Cool News
Massawyrm Reviews RED DRAGON and lusts after Ralph Fiennes!
Hey folks, Harry here... Massawyrm has some prime A grade crack... cuz he feels RED DRAGON is equal in quality to SILENCE OF THE LAMBS.... and we know, that can't be right can it? Well maybe it can... Here ya go....
Hola all. Massawyrm here with a look at Brett Ratner's defining film, the much awaited "reimagining" (if you'll excuse the buzz word) of Red Dragon, the first book of the Hannibal Lecter trilogy. Now this movie carries with it quite a bit of baggage and has been met with much skepticism within the film geek community over the past year. This is primarily for two reasons. 1) Red Dragon has already been adapted for the screen by film geek favorite Michael Mann back in 1986. And 2) Brett Ratner had yet to prove himself a capable enough director for this mood driven a piece as the bulk of his work lay exclusively within the buddy-buddy Action/Comedy genre. Note that I say HAD yet to prove himself. Red Dragon is a brilliant addition to the serial killer thriller sub-genre and is not only a worthy addition to the Lecter Franchise, but a film equal in quality to Silence of the Lambs.
Now I know that's a bold statement, and I'm not saying that Red Dragon will have the same visceral effect on it's audience that Silence of the Lambs caused back in '91, nor do I think that it will attain the 'Classic' status that Silence achieved for being so groundbreaking (although it is a possibility). However, there is no denying that the same level of quality is present. The mood, the acting, the writing. All top notch. This is the type of sequel (or prequel if you will) that you pray for: a film that is tonally perfect for the established universe that seeks to tell a new story and further expands the boundaries set by the earlier film without breaking the pre-established parameters or simply turning into a "further adventures of" story. But I'll go more into that later. In order to do this right, we have to begin at the beginning...
Once Upon a time, there was a book called Red Dragon, and it was a good book, a perfect example of a new generation of crime thrillers that focused upon the aspects of criminology, forensic investigation and psychological profiling rather than just the age old grizzled cop with good instincts or lucky breaks. And that book was optioned by Dino De Laurentas and turned into the 1986 crime thriller "Manhunter". And yes, it was a damn fine film. But, it was not Red Dragon. Oh, it stuck to the plot and had the same characters, but it was a mid 80's crime thriller that stuck pretty well to its genre for the time and ignored the bulk of the examination of the "Tooth Fairy", the exposition of the character that Will Graham was brought out of retirement to hunt for the FBI. All of the Lecter material was there, and it was good and the plot delivered all of the books twists and turns; but still, the rich textures of the serial killer were gone.
But that was a different time. Audiences didn't want to see a serial killer explained, or so Hollywood thought. They wanted a relentless boogey man for the tireless hero to overcome. And that's exactly what Michael Mann gave them, and he did it well. So when Thomas Harris penned the sequel "Silence of the Lambs" de Laurentas had the rights to make another film, and Dino gave it a shot. This time Jonathan Demme took the helm from a script written by Ted Tally and together they created a modern masterpiece of mood and horror. Tally shifted the focus away from just the investigation and more into probing the mind of two distinctly different serial killers. He focused on the characters rather than the twists and Demme set a visual tone with a perfect cast that became an instant classic. Winner of 5 academy awards for Best Actor, Actress, Director, adapted screenplay and the brass ring, best Picture, this film changed the way America looked at crime thrillers. All of a sudden the subject of the hunt was far more interesting than the cop chasing them. This of course led to a whole series of imitators, some great, some complete duds.
But most importantly, in the context of the series, Silence instantly dated Manhunter and surpassed it in every way. Manhunter became forgotten by most of the film watching world and Silence became widely held as the first, the original. Talk to an average movie watcher at your local video store and ask them about Red Dragon. "Oh, that's the third Silence of the Lambs movie" they'll no doubt say. Bring up Manhunter. Mention that Silence is it's sequel. Watch the confusion in their eyes. As a video store clerk, I've had this conversation countless times. I've sent many a soul home clutching a copy of Mann's directors cut (released on video and DVD as a side promotion with the release of Hannibal). I have met few people, all of them film geeks, who remember and have known full well for years exactly what Manhunter is.
So when I heard about the "reimagining" of Red Dragon, I thought as those of you who enjoyed Manhunter as much as I did simply "Why? It's already been done. They're just milking this for more money." And when I heard that Ratner had brought on Dante Spinotti as a cinematographer when he had been the cinematographer of "Manhunter" I thought, as many of you did "Okay, what the hell are they thinking? This is Like Van Sant's using Hitchcock's shotlist for his remake of Psycho. This is insane." But Spinotti's grown alot as a cinematographer, in fact, he's become damn brilliant. Since Manhunter he's done such visually charming favorites as Raimi's "Quick and the Dead", Curtis Hanson's "L.A. Confidential" and "Wonder Boys" and Michael Mann's "Heat" and "The Insider". And lest we forget, he'd actually worked with Ratner before on "The Family Man". Ratner and Spinotti have a history. It seems more a strange kind of synergy than just some "Hey lets get some crew from Manhunter" ass backwards decision.
The first thing you Notice about Red Dragon is just how damned similar it looks not to Manhunter, but to Silence of the Lambs. From the opening scene Spinotti's camera work perfectly emulates Tak Fujimoto's (Signs, Sixth Sense, Badlands) brilliant camera strokes from Silence. Under Ratner's direction the mood and spirit of the franchise are brought back to the screen with the fantastic adaptation by Ted Tally. No longer is there a schism between the first and second episodes of the trilogy; no longer is there a vast difference between the look, the feel and the casting of the first and second films. Red Dragon is a perfect addition to the Hannibal Lecter Universe, expanding the characters in all the right ways while giving us a film that doesn't simply retread over old material.
Ted Tally's script is brilliant. The focus upon the "Tooth Fairy" is very real and well handled. The monster within him is slowly and masterfully exposed to us in wondrously horrifying ways. It isn't until the very end of the film that you realize just how powerful the Red Dragon is. The scenes between Will Graham and Hannibal Lecter are meticulously crafted, perfectly exploring the battle of wills between these two men. And the script is simply "All Balls", refusing to play it safe. There is one scene in particular between the "Tooth Fairy" and his love interest that is so perfect, so dark and macabre, that it simply will make your skin crawl at the very thought of it. Expect this to take at the very least a nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay next year at the Oscars. It's that fucking good.
The most interesting thing about Red Dragon that has balanced out the controversy over the choice of Ratner and the fact that its a remake of a good film is the dream cast assembled for it. And boy howdy does this cast pay off. Anthony Hopkins, in most everybody's mind, IS Hannibal Lecter. Now I know there is a small segment of the film geek population that contends rather that Brian Cox (Manhunter) IS Hannibal Lecter. Don't get me wrong, I love Brian Cox. His performance is wonderful as Lecter. But I gotta go with the crowds on this one. Hopkins just exudes creepiness in this role. He has the sweat of a madman on him, skin that would sting you upon touch and a stare, a glare, that bores a hole right through you and drinks in your darkest secrets. Hopkins gives us every bit of the performance that won him his Oscar while delivering a new and different side to Lecter; the Lecter whose forced to face the man who bested him. There's wounded ego in every scene with Graham, a delight in every tormented glance he catches. Hopkins is the reason everyone will see this movie and he won't for a minute disappoint. But that was never really in question was it? Hopkins fucking this up would be like a professional center fielder missing a pop up fly ball. Sure, it COULD happen, but the odds just ain't in that favor.
Well everyone else lives up to their reputations. Emily Watson is simply brilliant. I'm not going to go into any detail about her character as it is one of Red Dragon's most devilishly clever concepts and an absolute pleasure for those of you who aren't familiar with the story. But her performance is grand, completely endearing and yes, expect another Oscar nomination to come her way. This time I really feel she has a shot to walk home with the old gold man, this time for Best Supporting.
Ralph Fiennes proves once again just how great an actor he is by giving us one of the greatest textured performances in recent memory. As Francis Dolarhyde, "The Tooth Fairy", he gives us a variety of emotion out of the same character, without once slipping into comical dementia that a lesser actor could have easily delivered despite their best efforts. Dolarhyde is a complicated character with so many facets to his personality that are in such constant conflict it could easily become confusing and the character could become a muddled mess on the screen. Fiennes, however, perfectly portrays each facet, both physically and verbally. The looks in his eyes, the contortions of his face, the quiet menace in the calmer times. Everything is played note perfect, a performance on par with Hopkins' own, as well as such past greats as Anthony Perkins in Psycho and Robert Mitchum in Night of the Hunter. Ralph Fiennes is the soul of this movie, its driving force, and Tally's script makes sure to give him plenty of screen time and plenty of good material to work with. Fiennes portrayal is what keep this from becoming "Yet another serial killer thriller", taking us deeply into his mind without the crutch of visual flashbacks. Oh, this film has a couple of auditory flashbacks, but all the while we watch Fiennes react to the thoughts, trying to force them out of his head and deal with them as rationally as he can. These are the moments where Fiennes is at his best, when acting is it's toughest. Alone with only a few lines to cling to. It's these moments when actors truly define themselves, when there's no one in the scene to play off, no clever dialog to help you, no camera tricks to divert attention away from your imperfections as an actor. Fiennes has finally come into his own, delivering a character people will be chewing on for years to come. Again, expect another nomination come Oscar night to head Fiennes' way.
Providing support Mary-Louise parker, Harvey Keitel and Phillip Seymour Hoffman all live up to their abilities. However, Parker and Keitel are never really given much to play around with, especially in contrast to the characters given to Hopkins, Watson and Fiennes. Only Hoffman is given a scene worthy of his talent which he nails as he most often does. While none of these three actors really get the showcase they all deserve, I'm glad Ratner chose such a strong supporting cast here. One weak link could have distracted from all the other amazing elements in this film. Now while I did quietly long for Scott Glenn to have returned one final time as Jack Crawford (Scott Glenn after all is one of the best stoic actors out there at portraying someone who always appears to be two steps ahead of everyone else in the film), Jack Crawford finds himself here more of a catalyst and less a real presence in the film. Keitel gives it his best and only in retrospect do you really wonder how cool it would have been with Glenn.
One of the best touches in the film is the return of Frankie Faison as Barney (merely as a set piece as he has no lines) and Anthony Heald as the detestable Dr. Chilton. Heald once again is downright loathable in the best way and having Barney there, well it does something very special for the film. It takes you back. When Will Graham visits Lecter you forget that there's a new Jack Crawford, you forget that there was a film called Manhunter. You go back to Silence of the Lambs and walk down that creepy ass hallway and its all familiar, just how you remember it when you first walked down it with Clarice Starling 11 years ago. And at the end of that hallway is that damned fold out chair and a smiling, patiently waiting, Hannibal Lecter. Every detail is perfectly in place, everything is just right. This movie exists in the exact same universe without a single difference at that point. It's perfect. Utterly perfect.
And of course there's our Hero, Will Graham, played by Edward Norton. Now early reviews have been giving Norton what I feel is a very unfair shake over his performance. He's good, as he always is, but Will Graham simply isn't as deliciously textured as many of the other characters he's coming into contact with or as some of the characters Norton's been able to chew on in previous roles. He's the straight man. Sure he has issues, but those are nothing compared to Cannibalism and Necrophilia. He's the hero, ever stoic in the face of evil and driven by a determination to do some right in the world. But there are moments, a precious few moments, where Norton really earns his paycheck. Anyone who thinks Ed just sleepwalked right on through this film missed those few key scenes. Scenes like when he walks into the dark house, squints and opens his eyes to become someone completely different. Scenes like when Lecter is doing his damnedest to get into his head and torment him with his innermost fears. Norton is excellent in this film and plays what he's given to the best of his abilities. It's not flawed at all, just very vanilla when you're standing next to one of the most deranged men in cinema history or even when you're compared to Jodie Foster's troubled Clarice Starling.
Movies this good don't happen by accident. Brett Ratner has finally proven himself, delivering the film that will hopefully quiet down this rampant loathing I've seen and heard from many of you fellow geeks out there that based upon just a handful of career building films. Unlike many of my fellow staff members, I've never met Ratner and like yourselves only know of him through his work. I loved Rush Hour 2, like Rush Hour just fine, was very shaky hand on The Family Man and hated Money Talks. But this is the film, the masterpiece in his collection, the film that illustrates that he can deliver a character driven mood piece just fine. There's little to complain about in this film (all of which are period issues) and Ratner has put together one hell of a film that will most definitely put him on the map. If he keeps this up I believe he's well on his way to being spoken of with such names as Ridley Scott, Richard Donner and Robert Rodriguez rather than the Joel Schumacher, Renny Harlin, Michael Bay comments I've been hearing as of late. While I'm not sure if H-towns up for giving him a nod for this one, I do feel that this is one of the best directed films of the year to date. We'll see what comes of that, but I'm pulling for it. This film really is that good.
The only issues I have with red Dragon are small, anal retentive ones dealing with the period setting. While the film does a great job of setting itself back in the mid 80's without too much flash and only one small bit of ribbing (a library girl who is sooooo 80's that its beautiful) there are a couple minor bits that don't mesh with the period. Small modern day nuances that stick out if you're paying attention. But it's absolutely minor and only something you may discuss after the film in passing.
All in all this is quite possibly one of the most widely satisfying films of the year. If you enjoyed Silence of the Lambs at all it will be nigh impossible for you to not enjoy this one as well. Red Dragon will easily make it onto quite a few top 10 lists this year and will no doubt have a powerful showing at next years Oscars. A great film for the season and a genre lovers paradise this film gets some of the Wyrm's highest praise. If you enjoyed Silence of the lambs at all, I cannot stress enough how much you need to see this film. And before anybody brings "Hannibal" up, remember that the audience for the book was just as divided as the audience for the movie. It's nearly impossible to make a great film when the source material is so weak. red Dragon is great source material. red Dragon is a great movie. It opens this weekend and I hope to see some of you there as I take it in for a second time.
Until next time friends, smoke 'em if ya got 'em. I know I will.
-
+ Expand All
-
Big deal
-
I saw a screening of Red Dragon last night. As far as some people go, don't pan a movie before you get a chance to see it. I had planned on not seeing this movie, but after winning some free passes, I figured what the hell. It paid off. Big time. Capping the whole cinematic experience was right before the film I was witness to the trailer for The Two Towers. Wow. If you think it looks good on your computer, think of how it looks on the big screen. I'm counting down the days to December 18. Anyways, back to Red Dragon. I did enjoy the movie. I'm one of the few who think that Lambs was a tad bit overrated. Don't get me wrong, I love the movie, but something just didn't seem right. In retrospect, it was the bad guy. Thats where I think Red Dragon comes out ahead. He get to see into what causes the "Dragon" to do what he does. Buffalo Bill came off to me as just some sick fuck. But Fiennes gave Dolarhyde some feeling. As for the nuances that stuck out as non-80's, I believe the only one I caught was the use of the internet. Sure, it was around even back then, but not nearly as prevalent.
Anyways, I'd reccomend Red Dragon. Its not a perfect film, but its worth your 8 bucks. -
I'm looking forward to seeing this movie, but I think Ratner missed a real opportunity when he didn't cast Philip Seymour Hoffman as Dolerhyde. Ralph Fines will do a good job, but he's just to handsome. Remember Hoffmans performance in Happiness, that was amazing, I imagine that character was based on HP. Just kidding big fella.
-
With the reviews of Red Dragon being great I cant see how any of the clones on this forum can cut ratner down anymore. I saw the interview last night on Charlie Rose. Anthony Hopkins has alot of respect for brett ratner. I was very impressed by what brett had to say about the behind the scenes stuff.Great interview if you dont catch it on tv am sure ratner well put it on the Red Dragon dvd.
-
Other than this, the cast is a dream. Who knows? This might actually be good (although Manhunter's ending is MUCH superior to the book's, despite what the "purists" have to say).
-
just to point out that the legendary producer's name is Dino De Laurentiis, not De Laurentas. Cheers.
-
Harry, what kind of twaddle is this. First Massawyrym goes into the whole history of the Manhunter/Red Dragon business (like any self-respecting talkbacker wouldn't know all about it anyway) and then proceeds to disrespect Manhunter like he's never seen it. I'll tell you something shall I? The contrast between the two films is clearly distinguished by the choice of using the 'Red Dragon'(William Blake) tattoo. One is cerebral; the other isn't.
It's your choice whether, or not, you want to see this movie (I have), but be warned - Manhunter fans - you will be enraged/elated at how crass this 're-imagining' is. Massawyrym wants Rantnerd for Superman!?! CREDIBILITY = 0. -
Are actually Ralph trying to remember what his dialect coach told him about American accents.
-
Were separated at birth.
-
Mann created a relentless serial killer without going into the Tooth Fairy's character? What a ridiculous statement. That was the probably the first time a movie about a serial killer actually spent any time with the character, except for maybe Hitchcock's Psycho. Dolarhyde isn't the movie's main character, but almost the entire final 30 mins. is only about him. Will Graham gets pushed into the background. This was totally unlike movies of the day which had a bad guy who was the equivilent of the Alien, a killing machine. We get to know Dolarhyde as a man and where his psychosis stems from at least partially. Maybe in comparison to Red Dragon the time spent with Dolarhyde is less involved, but to say that Mann didn't explore the character is absurd. It was precisely the defined Dolarhyde character plus Mann's skilled direction and some great performances that elevated Manhunter above the pack. I just watched it last week, and was pleasantly surprised how well it has stood the test of time, even much of the technology is rather current (except the big phones). I'll pass judgment on Red Dragon when I see it, and Ratner may show himself to be a quality filmmaker, but let's not short-change Mann in an effort to give praise to the new film.
-
Oct 02, 2002 2:52:04 PM CDT
Yeah, but is there anything as delicate and cool in this film li
by don_gately
A weeping Dolarhyde placing Reba's hand on his deformed mouth as she sleeps?
-
No one should compare Manhunter to Red Dragon. My guess is that only a few people who recognize the subtle distinctions in directorial style will have much that is worthy of being said about Manhunter. I love Mann's style, and it displays itself in his great movies (Insider), his good-to-fair movies (Manhunter), and his bad movies (The Keep, which I loved but really killed the book's ending). Like Kubrick, you know his movies in the first few minutes due to the unique dynamics of his cinematography. I have yet to see this out of Ratner, and doubt that he will do anything with RD that will be looked back on as distinct. Go gaze into your navel for insight if you think that this movie will be remembered as better than Silence, or even Hannibal. Those had the marks of great directors, which Demme and Scott were and are. Manhunter's appeal also comes from the whole Eighties feel of the movie, music included. And I really like Norton, but Peterson has the thousand-yard stare down and won't be topped there. Nuff said. Oh BTW, if anyone read The Keep, the other books that go with the series are amazing (The Tomb, The Touch, Reborn, Reprisal, Nightworld) and are screaming for movie adaptations, esp. the last three.
-
The character is meant to be handsome, his ugliness is all in his head. I direct you to the scene in the book where he's at a stoplight and two girls are checking him out, but he thinks they're laughing at him so he spits at them. Fiennes is perfect for the role...ok they could have used someone a bit more muscular, but how many bodybuilder types out there can actually act.
-
Oct 02, 2002 6:02:51 PM CDT
Hopkins loves any director that pays him heaps of money and does
by cash bailey
After HANNIBAL, BAD COMPANY and now this, Sir Anthony Hopkins is officially a hack actor. He gave one of the finest screen performances ever in REMAINS OF THE DAY (vastly more deserving of an Oscar than SILENCE) but now he's cruising in crud with bad film-makers for his huge paycheck. Damn shame.
-
Now I can see why guyinthebackrow gave himself that name. with idiotic comments about Ratner not reading the book (which is irrelevant because he's not making a movie from a novel, he's making a movie from a script) it's no wonder he's theguyinthebackrow... i'm convinced he'll stay there. i have a problem with people bashing Ratner mainly because most of them have a personal problem with him or judge him just because he's done a few comedies. ridiculous. the man is just starting his career.
-
WTF is that? Let's be real...Manhunter was a decent movie, but I'd hardly call it a classic. Red Dragon is easily one of the scariest books I've read in the last 10 years and deserves a proper treatment. Oh yea, all "first" posters should be should have "FUCKSTICK" tattooes on their forehead.
-
I just...nothing breaks my heart more then when mediocre films like Silence of the Lambs, Traffic and now this are seen as masterpieces. Are we that desperate? I don't care how good this movie is. It ain't Seven. I am all for seeing a decent piece of cinema. Something that entertains and doesn't insult me. The thrall that Hopkin's Lecter has on America escapes me. He is no Harry Lime or Travis Bickle or HAL or even John Doe. Nothing even resembling a complex character. He's a brand name now, like Freddy or Jason. And this silly AICN hiccup has people being an apologist for Ratner. Sure he can crank out glossy Hollywood movies. He will never make Chinatown. Or the Exorcist or even True Romance. Go. See the movie. Have a blast. Just don't tell me you saw something magic. And can I take a minute to go off on Ted Tally, a man possibly even more lucky then Ratner. This guy is a hack. Capital H. Capital ACK. Check his retched scripts for Pretty Horses or Before and After. Go watch Quiz Show or Last Temptation of Christ or Out of the Past. That's some writing. That's some adapting. You never hearanyone who wants to write for movies say how they love Ted Tally. He's awful. Finally, I didn't get to read Harry's note about second thoughts he posted last night. I think he was just feeling the pressure. But hey big guy, you're in the top spot now, whether you asked for it or not. Greatness (or something like it) was thrust upon you. Wear it proudly. This site has made a difference. And that comes with a price. But it's something to take pride in. I won't say I wasn't disappointed in you. But the site's users feel strongly. That should tell you soemthing. And this is a real chance to make a dent. It's kind of metaphorical you know? Don't back down. Take a second. Reassess. Talk to old Drew. Work something out. And do something you won't regret later. It won't be easy at the time. But nothing worth anything is.
-
I think the review here is pretty well thought out, but a few things really get me scratching my head. first off Francis dollarhyde is much more clearly explored and written in Manhunter than any serial killer up to that time. Certainly much, much more so than Buffalo Bill in Silence, after all he's even given a girlfriend even. It's not as detailed as in harris' book, but to say Mann made a film that didn't delve into the mind of the serial kiler is plain wrong. Also, sure most common folk may not be familiar w/ Manhunter, but you have to be a "film geek" to have realized the brilliance of what it's becoming. I don't think so, just a modicum of film knowledge will do. Lastly, speak for yourself when you say Silence is a beter, more fully realizd film than Manhunter. I think MH is a much more psychologically complex film, Mann a much more intense, and quite frankly brilliant filmmaker than Demme, and Brian Cox's Lector is much more chilling than Hopkins (who tends to get a little hammy at times, hence the audience safety in liking him so much.) I guess I shouldn't be surprised you guys would serve up a little softball for rattner and the big budget remake, but dollars to doughnuts in my book Red Dragon can't touch Manhunter. The only flaw in the latter being the cheesy shreikback score. Even tho I like Ed Norton he just looks like a little boy compared to william Peterson's Will Graham.
-
Oct 03, 2002 8:36:22 AM CDT
Massawyrym... Talkbackers should be replied to HERE not at our p
by workshed
... for those who would like to see Massawyrym's reply.
"Um...did you read my piece? I specifically said nothing about Ratner for Superman; I didn't even bring up Superman at all. Secondly, if you read the piece, you'll see I like Manhunter quite a bit. In fact I reccomend it at my store. There's no denying, however, that Mann made a COP film and Ratner made a SERIAL KILLER film. The rest of the differences are spoilers and I like to write spoiler free reviews.
And while any self respecting talkbacker might know the history (as noted many of them don't even bother to read the pieces, they simply know) only a small section of the population even knows manhunter exists (which had you read the piece, you would realize was why I was going into the history).
Talkbacker Credibility = 0
Massawyrm"
Now, that's a fair old reply - but why not post it here where everyone can read it!
Massawyrym... We must ALL band together if we are to STOP RATNERD making SUPERMAN. DON'T GIVE HIM ANY SUPPORT. Quote: "He has finally proven himself"; "Masterpiece"; "Up there with Scott, Donner(no reference to Superman, eh?) and Rodriguez(Harry himself will tell you that this last one is BULLSHIT)"!!! HE MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO TAKE THAT RISK OR IT TRULY WILL BE 'THE DEATH OF SUPERMAN'!!! -
Dude, the two girls in the car aren't checking him out. He's looking up the skirt of one of them, and when she sees him she shudders and adjust herself. That's when he loogies her. Read it again.
-
And Philip Seymour Hoffman should have played Dolarhyde.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- A hot redhead (not Harry) is set to play lead in Fede Alvarez's remake of EVIL DEAD! -- 166 total posts 166 posts
- UPDATED: Talkbacker Bob Orci tweets STAR TREK old set pics! -- 243 total posts 87 posts
- The Friday Docback Spelunks 'The Caves Of Androzani'!! DOCTOR WHO Story #136, And More!! -- 90 total posts 81 posts
- RIDDICK Sequel Details Via A New Press Release!! -- 84 total posts 73 posts
- Here Comes THE GODMOTHER! -- 71 total posts 71 posts
- Rest In Peace Ben Gazzara -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- INSIDIOUS-ER? -- 120 total posts 42 posts
- ABC Has Cast The Lead In Its Future Nuclear Nation Pilot!! And They’ve Chosen Wisely!! -- 39 total posts 39 posts
- The Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day, you bitch! You never backed away from anything in your life! Now fight! FIGHT! -- 136 total posts 37 posts
- AWAKE, This Season’s Best Broadcast Pilot, Gets NBC’s Old ER Slot March 1!! THE FIRM To Burn Off On Saturdays!! -- 37 total posts 37 posts