that I don't think ANYONE knows what really happened. I figure that it was like the Matrix: Jesus was Neo, Mary of Magdalena was Trinity, she introduces him to John the Baptist (Morpheus), he reveals to him that he is the "One", that he's able to perform miracles (to warp reality with a mere thought), he's always persecuted by the Agents (of the Roman Empire), he's eventually betrayed by Judas (Cypher), he resurrects at the end and shows everyone that he truly is the Son of God, or Emissary of the Infinite Intelligence, or whatever. Sounds better anyway. Oh, and when he got pissed-off and started kicking ass in the Temple, there probably was a lot of wire-fu.

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 4:57 p.m. CST

    John_Howlett_Jr

    by FrankCobretti

    I wasn't at the meeting, but I suspect the publishers went with "Sorceror's" vice "Philosopher's" stone because the average American child isn't really up to speed on European folklore. It's unlikely he'd even have heard of alchemy by the time he hit the book's target age, but he would probably have some inkling that sorcerers are "cool." Just a guess. Oh, and by the way, I couldn't get the people I had lunch with last Friday to agree on precisely the same story of who said what to whom. Read the gospels for the themes, not for what kind of quadruped Jesus used to ride into Jerusalem.

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 5:54 p.m. CST

    Hamlet again

    by AliceInWonderlnd

    I believe that one of the big selling points around Branagh's "Hamlet" was that it was the first time all the dialog from both folios was used, and he must have wanted to play about with that. Zeffirelli's is more streamlined, but this works in its favour. They both have kick ass casts full of top drawer talent, but I prefer the casting in Zeffirelli's - I can't even remember Laertes in Branagh's version, whereas he made a strong impression in the other version. Plus, Gibson acted his tits off. His mad scenes are much better - laconic, understated, yet exploding into violent outbursts. "What are you reading, my lord?" "Words... words... Words." Regarding the namechange from "Philosopher's Stone", it is unlikely that many British children are going to be heavily versed in the concepts of medieval alchemy - it's just a cool name. No idea why it was changed, but if I were an American I would be feeling faintly patronised by this. Finally, the four gospels are unified in the story they tell - rather like asking four witnesses to the same event will give slightly differing versions of the particulars, but can describe the general event.

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 6:07 p.m. CST

    Last Word

    by FrankCobretti

    Alice, you are dead-on-balls accurate. And you've made me want to see the Gibson Hamlet again. Do you happen to know if the screenplay is available anywhere? I'd be interested in making the comparison. I suspect this particular TB will drop off the board soon, but it's been a pleasure making your acquaintance ... I'll see you on another one. --Frank "Through little sleep and much reading, his brain dried up and he lost his wits" Cobretti.

  • Aug. 24, 2002, 11:29 p.m. CST

    linda mason?

    by FreakyLeprechaun

    Linda, in my opinion, I find nothing wrong with wanting to escape the everyday dull, gray life and pretend, even if its just for a moment, to escape and go off somewhere on a magical adventure. Rowling is not trying to tell children that this is what they should believe,I believe she's just telling a story, nothing more, nothing less. Everyone wants to escape every once and a while. WHAT THE HELL IS UP EVERYONES BUTT? I LOVE HARRY POTTER! BOOKS AND MOVIE!!!!! sorry just had to get it off my cheast. what is it with Brit's?

  • Aug. 25, 2002, 1:53 p.m. CST

    just a common circumlocutory comment from a chubby-cheeked chri

    by maenu80

    Honestly speaking, I don't (or maybe don't want to)understand both extremes. 1) I do believe in the bible and its truthfulness and don't appreciate any blaspemic or just insulting comments on that fact or people sharing this point of view. (;-) you know which reading) 2)In my humble opinion, the 4 Harry Potter books (so far)are humorously and inspiringly written books for children and adults likewise. Well, it's true -they deal with a pagan topic. However, it's all about bravery, friendship and love. The topic is only a means to transport these values, which are inherently christian. That's why I can't see the point in trying to get rid of it. We're still living in the world (whether we belong here is another question). They should be talked about between younger children and parents. Due to their dark tone and problmatic topic, I'd not have it read by children under the age of 12 or so. I, myself, have read the 4 volumes with enthusiasm and found despite that magic stuff several analogies to biblical themes. I highly recommend the HP books to anyone who wants to experience some hours of joyful reading. 3)The film is not that bad, but you come soon to realize that they wanted to pack all in and failed to do so, naturally. Nevertheless, it sticks close to the book and is a must for all fans. Well, that's about it from a German student - stuck in between childhood and adult(ery). Pardonne-moi, I couldn't help it. (besides: I'm not married - so: never mind.)

  • Aug. 25, 2002, 4:17 p.m. CST

    Philospher's Stone=Cannabis reference

    by DrKodos

    A "Philospher's Stone" is a device sold in Head shops to smoke joints with. This is the main reason the title was changed in America. The device is a ceramic/porceline "stone" that holds a joint in one end an allows the smoker to smoke all the way down through the roach. They were very popular back in the day.....60's to the 80's so I thinks the reference is lost on most people. That being said, the studio still felt it couldn't take the chance. On another note....Harry Potter is a plagiarized piece of garbage.

  • Aug. 25, 2002, 7 p.m. CST

    The Walkabouter

    by Kayleee

    While I appreciate the inside info the Walkabouter has, can someone PLEASE edit his ramblings into a readable review? You have to read 10 paragraphs into his writings just to get to the title of the movie being reviewed! I actually agreed with some of his ideas, but the work involved in following this "stream of consciousness" was not worth the effort.

  • Aug. 25, 2002, 9:16 p.m. CST

    HARRY SANCHEZ

    by TomVee

    HPII, if I get the drift of this review, sound like more of the same as seen in HPI. I could not get beyond about 15 minutes into the first one, but then again it is my teen daughters HP is aimed at, not middle-aged white males like me. And Dirt Sanchez indeed!

  • Aug. 26, 2002, 4:58 a.m. CST

    HAMLET and TV Casualty

    by t-squared

    True, a nice DVD of Kenny B.'s Hamlet would be nice, but what would the extras include? Interview with the screenwriter? No. Deleted scenes? Since Branagh included the whole text there are none. Alternate endings? Nope. Everbody would still die, perhaps in a different order. It would look great on DVD. It seems that's the only possible perk. Mr. Casualty: What's a dirty sanchez? Is that like a dirty juanita? I'm familiar with the Wobbly H, Jelly-donut, Bullwinkle, and others. Dirty-Sanchez? Hmmmm. And to the guy who put the St. Crispian speech on his post: Great speech. I use that for my auditions when hoping to do some of the Bard's work.

  • Aug. 26, 2002, 11:14 a.m. CST

    HARRY POTTER THE TRUTH

    by JEZEBEL

    RIGHT EVERYONE THERE IS SUCH THING AS POST STRUCTUALIST WHICH IS BASICALLY THE MANAFACTURING OF OLD IDEAS INTO NEW ONE. HP IS SUCH AN EXAMPLE ONLY THERE IS A THIN LINE BETWEEN THE ABOVE AND PLAGERISM AND HERE IS AN EXAMPLE LORD OF THE RINGS 2 FRODO AND SAM GO UP AGAINST A GIANT SPIDER IN A FOREST, HP2 HARRY AND SAM (SORRY RON) DO THE SAME. WHICH IS WHY LORD OF TEHRINGS SI SURPERBE AND HP IS PALAGERIST, SEXIST AND IS SO HYPED UP IT DESERVES TO FAIL

  • Aug. 26, 2002, 1:21 p.m. CST

    once more for all of you in the back... (T-squared)

    by TV CASUALTY

    Dirty Sanchez - when copulating with a woman from behind, you insert your finger into her anus and smear the goo drawn out across her upper lip. Yeah, it's nasty all right. For the record, Esseilte and I had a wonderful time, thank you all for the good wishes. WHY WON'T THIS TALKBACK DIE? Nordling, we appear to have created a monster...

  • Aug. 28, 2002, 6:28 p.m. CST

    I hate all the jerk geeks around here.

    by Cici_pena

    God, you're all such annoying jerks! You bitch and whine about everything! Can't you get around to actually discussing the movie? Jeez, nothing is sacred here. And don't compare Harry Potter to refined literature or Lord of the Rings. I bet you think HP fans don't know the difference, but not all older fans are quite the dumbasses you make them out to be. Most, myself included, are aware that the books aren't perfect. BUT THEY'RE ENJOYABLE REGARDLESS! And if you don't agree, then don't read them. Those of you who waste time dissing the Harry Potter books are pretentious bastards. Get a life.

  • Aug. 29, 2002, 10:41 a.m. CST

    A NOTE OR 2

    by JEZEBEL

    is anyone out there wondering that since only 5 years ago all HP was. was a mere book not it's a national phernomanon and in danger of burning out because it's basically too much too soon. another problem is Warner Bros. are famous for taking a product, turning it into a franchise and ruining it. think Batman or and i know this is pushing it Pokemon! another problem is, the growing changes in youth and the way they outgrow things. so by the time book 7 comes out people won't care of another problem is by the rate she's taking to write them the books would have caught up with the films hence cheapening the book itself and you can't hold production of the films as the cast will grow too old and have to be replaced (think Batman, again) sao overall HPO will burn out and that's the authors fault

  • Oct. 22, 2002, 7:33 p.m. CST

    The first film was...

    by Jar Jar Boinks

    Bland & pedestrian, but it did the job. Face it kiddoes, J.K.Rowling has gotten you reading those things called books, but frankly, they aren't much of an advance over Tom Brown's Schooldays, which they borrow heavily from. I'll probably watch the sequel, but as with the debut film, I suspect it will be difficult to get me watching a repeat, despite that arsehole Roeper idiot declaring it a "masterpiece" and the "new Wizard of Oz" cough, hack, cough. If Harry Potter is considered a "masterpiece", then Biggles is "The Iliad of the 20th Century" and Richard Roeper is the "new William Shakespeare". In other words, poppycock, bollocks and codswallop, don't buh-lieve the hype.

  • Nov. 6, 2002, 5:36 p.m. CST

    JUST LEAVE US ALONE!!!!

    by NjGoFool

    Why can't you just leave Harry Potter fans alone! If you don't like it, you don't like it. Don't watch the movie or read the books. We're not asking you to. Just do something more useful with your time then dissing the Harry Potter books/movies. You're all sensible adults!

  • Dec. 15, 2002, 7:06 p.m. CST

    Branagh, Hamlet etc

    by Staringintospace

    First of all Zeffirelli's Hamlet was little more than a platform for Mel Gibson, a nice attempt to get Shakeespeare into the mainstream but nothing compared to Branagh's, simply because Ken knew what he was doing and he did it properly, so it fours hour's long who cares that's how it was meant to be. Branagh stole the show as Lockhart simply because he's an insightful and talented actor who know's his stuff. Basically he's one of the most underrated actor's of today. As an actor myself Kenneth Branagh is a man I deeply admire with a talent I aspire to both as a director and an actor. Thanks Ken for showing us the way.