You could do some good work if you stopped TRYING so fucking hard. You just end up sounding like a studio plant who was hired to sound hip and EVER-SO-CAREFULLY irreverent.

Mix in some film savvy to go with all of your hyperbole and dick jokes.

BTw I remember Niel's mom reviwed a movie once and speculation was that iwas Sarah Silverman, was it her, or someone else, I belive the review was for Pirates 2 or Spiderman 3 or something

p.s. Great review Neill.

ekjwiefiq hei qwd9iwqehui

ihwebwebwegfwie fwin

It makes about as much sense as Neil's reviews.

Wales. No shit.

Eff this crab shit. It's a whale.

Hang on... phone's ringing.

.....

Um, it was your sense of humor calling. It told me to tell you it's over between you and to go fuck yourselves.

Try reading the TB before actually posting.

You don't have to find his shit funny, but at least realize what you are reading... I worry for the next generation of movie lovers, because apparently they are retarded...

Anyway it is late and I need to crash, wonder how many other people will come in and complain that Harry let some idiot review it who didn't give them spoilers... I imagine they are the sort of people who if you changed the channel on the TV when they were out of the room would complain that the history channel show didn't have a laugh track...

My mom thought I was going to be a doctor...

Go, escape, as fast as you can, sleep and dream of a better world where we all have a purpose and pet monkeys are as common and easy to acquire as internet porn. If only. Ah, if only...

At university, my flatmates made up this thing called 'the phantom pussy' when we were stoned. We used to say that it was like a facehugger from Aliens and that it was creeping around the dorm waiting to clamp onto our face. You could really freak someone out by making a squelching sound and whispering 'It's coming to get you!' when they were wasted.

Thanks JJ! Thanks for bringing us THE PHANTOM PUSSY MOVIE! Only bigger!

I don't want it to eat me out.

Don't worry you angst filled crybabies, you will get your "real" reviews soon enough.

It's Neil Cumpston.

This is how his reviews read. Get the fuck over it. And he's not a plant. Ridiculous.

Why so serious?

Holy shit, you idiots are still here, thicker than whale omelettes and more plentiful than ever. Alonzo is right, it doesn't matter if you think Neill is funny or not, but the sheer amount of dopes who don't even understand that the joke's on them is staggering - surely a new record for a Cumpston talkback.

Good God, you people suck.

Will it be you, deathstar73?

True Fact.

1) I'm pushing late 30s now, and I find it hard to identify with kids in their 20s or stories told from their points of view. They just lack credibility to me. Which may be more the fault of writers, who give their young heroes too much of this "Dawsons Creek Abercrombie Fritch" look and pathos.

2) the story (and movie) is supposed to be based on film taken from one of the witnesses' cameras, who was apparently at a going-away party for a friend. Ummm...I don't know about you, but even for Christmas I only use up one mini-DVD worth of stuff. Plus, I'm guessing that the camera person did not bring their power adapter to the party. I mean, who would? My point is, the camera person appears to be getting way too much footage for someone who was probably supplied only to shoot some tape of his friends at a lame-ass poseur party where all the guys have that on-purpose bedhead look and day-worth of razor stubble and a sportcoat from 1979. I hope they're all killed.

Oh and William Landis, thanks for the compliment, I am going to call my mom and tell her, that should make up for me not being a Doctor...

I think the time off has made this review all the more entertaining to read, even though its slight on movie details. The point people are missing is that Neill writes to ENTERTAIN US, not to INFORM US. Accept him for what he is - he is not Vic Tayback. I'm not sure why I even made that reference, but basically what I'm saying to the Cumpston haters is, "HEY DINGY! PICKUP!!"

That is all.

Great, another comedian reviewer by jimmy_009 Dec 18th, 2007 08:51:51 AM

Just what this site needs, another douchebag that thinks he's going to get a standup gig from his "hilarious" review on AICN.

-----end quote----

and yeah, for a moment i thought this guy was actually Patton trying to play off his own irony, but no, this guy actually meant the post above. What a douche.

SithlyLongFellow you made my day.

It's a sad, sad day when Neill Cumpston gets the short end of the stick because a bunch of pretentious asslicks come to AICN looking for a Michael Fucking Medved review. "Hey, he's not serious enough! And he didn't describe the monster! And he swears like he's in a Tarantino movie! He musta gotten paid by the studio to not actually describe the movie!"

Yup, you're right. It's that he's stupid--not that the joke's on you. By the way, MENSA called--the next four generations of your descendents have all been officially fuckin' disqualified on the basis of your genetic predisposition against reading comprehension.

If you really believe that it's necessary to fill your plant reviews with 'pussy' comments and 'dick' jokes, in order to sell the movie to us, then that is a very revealing insight into the reason today's movies have become so disposable and moronic.

To all the readers on this forum; The staff "writers" at AICN are obviously pulling your chains. They have been foisting these so-called trusted reviewers on you for a few years now. But the truth is, these guys are all part of a little network. If you look back at this particular reviewer's previous submissions, for instance, you'll see that he's promoting the same companies over and over.

Some of us readers aren't stupid enough to fall for it anymore, guys. Either come clean about this or watch your credibility fall apart as the readership gets wise to what you're doing.

I think that if one were to read the Cumpy talkbacks in chronological order one would quickly see that the percentage of irony-challenged asstards has steadily increased. Even with that in mind, this particular talkback must represent a quantum leap in the number of droolcocks cluttering the board.

The end is truly nigh.

You know . . . I'm just going to say it: I've been reading AiCN off and on and, well, I think I now know why I read the 'site so off and on.

Some of these AiCN reviewers can say in a few paragraphs for what they take an arm's length of words to address.

I mean, after I read stuff like the following:

"And if that wasn’t bad enough, the giant monster starts rubbing itself on buildings, and then stuff falls off it’s gross body and crawls the fuck away – only the crawling-away stuff doesn’t stay away for long, if you know what I mean."

I'm simply exhausted. I read novels, more classic than current. I've read "Paradise Lost." So, I know what it's like to read lengthy prose.

Hahaha, apparently important enough to provoke you to post that defensive remark, you transparent wanker.

When did movies suddenly start getting made by these fucking neanderthal jock-types who can't even defend their execrable cinematic shite with a bit of well-written English?

Cripes. The heck happened to the rest of my post. 'Ey, maybe the same kind of truncation should apply to AiCN reviewers, heheh.

Anyway, to continue, some of these AiCN reviewers would do good to read one of those short books on writing (writers of writing books know folks who need to write something are pressed for time; is why they keep their books short) or take a course on writing. You'll learn how to make your writing more efficient, more economical . . . you know, to the point.

If all this "HOOLOOBAH-LAH, this, and, ooh, that F&*KIN' THAT, and, I COULDN'T F*&KIN' BELIEVE MY F*&KIN' EYES, YEAH, YOU'D DO GOOD TO SELL YOUR FIRST BORN TO CATCH THE F*&KIN' FIRST F(*KIN' GLIMPSE OF SOMETHING NO ONE ELSE WILL SEE 5 YEARS BEFORE THE FIRST F*(KIN' TRAILER IS HACKED ON THE F*&KIN' 'NET," rhetoric means to keep the reader in suspense? You fail. That kind of narrative gets boring after the first few paragraphs.

Please AiCN reviewers, spoilers, whatever . . . we got other things to do. Tell us the goods or don't.

Neill is not meant to be concise, efficient, or factual. You're just too fucking thick to get the joke, which makes the joke all the funnier for those of us who graduated from high school.

I remember back in the old days, when you didn't know about something and got put in your place for it, you either shut your piehole and slunk away or you spent the time to learn about it. Not nowadays, though: instead we get a buncha jackasses who figger if they bray louder when they're caught with their dicks hanging out nobody'll notice they're jackasses. Don't work that way, jackasses. I'd say thanks for playin', but you're all busy playin' Candyland while the rest of us play I'm Not Cockdrool.

12 terrorists seize control of a giant monster. Their object: $100,000,000,000 is gold hidden in the monster's colon.

But there's one thing they didn't bargain on:

An ex-cop, swallow by the monster and being slowly digested since the pre-9/11 style action movies. He's a shoot-first-ask-questions later wiseacre who just won't give up...

First of all, if we're going to nitpick, the comma goes inside of the quotes, SleazyG.

"Neill is not meant to be concise, efficient, or factual." Really? THEN, WHAT'S THE DAMN SENSE OF READING AiCN info?! Isn't AiCN supposed to be the bastion of getting fringe information?

Admittedly, you bring up a good point that I failed to cite -- edits! Thanks for bringing up the fact that AiCN requires an editor.

"'Do good'" vs. "'Do well'" -- well, that's something that needed to be edited, I'll admit. Nice to see you got my point, though.

If there's humor here, I DON'T get it. Take that write-up and randomly show it to others -- see if THEY start guffawing and rolling on the floor after reading that confusion.

Lastly, and above all, such AiCN writers can continue to write like how they're currently doing . . . and they can reap the all of the rewards that they gain from doing so. Yeah. Big Hollywood money, right?

Lowly n00bs. You don't deserve to post on this site.

NO CTHULHU DANCE FOR YOU!

Cumpston would weep if he weren't mocking you...

Get over yourselves. Pricks.

Holy shit, if anything, the talkback got even worse overnight. Kazzer, you are probably the most clueless human being I have ever encountered. I'm going to make an exception and present you with the AICN Mark Twain You Fucking Moron Award simply for your outstanding achievement in being an absolute moron and all-round humorless asshat. Congratulations!

Your momma must be so proud.

This is the greatest talkback ever. And Alfred_Packer, thanks for posting another Cumpston review. I hadn't seen that ROTK one before. Helped me waste a good chunk of my morning. Time for coffee. I'm going to try to get it to the same color as what was in that wonderous cup.

On a related topic, his LotR was the best, followed closely by X2 and 300: "So what, Gaylord?" "A c*ck made out of 3 machine guns". Though the Jesus Zombie double feature was so brazenly irreverent I had to giggle. "Thank you Jesus."

No one should explain to you how it's done and the only way to obtain the game's secret is to sell your soul. Or whore out your wife and sister.

So n00bs, for now on...Neill Cumpston is the name of the game.

And since you come to this site, I'm sure you are aware of what a Neil Cumpston review is, so do not read his reviews. Then you won't have to subject yourself to such "sub-moronic drivel".

And you never return my calls..tis a shame.

As I recall, even that TB was filled with braying assheads although not as plentiful or stubborn as the most recent bunch on display here.

It's not a "real review" per se. It's not about the cock jokes. It's not about the sophmoric humor. It's not even about being an enlightened AICN regular or those who think they have "better things to do".

Now, think about geek culture, how it relates to this review, and get back to us. Remember, Neill Cumpston is the name of the game.

Whoever Neill is, he must have a brain the size of a Yugo.

WHOOOSH!

Congratul ations on continuing to prove Neill's point.

Oh yeah...

*husky boy chest bumps with Johnno*

so funny, this guy.

Alfred_Packer reproduced the Hobbit-Man review above in this talkback, for those too lazy or stupid to use the search function on this site.

the fucking Blues Brothers guys and razors and swordfight on top of a truck and Memento Babe flying through the air and out of nowhere Neo and I am out!!of!!cum!! 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Was there anything in that "review" that we hadn't heard or read somewhere before?

As someone already noted, the lack of ANY sort of description of the monster is highly suspect.

SleazyG. - Spot on, sir. Well said. I laugh with you.

Star Wars: Every Cock in the Universe Up My Ass Part II

Planet of Furry Faggoty Fuckheads

MATRIX: SUDDENLY GAY and TERMINATOR: I LOVE COCK

I gotta go, 'cause even in real life giant spiders are bad news.

This movie is a remake of The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms. Plain and simple. I believe the proof is here:

http://tinyurl.com/2mv7wv

Notice in the poster there is a man shouting "It's Alive!" This is the phrase we have been hearing the entire time in the clips we have been seeing. Obviously, we're heading for another remake.

Sad, isn't it?