Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

THE LOVELY BONES test screened last night and we have two wildly different reactions

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. THE LOVELY BONES is one of my most anticipated '09 releases for many reasons... the primary being the marriage of filmmaker and material. Alice Sebold's book about little Susie Salmon's life and afterlife is a fantastic narrative and when Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh attack this kind of story we get a film as lovely as HEAVENLY CREATURES. To be perfectly frank, I didn't think Sebold was a strong writer, but what she did succeed at in the book was take a fantastic idea and a group of fascinating characters and meshed them together to make something truly unique. The film doesn't come out until December of this year, so I'm sure it's still rough days yet. But the powers that be test screened the movie last night and we got two people to write in about it. The first contact we got was very simple, saying that it was a very, very good movie and they can't wait to see it again. I asked this person to elaborate on the film, the performances and the state of the effects (especially what Jackson's vision of "heaven" is) and the first review is what I got back. Here it is:

Oh sure, this is my first time... The movie was BETTER than I expected, and that's saying a lot because it's Peter Jackson... First the movie on a whole made me feel wonderful, which I didn't expect with such a dark premise, but Pete and crew are amazing with that kind of stuff. They tell you in the beginning what's going to happen, even so, there are parts that make you grip your chair with anticipation, or cringe with disgust even though you knew it was coming, and then the stuff you weren't prepared for, well it just blows you away. All the performances were fantastic, all the characters emotions felt so real, which I think is difficult with this kind of subject matter, no one can imagine this sort of thing happening to them. But Suzy Salmon, the main character, is superb. This character needed a strong actress and she shines through the whole movie, it's her that pulls you in a makes you care. You instantly feel for all the characters, even the bad one, which is strange... And the effects, which I would say hit about 25-30 minutes in, but I was so enthralled it's hard to say. But once the effects hit they are there apart of the movie and it feels so right. I didn't know what to expect of "heaven" but once you saw it you knew that's exactly what it was supposed to look like. It's actually like you get the pay off of the movie in the beginning, but it last the whole movie. While I was watching, there were moments that would make think of a different movie, which isn't necessarily a good thing, but every time I thought that, I'd immediately note how this movie has done it 10 times better. I know you want more details on "heaven", but it really should be a surprise, but I'd say, and I'm no expert, but it seems all the effects are CG, no "physical" effects from what I could tell. When you were in "heaven" with Suzy it seemed real, and then something entirely impossible and beautiful, or scary would happened and you'd be reminded it wasn't reality. I'd say the whole movie had a slightly "other world" look to it, and a variety of camera work of the likes I don't think I've seen from Pete. This movie is definitely more in the vein of Heavenly Creatures which we expected, but this has something more, a new movie and style for Pete Jackson and I love it. I think the less you know the better, but anyway you see it, you're in for a real treat this December (hopefully). Love to The Geeks, -LongLiveRock-

Now the below review is certainly not as positive as the above review. It reads a tad on the snarky side to me, but the below review is just as valid a view-point as the above. I will say that it sounds as if the source material itself wasn't up this person's alley as many of their complaints stem from the novel. The only area of concern for me personally is the talk about Jackson's camerawork and editing being jarring. I hope that's not the case... it's definitely not Jackson's M.O. Anyway, here's the second review, the other side of the coin:

Dear Aint-It-Cool, Last night I saw a test screening of Lovely Bones. It was said to be a work in progress with missing effects shots and the editing process was still ongoing. I don't know, I didn't see any scenes where there was obviously a CGI monster missing or anything. There were a few effect shots that didn't look finished and a bunch of spots that could use some color correction. But I usually feel that way walking out of a finished movie and this wasn't any more so. I know the score is usually one of the last elements to be added but I'm under the impression this was the Brian Eno score and not a temp. The story is about a bright and sensitive preteen girl (Saoirse Ronan) who loves photography; then she gets savagely murdered by a child abductor. She is consequently taken to a magical afterlife of imaginative wonder while her family is torn apart by overwrought drama. And they also are trying to find her killer. The same killer whose identity we learned an hour ago. This child abductor character was played by Stanly Tucci who I did not recognize and literally looked like he was dressed as a child molester for Halloween. He had a child molester mustache, a child molester hairline, child molester glasses, and he spoke with a child molester speech impediment. If he were a pirate he'd have an eye patch and three peg legs. There's a line when Ronan's character is exploring this fantastical new afterlife of wonder and she decides it's not quite heaven and not quite the world of the living "but a little bit of both". That's the film's issue in a nut shell. It's two completely different things and they go together about as poorly as possible. The editing and camera work are jarring, blunt and clumsy. I've never seen Jackson (He's the director so I shoulda mentioned him by now) work like this, he keeps yanking me out of the scene and I hate it. There's lots of cross cutting between the two settings; the girl is lost in a forest of butterfly wings meanwhile her dad (Mark Wahlberg who I haven't mentioned) has a nervous breakdown and screams at his wife (a very unlikable Rachel Weisz) until they both cry. C'mon, I'm trying to escape to a world of magic here. Apparently they're aiming for a pg-13 , that's baffling. Lovely Bones is like a PG film and an R forced together in a shot gun wedding. I could see young girls really loving parts of this movie. Too bad the other parts are about a young girl being abducted and murdered. Might be kind of a tough sell. This cut had all these parts that don't fit. Why is Susan Sarandon in this movie? Why does the film turn into Rear Window at the 11th hour? Why does the murdered girl have an Asian sidekick in the afterlife? That's about as far as I'm willing to go in ripping this unfinished film. I definitely see how this is a work in transition and I hope this cut is like the missing link to the good film they end up making. There's emotionally effective bits, impressive visual accomplishments and Saoirse Ronan is quite good in the lead (except it stops being the lead half way through). They need to pick a direction, dial down the shrieking sound design they use to cover up the absence of suspense and tone down the heavy handed camera work and editing. If they address all those issues in a final cut I'd definitely be interested in giving this film another look. Thanks, The handle's Doc Ock.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • April 24, 2009, 3:07 p.m. CST


    by RodimusPimp

  • April 24, 2009, 3:11 p.m. CST

    Comments about running time in 5... 4.. 3....


    *eye roll

  • April 24, 2009, 3:12 p.m. CST

    Would this be considered a workprint?

    by tonagan

    If so, would that mean it's a sequel to the Wolverine workprint?

  • April 24, 2009, 3:13 p.m. CST

    King Long

    by lockesbrokenleg

    How long is it?

  • April 24, 2009, 3:13 p.m. CST

    Ironically, The Lovely Bones...

    by Vladimir_Ilyich_Ulyanov

    Is what I call my penis.

  • April 24, 2009, 3:13 p.m. CST


    by spankmyassyoudirtywhore

    That goes for BOTH reviews

  • April 24, 2009, 3:14 p.m. CST

    Did we get a confirmation?

    by Tell_Your_Mom_I_Said_Hi

    Is the squid in the movie?

  • April 24, 2009, 3:15 p.m. CST


    by Dr_Zoidberg

    OH wait, this isn't another Lord of the Rings is it?

  • April 24, 2009, 3:16 p.m. CST

    I'm not interested in seeting this.

    by Napolean_Bonerparty

    I'm not.

  • April 24, 2009, 3:17 p.m. CST

    Oops. "seeing" this...

    by Napolean_Bonerparty

  • April 24, 2009, 3:17 p.m. CST

    PJ's camera work and editing have always been jarring

    by Gil Brooks

    I like most of his stuff, but he does edit with a chainsaw, not to mention he can't, for the life of him, NOT move his camera. Word is that Fellowship was saved when one of the NL producers came in, an reedited the film.

  • April 24, 2009, 3:19 p.m. CST

    Any misty eyed Frodo shots?

    by lockesbrokenleg

    He's good at that.

  • April 24, 2009, 3:21 p.m. CST

    Still looking forward to this

    by eric haislar

    The premise sounds interesting. Will wait to pass judgment till first trailer.

  • April 24, 2009, 3:23 p.m. CST

    1st reviewer = Plant, 2nd reviewer = Troll

    by DerLanghaarige

  • April 24, 2009, 3:28 p.m. CST

    Workprint wasn't bad. All the Bale stuff wasn't put in yet.

    by Stuntcock Mike

  • April 24, 2009, 3:30 p.m. CST

    Jackson says the film is done

    by OGoncho

    In the new issue of Empire, he says the film is done and awaiting awards season and in the meantime he's going back and tweaking little things with the effects.<br><br>Doesn't sound like a rough cut to me. Still, benefit of the doubt and all that.

  • April 24, 2009, 3:37 p.m. CST

    Sounds awful...

    by symon

    So the parents try to find the killer and grieve while the little girl is happy in the afterlife? That's what this movie is about? Sounds like something I would've been forced to watch in Sunday School. No thanks. This will be the first PJ movie I pass on...

  • April 24, 2009, 3:39 p.m. CST

    What's a molester hairline?

    by rev_skarekroe

    Hope I don't have one...

  • April 24, 2009, 3:44 p.m. CST

    I can't take either of these reviews seriously

    by IndustryKiller!

    They both have no grasp whatsoever on nuance. They don't seem to have any discernable idea WHY they liked or didnt like what they saw. As far as I'm concerned word on this is still pending. King Kong was a big misstep for Jackson that only seems bigger as time goes on, but he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

  • April 24, 2009, 3:45 p.m. CST

    Lovely Boning

    by Outlaw

    Quick, get Hustler on the phone...stat!

  • April 24, 2009, 3:49 p.m. CST

    First one = elementary school?

    by gnarwhal_evan

    That was so badly written, Jesus Christ.

  • April 24, 2009, 3:52 p.m. CST

    Quint, are you sure the first reviewer actually saw it?

    by BadMrWonka

    I'm just saying...did you get some actual confirmation on the scenario where they got to see it? because honestly, I haven't seen this movie, and I could have written that review. (meaning: I've read the book and I could write like a 14 year old girl if I tried hard enough...)

  • Online reviews. Quite a change from 10 years ago, eh? We've all become so damn cynical that we can't trust anyone's opinions anymore: reviewers are categorized into being either a "plant" or a "troll". <p> But perhaps that's good, perhaps we are learning to keep our expectations low and to trust no one's opinions but our own. Its been an interesting progression over the years, starting as a fanbase rabid for early reviews of their most-anticipated films and growing into a group of cynical and jaded folk unwilling to trust that anonymous reviewer on the other side (and sometimes the not-so-anonymous HeadGeek and company).

  • April 24, 2009, 3:53 p.m. CST

    oh boy

    by palinode

    Do we get to see another film with Mark Wahlberg looked pained and confused, like he doesn't know whether to run for the john or shit where he stands? Because that is worth my precious time.

  • April 24, 2009, 3:58 p.m. CST

    Review 1 + Review 2 = 0

    by morGoth

    Well, that pretty much leaves everyone with a distinct "Huh?" I couldn't tell you if it was good or bad based on the above. DOn't care, still looking forward to it. Glad to hear Saoirse Ronan was well rceived by both reviewers. Until we see a trailer...

  • April 24, 2009, 4:05 p.m. CST

    I really DID see it! I'm the good review...

    by LongLiveRock

    I really did see it, I suppose it's just a bad review... My sister got tagged seeing Gran Torino last week and they asked her if she had seen any movies off a list they had, the first movie listed was Heavenly Creatures and the rest were all the Oscar noms from last year, she said she had seen Heavenly Creatures and Slumdog, so the gave her a pass for herself and a friend, so I supposed we were "picked" to see the movie... I didn't want to give away too much because I think it's fun to be surprised. If you people want more details I could replay 10 different scenes that have been running through my head since last night... I just wanted to give Pete fans a heads up that they will not be let down. But I am someone that respect person growing and changing as a film maker....

  • April 24, 2009, 4:10 p.m. CST

    I used to think

    by zer0cool2k2

    That if I ever had a son, I'd name him after Moe Howard and Lester Flatt. Then I could introduce him as "My Child, Moe Lester".<p> Curse the luck that I had a girl, so I just named her after Charlton Heston's character in Planet of The Apes.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:10 p.m. CST

    Susan Sarandon is in it because...

    by morGoth

    ...she's, y'know, an actress. Pretty fundamental concept, really. I think it's apot on casting myself.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:11 p.m. CST

    SPOT on casting...

    by morGoth

    ...c'mon ye chubby-assed fingers...get with the program!

  • April 24, 2009, 4:13 p.m. CST


    by spooky2k

    The book was wonderful but I can't for the life of me understand why people are so itchy to see Jackson adapt it? He's shown glimmers of being able to direct straight forward drama, but nothing brilliant. Many people will disagree, but the talent comes from Fran Walsh. Jackson directs by the numbers.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:15 p.m. CST

    Child Molester Hairline?

    by johnnylawless2

    I saw them support Yo La Tengo, true story

  • April 24, 2009, 4:18 p.m. CST

    That second reviewer clearly hasn't read the book...

    by FlickaPoo

    ...and would hate it if they that opinion gets filed directly where my turds go.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:20 p.m. CST

    Running time

    by strawdog17

    Hey LongLiveRock...thanks for the review btw....but how long was it?

  • April 24, 2009, 4:21 p.m. CST

    Mark Wahlberg

    by strawdog17

    and how good were the performances? Wahlberg in particular...

  • April 24, 2009, 4:24 p.m. CST

    Two hours and some change...

    by LongLiveRock

    They confiscated our cell phones, and I don't wear a watch anymore. But I think about 2 hours... I know my review was lacking in negatives, but what can I say, I'm a fan...

  • April 24, 2009, 4:26 p.m. CST


    by loafroaster

    Are we talking raspy whispery Wahlberg, or Not-too-faaaah-from-the-yaaaaaaad Wahlberg?

  • April 24, 2009, 4:28 p.m. CST

    heaven's soundtrack by ENO?! I'm watching it

    by pipergates

    sounds like they did a hell of a job on heaven too {}...and that young actress is somebody to watch.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:32 p.m. CST

    The Book is Overrated

    by Jack Shepherd

    And the ending is a total cop-out.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:35 p.m. CST

    I liked Wahlberg in I Heart Huckabees...

    by LongLiveRock

    And this movie! There are a lot of parallel story lines in this movie, as I'm sure there are in the book, but I haven't read it. But my favorite is between the Dad(Wahlberg) and Susie building ships in a bottle and he's explaining to her why hobbies are important and how they give a person something to complete and be proud of to look back on, which is the same thing as the serial killer is doing in a sick way, it's just his "hobby" a very disgusting hobby...

  • April 24, 2009, 4:36 p.m. CST

    now get Eno to score The Hobbit

    by pipergates

    as a small boy i simultaneously discovered Eno and Bowie's Low and Tolkien's Hobbit, the combination of which totally transported me to Middle Earth. The soundtrack to Lotr i found sadly formulaic and pompous.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:36 p.m. CST

    Is it unusual for a test screening this far advance

    by skimn

    of the actual release date? Are they anticipating reshoots? I ask because living in Michigan, my chance of seeing a test screening is about as likely as winning the lottery.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:39 p.m. CST

    Test Screening

    by strawdog17

    Jackson said in the new Empire that they finished the film with a March release date in mind and that it was always going to open a week after Lovely Bones. But Studios saw a cut and held it back for awards season. So yea this test screening comes pretty early but the films been finished for sometime i believe.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:46 p.m. CST

    It's really not early for a test screening

    by IndustryKiller!

    I saw Zodiac five months before release and Pineapple Express literally more than a year before it hit theaters. And that's just to name a few.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:54 p.m. CST

    Plant, and Anti-Plant.

    by Sal_Bando

    Yes those exist too-other studios sending in hit-jobs on their rivals releases etc. I'd iggy the both and wait. Sounds promising, at least.

  • April 24, 2009, 4:55 p.m. CST

    Here Come the Warm Jets

    by seppukudkurosawa

    Loving the fact that Eno's scoring this. It especially seems right for him considering he once released a song called The Heavenly Music Corporation. Much as everyone wets their panties for Danny Elfman a al, I miss the days when scores could have atmosphere AND be memorable. Hopefully Eno brought in his old buddy Robert Fripp to help, too.<p> And this looks right up my alley. Why people seem to concentrate so much on who a movie's made for these days I don't know. If you're writing a review, it's not your job to come up with box office projections, just say whether it worked for you or not.

  • April 24, 2009, 5:01 p.m. CST

    I didn't realize Geeks were haters too...

    by LongLiveRock

    This was my first review and probably my last, I'll never get such luck again... So you can "iggy" my review all you want, I just thought this was a generally Pete friendly zone and that people would be as excited as I was to find out that his new movie didn't suck like King Kong...

  • April 24, 2009, 5:10 p.m. CST

    Aside from the horrible murder of a child.....

    by cookylamoo

    This is pretty much what they show on the oxygen network. Too bad, this could have made a bitchin' horror movie about a murdered tot who bloodily disposes of the football/cheerleading team who raped and murdered her.

  • April 24, 2009, 5:17 p.m. CST

    Don't let it get you down, LongLiveRock

    by D.Vader

    If you see another test screening, please report to us with a review. Some will choose to believe it, some won't. Its just the way the game is now played around here.

  • April 24, 2009, 5:21 p.m. CST

    Neat. I'll watch it.

    by ricarleite2

    But PJ could do a Brain Dead 2...

  • April 24, 2009, 5:33 p.m. CST


    by seppukudkurosawa

    I honestly can't recall any reviewer on this site ever getting off completely Scott Free from the talkback treatment. Even Vern still gets his share of shit after almost ten years writing reviews for this site. Most of us are probably just jealous that you and your sis had an excuse to get off the computer and out of the house.

  • April 24, 2009, 5:36 p.m. CST

    Harry, you can't give two opposing viewpoints

    by JumpinJehosaphat

    in one post. TBers can only think in terms of Rulz or Sux -- you know this. You go throwing a person who is squarely in the "It's Good" camp with someone in "Don't Bother" territory, you'll get a lot of vapor-locked geeks unable to know what opinion they're supposed to have. Think of the kids, Harry!

  • April 24, 2009, 5:45 p.m. CST

    Starting reading the book

    by KevinMuller

    I am about 40 pages in and I like it so far.... this material, in my opinion, is perfect for Jackson

  • April 24, 2009, 5:45 p.m. CST

    This could really go either way.

    by Fa_Tass_DinoMolester

    LOTR was one of the greatest achievements in cinema, and Kong 2005 was one of the dullest. Hopefully Jackson has learned his lesson and this'll retain some of his old genius.

  • April 24, 2009, 5:57 p.m. CST

    Wasn't this in production for 4 years?

    by Stormwatcher

    Like Eyes Wide Shut taking forever?

  • April 24, 2009, 5:59 p.m. CST

    a very unlikable Rachel Weisz

    by Series7

    So just like every movie then. Seriously whats her appeal? I guess starring with a dumb almost crossed eye look all the time is good acting?

  • April 24, 2009, 6:01 p.m. CST

    I hope Marky Mark

    by Series7

    Apologized to a fake plant in this movie as well. It could become like his signature thing to do in movies. That or take at a prosthetic dick at the end of ever movie and tell himself that he's a star.

  • April 24, 2009, 6:01 p.m. CST


    by Series7

  • April 24, 2009, 6:21 p.m. CST

    Not his modus operandi?


    Did you SEE King Kong!??!?!?!

  • April 24, 2009, 6:32 p.m. CST

    Mark Wahlberg brings NOTHING to 99% of his movies

    by The_Man_Behind_The_Curtain

    With the exception of The Departed, Wahlberg constantly fails to deliver at every role he is given.<p>The guy SLEEPWALKS through his movies. You can almost see the dollar signs in his eyes as he reads his lines and waits for the check to be cashed.<p>If Mark Wahlberg retired today, only about three people would notice tomorrow.

  • April 24, 2009, 6:43 p.m. CST

    Hey The_Man_Behind_The_Curtain

    by Series7

    Say hello to your mother for me.

  • April 24, 2009, 6:45 p.m. CST

    Second reviewer clearly missed the entire point

    by KCMOSHer

    It's like this: if the second reviewer is accurate, then we have a storytelling problem here. If not, they're just an idiot douchebag who should try following a narrative that doesn't involve 'CGI monsters'. The point of the tale isn't the murder or the 'hunt' for the murderer. It's the characters and how they change...Suzy in heaven, her family on earth, and how they keep intertwining, just a tiny bit, in that process. It's not about 'an escape to a magical world'. It's not 'rear window'. So either he's a dumbass, or Jackson/Walsh botched the ability to grasp the point of the plot in the midst of all their CGI minutae. I'm willing to believe he's a douchebag.

  • April 24, 2009, 6:46 p.m. CST

    Marky Mark is pretty good actually.

    by Sal_Bando

    C'mon-Three Kings? Dirk Diggler? the Departed? You're fulla shit. He's fine.

  • April 24, 2009, 6:47 p.m. CST

    I don't about this movie, but I just saw Peter Jackson....

    by BEEK my Comic Shop last Wednesday. He, Phillipa and what I assume was his kids came in. Phillipa bought Walking Dead vol. 3 and Peter bought all 3 League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen TPB's. I geeked in my pants. They where very nice and he has lost a lot of weight. My shop is in San Francisco.

  • April 24, 2009, 7:07 p.m. CST

    You never go full child molester

    by Ye Not Guilty

    Not with the hairline and mustache and glasses and speech impediment and everything. Never go full child molester. The Academy will hate you for it.

  • April 24, 2009, 7:21 p.m. CST

    "I've never seen Jackson work like this......


    ......he keeps yanking me out of the scene and I hate it."<P>You've never seen him work like? So clearly you never sat through the Helm's Deep scene. You know, when he keeps cuts back and forth between epic slaughter in the rain to a boring rubber tree saying "Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee don't thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiink you're ooooooooooooooooooorcs." <p>Hehehe. Yeah. Sometimes Jackson needs to hand his films over to editors with giant fucking machetes, and let them do their thing.

  • April 24, 2009, 7:23 p.m. CST

    Susan Sarandon will be the only good thing in this turkey.

    by DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD<P> Respect bitches!

  • April 24, 2009, 7:24 p.m. CST

    Saoirse Ronan is an 'IT'


    He said, "Saoirse Ronan is quite good in the lead (except it stops being the lead half way through)."<p>Glad you put that whore in her place. God Damn is she gonna pay for the shit she pulled.

  • April 24, 2009, 7:33 p.m. CST

    Hmmm....I don't mean to sound contentious, but...

    by Specktron

    ...the second reviewer sounds like a sports-bar jerk. Sorry Doc Ock, you should read the book and then come back.

  • April 24, 2009, 7:36 p.m. CST

    If this fails, PJ is gonna' be likened to Orson Welles

    by Alfie Boy

    Not tha PJ is in Welles' league, but let's face it, Welles struggled to find a voice after Kane. PJ may have "shot the load" after LOTR.<p><p>Thoughts?

  • April 24, 2009, 7:53 p.m. CST

    Zoidberg, dude...

    by Kaitain

    ...if you're going to do the comical shouting thing, you should at least get the words right. It's "You CANNOT pass."

  • April 24, 2009, 8:06 p.m. CST

    Tremendously overrated book

    by I am_NOTREAL

    Good enough idea, but awkwardly executed. Not horrible, but no better than a thousand other novels that are published year over year, an inexplicable "buzz" book. Wouldn't be surprised if it made for an uneven film.

  • April 24, 2009, 8:26 p.m. CST

    Quint...pls learn SNARKY in your head is CRITICAL in the real on

    by quantize

    Quint...pls learn SNARKY in your head is CRITICAL in the real one

  • April 24, 2009, 8:52 p.m. CST

    when will people start to realize how clumsy the LOTR adaption w

    by Ryalto 3.0

    "So either he's a dumbass, or Jackson/Walsh botched the ability to grasp the point of the plot in the midst of all their CGI minutae." Uh, sounds exactly like Peter Jackson to me.

  • April 24, 2009, 11:03 p.m. CST

    God, the Two Towers

    by lockesbrokenleg

    People complain about Lucas and CGI, but The Two Towers was all about CGI.

  • April 24, 2009, 11:44 p.m. CST

    Neither 'review' deserves to be on here

    by performingmonkey

    Wtf is happening?? First review could have been written by anyone who wants to put positive thoughts in our mind. Plant McPlantkton, second cousin of Robert Plant. Then we have the second one, which shouldn't have been posted due to it blatantly being troll-written to the point of bitter ignorance. It sounds like a guy who would think Tropic Thunder was a serious Vietnam movie. Did anyone with an unfried brain go to this screening?? I'm slightly worried about Wahlberg and Weisz but who knows how they'll perform under Jackson.

  • April 25, 2009, 1:30 a.m. CST

    Damn You Michael Bay


    Damn You Michael Bay

  • April 25, 2009, 2:03 a.m. CST

    From he director of King Kong and Lord of the Rings

    by lockesbrokenleg

    comes an even LONGER movie. You thought those were long? Watch out! This one is EXTRA long!!

  • April 25, 2009, 2:22 a.m. CST

    first off I am a jackson fan

    by slappy jones

    but i really hate these reviewers who think they are comedians. Its great when they are funny but painful when they are not which is more often the case.

  • April 25, 2009, 3:39 a.m. CST

    Kaitan, dude

    by white_vader

    You should get your shit correct too if you're going to be such a smartypantsknowitall. Yep. First he says cannot in a regular voice, but the big shouty line is definitely shall not. And obviously what Zoidberg was on about. Man, I sound like like a Ring/Ringy/Ringer nerd! <p> All cool?

  • April 25, 2009, 3:49 a.m. CST

    Speaking of which, I'm looking forward to Dannyglovers

    by white_vader

    taking on Ringy9. When PJ's Hobbit hits and Ringy's shit hits the fan. "Dickblood tears the Ring". Lay some Baleriffic smacktalk down on that Anal-ringwearer, baby! <p> Then again, Ringy's rants probably amuse you no end... actually Danny if you're still out there, what's the prob with Ronan? I've never seen her in anything, but I'm guessing you're talking about her in Atonement (don't spoil it for me), am I right?

  • April 25, 2009, 4:57 a.m. CST

    Odd Book To Adapt

    by Giant Ape Balls

    It'll be intersting to see how tey do it but i don't have high hopes.

  • April 25, 2009, 5:12 a.m. CST


    by starlesswinter

    "The soundtrack to Lotr i found sadly formulaic and pompous." Is this a joke? Seriously? I would say that it would be all too formulaic to have a John Williams or James Horner score for LOTR. It's just the type of film they would do. Howard Shore's score, on the other hand, was anything but typical. It's very minimalistic in places. You just don't hear such operatic scores for films anymore, and LOTR is one of the most complicated examples of the leitmotif structure.

  • April 25, 2009, 7:52 a.m. CST

    Pics of heaven in the Spielberg edited Empire this month

    by Moribundman2000

    Also pics of misty eyed Frodo nature to keep Lockesbrokenleg happy and a shot of Susan Sarandon for DGDB. Should be hitting US newsstands in oooooh... July? LOL

  • April 25, 2009, 10:11 a.m. CST

    Hi LongLiveRock

    by coheedandcambriarock

    First of all...sorry for my english! I want to say thanks for your review! Can you tell me what do you think about the negative review? Like you, i'm a fan of Peter Jackson and when you talk about the real emotion of the characters, i knew i'm more in your team than the other one (when he talk about Tucci a big joke)! Ah man...i want to know more about the movie...i'm so excited...hahaha...maybe we can communicate to each other in an other way? Or...just tell me if the movie is powerful and's what i like to hear about Peter Jackson movie...the words...powerful and emotional! If you know what i mean! Thanks a lot!

  • April 25, 2009, 10:18 a.m. CST

    me again LongLiveRock

    by coheedandcambriarock

    just another thing in the negative one...when he talk about the character of Wahlberg yelling and crying! its so minimalist and not subtil...i'm sure the character give more than that!

  • April 25, 2009, 10:34 a.m. CST

    So basically Pete's made 'What Dreams May Come'...

    by BiggusDickus

    ...for a tweener audience? Shame, 'cos the book was an entertaining and intersting read.

  • April 25, 2009, 10:38 a.m. CST

    Saiorse Ronan is the Anti-Fanning

    by BiggusDickus

    You know it to be true.

  • April 25, 2009, 11:10 a.m. CST


    by pipergates

    i'm serious alright. sure the music could have been a lot worse, but it could have been a lot more magical too, and could done a lot more to create an otherworldly atmosphere. anyway, it's a matter of taste.

  • April 25, 2009, 12:54 p.m. CST

    Whoa up there pipergates m'lad...

    by morGoth

    ...either you just don't like Shore's score (see: taste) or you find it technically flawed (see: opinion based on technical merit). The former brooks no argument but the second is surely arguable. I love the LotR score and also find it technically brilliant. Like another said, we just don't hear that sort of sweeping grandeur anymore.<p>I've been to two live performances of the music and it was very well received by both audiences. But that's OK as there's always room for a minority opinion {[:^)

  • April 25, 2009, 1:29 p.m. CST


    by strawdog17

    What would you rate it out of 10?

  • April 25, 2009, 1:51 p.m. CST

    Jackson is the most overrated director on Earth!

    by johnnyangelheart

    There! I said it and I'm glad. He screwed up Lord of the Rings with stupid effects, over-sentimentalization, and blatant departures from the original story-line. Even that hack Columbus is better than Jackson. OK, I've got to go yell at the kids to get off my lawn, and then take a nap.

  • April 25, 2009, 2:15 p.m. CST

    Weeping Wall and Art Decade by Bowie&Eno

    by pipergates

    Does a much better job at creating an otherworldly ambiance in my humble opinion, morGoth. Minority you say? Seeing how the masses lap up a lot of soulless drivel, maybe being in the majority is not necessarily such a positive thing. Now tell DelToro to hurry things up and give us some news.

  • April 25, 2009, 2:20 p.m. CST

    Big step down

    by DougMcKenzie

    In the acting department from Gosling to Wahlberg... I'm sure Jackson has his reasons (most likely being ego). Jackson was smart enough to replace Townsend with Mortensen but there is a difference between ratcheting the talent up and ratcheting it down... way down that is.

  • April 25, 2009, 2:51 p.m. CST

    to the "jackson will be orson welles" guy

    by slappy jones

    kong was a financial and critical hit. it finished fresh on RT and made over 500 million at the BO. His film before thatr made over a billion. the success of lovely bones is hardly make or break time.

  • April 25, 2009, 2:56 p.m. CST

    Kong sucked

    by OptimusCrime

    It was visually stunning and caused me to become enchanted with Naomi Watts, but it was a long and horrible affair nonetheless. It needed to lose 45 minutes, at least, and unless this movie gets raves I'm skipping it.

  • April 25, 2009, 3:25 p.m. CST

    If by "otherworldly"...

    by morGoth don't mean, literally, this planet. My flavor on that would be as more of a sci-fi realm (literally, another planet) as opposed to an earlier stage of earth (Arda). I thought Howard's score fit Middle-earth splendidly. I have now officially split the split hair !<p>I only mean that the number of positive reactions I've encountered over the years far outweighs the negative. I don't hold with "popular acceptance automatically equals crap." That, in itself, is a cliche and is just as mindless as liking something just because it generates popular acceptance.<p>Speaking of Hobbit news: What do you make of the recent announcement (I sent Harry a heads-up and everything!) about ditching the "bridge movie" and going with a two-movie Hobbit?

  • April 25, 2009, 3:29 p.m. CST

    At any rate piper...

    by morGoth

    ...prepare to be disappointed as Howard Shore is booked in to score The Hobbit. Does that mean you've already made up your mind to not like it without out hearing the first note?

  • April 25, 2009, 3:38 p.m. CST

    no, i'm open...but not too

    by pipergates


  • April 25, 2009, 3:41 p.m. CST

    i'm glad about a two-film long Hobbit

    by pipergates

    just hope that means they will include all the little details of the book and let the story breathe. as opposed to editing out the not so spectacular parts or adding things...

  • April 25, 2009, 4:33 p.m. CST

    J_Kong was kinda lousy sure.

    by Sal_Bando

    Lord of the Rings was pretty danged great though. I'm all for seeing Del Toro get his shot at this. Oh and RIP Maude.

  • April 25, 2009, 4:35 p.m. CST

    I can't remember

    by AsgardTehGreat

    a single note from King Kong's score, while I'm still amazed by Shore's Lotr work. Howard Shore is the man.

  • April 25, 2009, 4:37 p.m. CST

    Yeah, me to...

    by morGoth

    ...while I'm sure we'd be seeing plenty of cool stuff I just never could see the writers being able to pull a decent story out of Appendix B.<p>Breathe indeed and let's just cross our fingers that GDT doesn't get infected with Kong-bloatitis.<p>Do you think the narrator should be kept? It is, after all, a big part of what makes the Hobbit a "childrens story" tone, anyway.

  • April 25, 2009, 5:09 p.m. CST

    The tone of Tolkien should be kept sacred

    by pipergates

    It's been too long since I've read the book, don't remember there being a narrator. My daughter is getting about old enough to read it to now. Hobbit is pretty much holy writ to me, I hope they keep the tone but not sure if the narrator might be a distraction. Right, I'd rather they make another separate film later on to try to bridge Hobbit and Lotr...and they will once Hobbit makes a tonation of cash.

  • April 25, 2009, 5:38 p.m. CST

    STFU lockesbrokenleg.....

    by TheWaqman

    it's bad enough that you have to troll all the Jackson talkbacks with the same shit over and over again. But to top it off you're a fucking Lost fanboy. It's a joke. It would have helped your case if you liked a better show. "Kate we have to go back!! WAAA WAA! We ran out of ideas so lets continue with a love triangle! No that's boring, we've overdone it. Lets make a love square!" Fucking pathetic show. Also FOTR was easily Jackson's best film, but as a whole I think the trilogy was fucking excellent. Much more satisfying than any other trilogy in recent memory (even The Godfather, because ROTK didn't have anything as annoying as Sofia Coppolla in it).

  • April 25, 2009, 5:42 p.m. CST

    Howard Shore's score was great....

    by TheWaqman

    particularly the Minas Tirith theme, and also the breaking of the fellowship. I don't remember shit from King Kong, but then again he didn't compose the music and also the film was just horrible. LOTR didn't feel long for me (hell I enjoy watching the extended versions) but Kong theatrical was a pain.

  • April 25, 2009, 6 p.m. CST

    9 out of 10

    by LongLiveRock

    I really enjoyed it that much, but I like movies that are slightly-very bizarre while being grounded in some reality that you understand, and I think they really pulled it off here. I'd say the second reviewer just didn't have an open enough mind and maybe he wasn't expecting to see The Lovely Bones, which I don't think is the ideal way to see this movie, and I'm not sure he'd watched the beginning, getting popcorn perhaps...? But they kind of filled all the "wholes" he mentioned. One being that the molester looked like he was wearing a "costume", in the beginning Susie is narrating over a good deal of the movie and she says how this was 1973 before we all assumed every single/divorced nice guy with a comb over living down the block was a pedophile murderer, I think in the world of 2009 we assume the opposite, but people were much more trusting back then, and it was before the whole country is informed of an abduction, sometimes within hours of it happening. And as for Wahlberg, he kind of is one of those actors that has only one character, and either it works, or it doesn't, and I think he works in this movie, he is a very believable grieving Dad, in my mind people could react in any number of ways to this kind of tragedy, and I would think there could be some screaming invovled...

  • April 25, 2009, 6:19 p.m. CST

    thanks LongLiveRock

    by coheedandcambriarock

    thanks for answering! Me too i like bizarre-film with cool and beautiful imagery. work as a drama, thriller and fantasy film?...and about the emotion...did you have one or two shivers down your spine?...i want the movie to be powerful...hahaha...ok...i stop there! thanks again LongLiveRock...and i drink to your name!

  • April 25, 2009, 6:34 p.m. CST


    by starlesswinter

    Lord of the Rings is not really a magical story, though. The production design makes Middle-earth feel like a real, grounded place rather than a fantasy land, and so the score shouldn't be littered with celestas or anything. And I think Shore's use of choral elements brings just enough of an ethereal quality to the music. I also like James Newton Howard's score for Kong, but it's not his best (that would be The Village or Signs) or anywhere near the quality of Shore's music. It's definitely not memorable to the masses, but there are moments of great beauty (the filming at sunset on the ship, the ice-skating scene, Naomi waving for the biplanes to stop).

  • April 25, 2009, 6:38 p.m. CST

    Mark Wahlberg

    by AsgardTehGreat

    All he needs is some good lines and decent directing. In "The Happening" he was raped by Shambalaya, but if you watch "Rock Star" you know what I mean :)

  • April 25, 2009, 6:45 p.m. CST

    if jackson stayed faithful to the lotr books word for word

    by slappy jones

    you would have three of the most fucking boring movies ever made.

  • April 25, 2009, 6:47 p.m. CST


    by slappy jones

    the second reviewer was trying to hard to practice his stand up routine. Why is susan sarandon in this film? um because she was hired to play a role in it? That might be the reason

  • April 25, 2009, 7:46 p.m. CST

    Look, I love all the LOTR movies

    by lockesbrokenleg

    I sat through the damn marathon! But even I can see their shortcomings. And yes, Lost is one of the best TV shows ever so suck me.

  • April 25, 2009, 11:09 p.m. CST

    Question for LongLiveRock

    by Artie Simek

    Was "heaven" ethereal and a lot of over-the-top elements or was it more specific, like what a 14-year-old girl would dream of?

  • April 25, 2009, 11:32 p.m. CST

    only jackson film i haven't seen is the mocumentary one he made

    by slappy jones

    forgotten something?? has anyone else seen it cos I hear its great.....

  • April 26, 2009, 12:32 a.m. CST

    Forgotten Silver

    by JTStarkiller

    It's great slappy. It's actually the only thing I've seen of his other than LOTR and Kong. We watched it back in film school years ago, and many of us had never heard of it, so it was interesting discussing at which point you realized the whole thing was made up.

  • April 26, 2009, 1:26 a.m. CST

    2nd Reviewer seems to know

    by ApneicMonkey

    ... an awful lot about the habits of child Molesters. Kinda makes you wonder, don't it?

  • April 26, 2009, 3:41 a.m. CST

    a failure like the rest of his failed films

    by livingwater

    The guy isn't Tolkien even if he can wear Tolkien's shoes for a miles. Stealing is no compensation for talent. I walked out of the screening of Brain Dead in his theater.... sick minded junk. He is an amateur affecting greatness that is why he has to steal and reference. There is no real talent, and the studios are waking up to that. Plus the fact that he plays political games BIG TIME behind the scenes. THERE IS ONE AND ONE ONLY ONLY REAL REASON he made this film...........he and I both know it......and this talkback is the only voice I get....... is because of a certain concept it contains... ....STOLEN FROM AN ORIGINAL SCRIPT I WROTE. I am not getting into it. Not a nice guy. He needs to retire and get paid by a VFX industry New Line created, and that he completely doesn't understand.

  • April 26, 2009, 4:55 a.m. CST


    by white_vader

    Ringy... is that you?!

  • April 26, 2009, 4:56 a.m. CST

    livingwater is pretending to be New Line's Bob Shaye

    by pipergates

    or is that really him voicing his frustration at the director who refused to be robbed by him, and helped cause his downfall? is spewing incomprehensible insults in a talkback what he dedicates himself to these days?

  • April 26, 2009, 6:03 a.m. CST

    Give the second reviewer a black box

    by AsgardTehGreat

    with reviews this good he should be hired by aicn and join the STAFF

  • April 26, 2009, 6:07 a.m. CST

    Thanks, Doc Ock

    by Stollentroll

    Sounds like PJ encountered all the problems we KNEW this production would have. Come on, how often has a depiction of heaven worked onscreen? Other than in South park, that is?

  • April 26, 2009, 10:50 a.m. CST

    I'm not pretending anything...

    by livingwater

    and the conversation is closed. It's not a debate or ego trip. This is an anonymous account.

  • April 26, 2009, noon CST

    Early test screenings happen every now and then

    by polyh3dron

    Over a year ago there was a test screening for Where The Wild Things Are.

  • April 26, 2009, 2:07 p.m. CST

    Novel stared interesting...turned very lame

    by FleshMachine

    and melodramtic and soap opera-y....the emperor has no clothes.

  • April 26, 2009, 4:24 p.m. CST

    wow livingwater

    by slappy jones

    no talent and the studios are waking up to this? you mean the studios that keep backing his films? the only reason he made this film is to get at you? dear lord......look bob you only have yourself to blame for golden compass

  • April 26, 2009, 4:35 p.m. CST

    'I didn't think Sebold was a strong writer...'

    by goatboy500

    ...but what she did succeed at in the book was take a fantastic idea and a group of fascinating characters and meshed them together to make something truly unique.' Ummm, sorry QUint, you just described what we in the 'buying books and reading them' industry like to call, a Strong Writer. Jeez. What do you want out of a novel, a blowjob?

  • April 26, 2009, 7:04 p.m. CST

    Quint, Jarring Editing IS Jackson's M.O.

    by Ringwearer9

    Haven't you ever watched "The Frighteners"? The car ride downhill without brakes seems like Jackson was trying to replicate comic book panel editing. Only with comics you can proceed at your own pace as you fill in the transitions between one scene and the next ... Jackson seems reluctant to waste time providing transitional scenes. And does anyone remember the bizarre way it turned from day into night in Fellowship while the hobbits were being chased through the woods by black riders? I totally believe the second reviewer. Also the first reviewer's comments about the CGI heaven sound like he/she wasn't altogether happy with it. It seemed to remind the person that the Heaven was FAKE, under-realized by the CGI fakery. Goes with Jackson's stated distaste for the magical.

  • April 26, 2009, 7:51 p.m. CST

    Can anyone point me to a link about the Producers re-editing Fel

    by Ringwearer9

    That sounds really insteresting, and probably true.

  • April 26, 2009, 9:43 p.m. CST

    I hope this movie doesn't have a 20 minute fucking ending of cry

    by TallBoy66

    That second review made it sound like it does. Well, it has to be better than KING KONG. Am I right? Course, that would just take some more effort to be better.

  • April 26, 2009, 11:07 p.m. CST

    Both useless reviews.

    by OutlawsDelejos

  • April 26, 2009, 11:10 p.m. CST

    To elaborate.

    by OutlawsDelejos

    First review didn't get it but tried, noble. And I'm surprised the second reviewer found his way to the cinema let alone managed to type a ham fisted review. Just say it, "Dat no Lord of de Rinnnnngs." I read the book a couple of years and ago and to me it had beauty but read better as a script than a novel. This is right up Jackson's alley and I'm sure will be every bit as poignant as we all hope.

  • April 26, 2009, 11:21 p.m. CST

    Don't know if anyone is still reading this...

    by LongLiveRock

    but I'll keep going anyway cause I'm still geeking about it, and as the days go by a sadness falls that I won't get to see it again until December. And I've been trying to find a way to describe "heaven", it's not at all like "What Dreams May Come" or whatever it was called, that sucked and made me instantly pissed off. Where this "heaven" made me smile at it's beauty. It looked to me it was done entirely green screen because I don't how else you could make something look so amazing and flawless. I guess it reminded me of how Sin City looked, not the black and white, but just how it LOOKED real, even though it's not reality. And then it also kind of, and I really stretch that out, kind of reminded me of the end of Contact (mediocre movie), when Jodie Foster meets the stupid "alien" and she's in a place that looked like home, but not, it's too perfect. And Susie's "heaven" is not at all static, it almost moves and changes like it was its own entity, although it changes to meet Susie's thoughts. Now, I've compared TLB to two movies that basically sucked, but I'd say TLB succeeded entirely where they failed.

  • April 27, 2009, 12:18 a.m. CST

    of course you believe the second reviewer ringy

    by slappy jones

    we didn't need that clarification

  • April 27, 2009, 12:28 a.m. CST


    by strawdog17

    Sounds like heaven looks pretty amazing....9/10 sounds awesome but is all the Best Picture buzz around the film legit? And is it more of an ensemble piece or is it pretty much Saoirse Ronan's show(susie)?

  • April 27, 2009, 9:07 a.m. CST are as excited as me for TLB! :)

    by coheedandcambriarock

    It's cool to have somebody in your team! I want to know about the intensity of the movie? For the parts i have read, the script is so wonderful and so brillant! It look like a dream who constantly change from a good one to a bad one! Sometimes i want to imagine some scenes...but with PJ visual can only be more than i imagine!

  • April 27, 2009, 10:12 a.m. CST

    LotR is to Jacksaon as SW:OT is to Lucas...

    by Cellar Door

    Seriously although I think Jackson is a far more talented director and Lucas a far more talented storyteller but neither of them are as mad talented as the world or they think they are.<p>True talent transcends the hunger of the starving artist. Once you've had success...that's when your talent will show or not. Do you still have a voice when your muse was being broke and hungry? Or will your voice be clouded out by cash, cars, snorting coke off hooker's asses, etc...<p>The guys and girls who continue to make greatness after success are the truly talented. Not to say Jackson and Lucas are untalented...but I firmly believe they're sitting a bit to the right of the top of that talent bell curve. This is why Kong sucked and why the prequels sucked. These guys don't have the talent to say "no" to themselves and nobody else will so we get hot mess movies like Kong and all 3 of the prequels (yes, even RotS which was not better than least not the first (Jabba's) and last (DS2 scenes) 30 minutes of it)

  • April 28, 2009, 7:38 a.m. CST


    by Cobbio

    Neither of those reviews was especially helpful, thus I'll wait for better reviews as they come out.

  • May 8, 2009, 4:16 p.m. CST

    Stanley Tucci as the bad guy

    by Fjordstone

    >>He had a child molester mustache, a child molester hairline, child molester glasses, and he spoke with a child molester speech impediment. If he were a pirate he'd have an eye patch and three peg legs.<< This is the funniest thing. I live on the street where they filmed the neighborhood scenes for TLB, and one day Stanley Tucci got out of the cast van for that day's filming. None of my neighbors recognized him besides me, so I turned to someone and said, "Hey, did you see Stanley Tucci? They have him costumed as a child molester!" The response: "That skanky looking guy?"

  • May 8, 2009, 4:18 p.m. CST

    Stanley Tucci as the bad guy

    by Fjordstone

    Great, I have no idea why my comment was truncated! Anyway, I live on the street where they filmed the outdoor neighborhood scenes for TLB, and I laughed at that description because one day, Tucci arrived in the cast van and got out for his day's filming. None of my neighbors recognized him besides me, so I turned to someone and said, "Hey, look: they have Stanley Tucci costumed as a child molester!" The response: "That skanky looking guy was Stanley Tucci?"

  • May 18, 2009, 6:43 a.m. CST

    ray Singh longliverock...!

    by Singerman

    Hey longliverock Thanks so much for the review. I just wondered how ray Singh features in the movie? There's alot of focus on tucci but what about the innocent side of the story? Does it play a part or was it forgotten? Thanks again

  • Sept. 13, 2010, 11:33 a.m. CST


    by Le Vicious Fishus

    &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; O&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ,-.|____________________&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; O==+-|(]--------&nbsp; --&nbsp; &nbsp; -&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; .>>&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; `-&nbsp; |"""""""d88b"""""""""&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; O&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; d8P&nbsp; 88b&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 88=&nbsp; ,=88&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; )&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 9b&nbsp; _.&nbsp; 88b&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; `._&nbsp; `.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 8`--'8&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \--'\&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; `-8___&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \`-.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; `.&nbsp; \&nbsp; -&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; _&nbsp; /&nbsp; <<&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; `---&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ___/|_-\&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |._&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; _.&nbsp; |_-|&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; &nbsp; _&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; _&nbsp; &nbsp; /.-\&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; -!&nbsp; .&nbsp; !-&nbsp; ||&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; "|&nbsp; !&nbsp; |"&nbsp; /\&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; =oO)X(Oo=&nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; &nbsp; /&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 888888888&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <<&nbsp; \&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; d888888888b&nbsp; &nbsp; \_/&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 88888888888&nbsp; <BR>

  • Sept. 13, 2010, 11:34 a.m. CST


    by Le Vicious Fishus

    &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; O&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ,-.|____________________&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; O==+-|(]--------&nbsp; --&nbsp; &nbsp; -&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; .>&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; `-&nbsp; |"""""""d88b"""""""""&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; O&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; d8P&nbsp; 88b&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 88=&nbsp; ,=88&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; )&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 9b&nbsp; _.&nbsp; 88b&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; `._&nbsp; `.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 8`--'8&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \--'\&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; `-8___&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \`-.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; `.&nbsp; \&nbsp; -&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; _&nbsp; /&nbsp; <<&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; `---&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ___/|_-\&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |._&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; _.&nbsp; |_-|&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; &nbsp; _&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; _&nbsp; &nbsp; /.-\&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; -!&nbsp; .&nbsp; !-&nbsp; ||&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; "|&nbsp; !&nbsp; |"&nbsp; /\&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; =oO)X(Oo=&nbsp; &nbsp; \&nbsp; &nbsp; /&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 888888888&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <<&nbsp; \&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; d888888888b&nbsp; &nbsp; \_/&nbsp; <BR> &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 88888888888&nbsp; <BR>