SNAKE AS A ROPE! SERIOUSLY!?!?! George Lucas...I quit.

Granted, I'm automatically giving this more leeway than some other movie since it is Indy.

Still, maybe this guy is being a little harsh. No doubt, a bunch more reviews are on the way.

I had a totally different reaction at the trailer before Iron Man, so although 1 Cinema in London is not representative, perhaps Merrick is talking bollocks.

Luckily, he will probably only be armed with a Han Solo prop gun, which does not shoot actual lasers, and no lives will be lost.

Here's to hoping Lucas allows his animation department to do Fate of Atlantis.

For 'slow', read: Well made film.

He said it was easily the best Indy sequel yet.

Sounds like ShogunMaster doesn't know shit and Merrick's predisposed to disliking it, too.

Fucking hell, I got burnt by the prequels too, but this review screams of someone who a)doesn't get it and b)actively looked for flaws.

Relax, ignore it, and lets see what else comes up.

"I caught an advanced screening of the fourth Indiana Jones movie and I say I enjoyed it IMMENSELY!!! Wow, for years now I thought that after "War of The Worlds" Spielberg has lost his touch; not so here. Here he returns to the basic fundamentals of the lost arts of practicality and just plain good old fashioned genuine storytelling (something that's solely lacking in today's CGI-heavy world) helped along by the big guy himself Harrison Ford along with witty and charming Shia LaBeouf as a newcomer to the franchise with George Lucas lending some support to cinematography. Ford is simply amazing as the venerable adventurer with lots of impressive stunt work. Everything is bigger and better than before, the action is of high-caliber, the plot is thorough and exciting with intelligent writing coupled with awesome special effects. But what really surprised me was that it looked like it was filmed in the 1980's; something that's rare in this Digital Age!!! I'm sure those accustomed to digital film-making may be put off, but it actually works really well and gives the film an added dose of nostalgia and sense of wonder that Spielberg brought so successfully in his past films. Not many films can achieve that feat, but I can strongly say that Spielberg has gone out on top and brought back one the most beloved cinematic heroes around for one more time."

and i think this will be bad, but i also think people will convince themselves its not. like some have with the prequels.

All that means is that the Marketing sucks.

http://tinyurl.com/5eylvw

i was a closet geek at the time, and didn't frequent these sites.

This leads me to believe that there is a fairly large dose of Ringwearer9 syndrome going around- they have very specific expectations and if they are not met then the film is a dud.

Now, Indiana Jones was always a bit lighter fare than the Die Hard series, but they drew the line of good and evil very clearly, and lives were at stake. Sure, the title hero never dies, but at least take his possible demise seriously. James Bond was not going to be lasered from the balls up in Goldfinger, but damn if it didn't look like it COULD happen.

I'll be there for Indy on opening weekend. I'm just afraid it may be a 2 1/2 star affair instead of a solid four.

Listen, there are two distinct camps: one that is predisposed to hate the new Indy, and one that is going to see it regardless of any negative reviews and judge for themselves.

I am not saying it's going to be great, cause I sure as hell don't know. I do know I liked the latest trailer, and I have the hope that I'll get a solid Indy movie. Does that mean I'm going into the movie automatically liking it no matter what unfolds in front of my eyes? No. Hell, I ignored every single Spidey 3 bashing review and was giving it the benefit of the doubt until I saw it myself. I loved the first two, but I hated the shit out of Spidey 3. The same will go with Indy 4.

I fear Indy 4 will be too pulpy!

Everything in the last three Indy movies is a "callback" to Raiders!

Newt is Jones!

Burke is Ash!

Vasquez and Drake are Parker and Brett!

The guy reaching longingly in the Indy 4 trailer is Satipo, er, reaching longingly in Raiders!

Gremlins = cultural sabotage!

The hat... The Hat... THE HAAAAT!!!

It's negative: "He doesn't know what the fuck hes on about"

So. Fucking. What. All that means is that the Marketing sucks.

You're like a particularly stupid dog with a particularly chewed bone.

You're like a particularly stupid dog with a particularly chewed bone.

And fuck off AnimalStructure.

I'd stop now before you make it worse for yourself.

Either way, we still won't be able to hear John Williams score.

I hoped and hoped, but my movie-lovin' childhood-balls are anticipating another rapin' by the beards. They invented Event Cinema - now they're fucking burying it again. Way to go, you slow old goatfuckers.

Still, there's always HELLBOY II. If there's one director who WON'T fuck us all over, it's Guillermo...

He's destroying any and all credibilty your site had by posting tripe like this.

"...presumably this is how ShogunMaster saw it". Presumably??? Couldn't be bothered confirming a few details, Merrick? Details, I might add, that ShogunMaster seems to be suspiciously lacking in or is straight up wrong about.

Merrick, you're embarrassing Harry and insulting me.

Therefore it is guaranteed horseshit- although it is like throwing a steak to a starving man for all the people that are determined to loathe it.

I smell a shitbomb. I hope I'm wrong, but the trailer's ain't exactly great...

I'm too old for this shit.

And as I've said repeatedly, there is no worse guide to what a movie will be like than a trailer- If it is bad, then the marketing is shit, and how many times have you been taken in by a great trailer for a shit film?

In short, I anticipate the worst, but pray and hope that I am utterly, completely wrong. It happens, rarely :D

I didn't actually see the movie yet, but that no longer seems to be a prerequisite for getting "reviews" posted here.

Merrick, you're as ass.

It's just Talkbacker ranting and should be treated as such.

What I asked you was could you not concede the possiblility that Mr X and (>>>>) was a typical pulp title. Read Dannyglovers comment, he makes it sound like Quartermain (which he can't spell) is based on Indy.

I said nothing about release dates etc. If you want an Indy rip-off then I give you the Tom Selleck Vehicle (if the vehicle is a trabant) Quigly Down Under.

Oh, and Jarv, good to hear ya liked Iron Man.

Oh, and for Messi - Sinestro Corps forever!

I'm not sure I can either.

Shit, It's YOU Diggers, isn't it?

It's still bullshit though.

Basically what I'm trying to say is: what the fuck is up with Perez????

"Here is the quote fucker: ".....as it accidentally referenced the old Allen Quartermaine days (a crappy knockoff of Indy Movies incase you missed them) and this was very much similar in most respects."

I figured out what he meant.....but reading this makes it sound like he thought the Quatermaine character in general was a rip-off of Indy movies. Not RAIDERS-- he never mentioned Raiders, and he never mentioned Richard Chamberlain, in that quote you worthless fucking twat. I understand the Quatermain movies in the 80's were cashing in on Indy success. It didnt seem to me like the original poster did. SO FUCK OFF."

Overall a very respectable 7 out of 10.

DOOMSDAY this weekend, motherfuckers, and that is what I've been most excited about for ages. So much so that I've avoided all teasers, most reviews and everything else. I just needed to know NEIL MARSHALL + POST-APOCALYPTIC BRITAIN and I was there.

Carry on.

Once again, seeing as you are being a willfully stubborn, infuriating pernickity little turd:

"Here is the quote fucker: ".....as it accidentally referenced the old Allen Quartermaine days (a crappy knockoff of Indy Movies incase you missed them) and this was very much similar in most respects."

I figured out what he meant.....but reading this makes it sound like he thought the Quatermaine character in general was a rip-off of Indy movies. Not RAIDERS-- he never mentioned Raiders, and he never mentioned Richard Chamberlain, in that quote you worthless fucking twat. I understand the Quatermain movies in the 80's were cashing in on Indy success. It didnt seem to me like the original poster did. SO FUCK OFF."

Not exactly grasping at straws, unlike Aliens= remake of Alien because Newt=Jones.

Part of me feels that it is the fact that I have no knowledge of Iron man and that is why I wasn't enthralled- if RDJ is note perfect Tony Stark then I wouldn't know it.

Say what you want about the films (especially the latter), but the effects in them were spectacular.

HOWEVER, whoever did the Hulk in both Ang Lee's version and this new one deserves SCORN because it still looks like crapola! (I think ILM may have done Hulk in Lee's version). It looks cartoonish and without any weight to it. Like a beefed up Shrek. Shameful.

Tit is clearly still applicable.

Disclaimer: I haven't seen Iron Man yet, just going along with the consensus.

Way to solidfy your credibility there.

Voila, no more shitheels.

It'll be fun to see Indy doing his thing again, I guess. But the gratingly obvious CG (as opposed to the flawlessly integrated CG of "Iron Man"), as well as the trying-too-hard feel of the film leaves me shaking my head. This venture feels like a calculated money grab. Spielberg has done some wonderful work in his time, but this will likely be counted among his least-memorable failures.

I'm sure it'll rake at the box office, though. Which is the only measure Lucas cares about anymore, so at least he'll be happy.

That movie looks ridiculously stupid.

I know I have.

On a different not, I don't know if this happens in America, but before Iron Man I had to sit through 35 minutes of fucking Adverts. This is out of order, especially at £10 a ticket.

Sorry, not relevant, but I just wanted to get it off my chest.

Awfully, some submorons kept laughing and I heard a fat family behind me say "We have to see that".

If 2true had been there then there would have been blood, oh yes, there would have been blood. But I don't carry a pencil to the cinema.

The worst reaction was Speed Racer- one kid started crying and there were snorts of disdain and negative comments- "who would pay to see this shit" was one repeated to my left and right.

1. This reviewers lack bias and disapproval of character development is a matter of individual taste.

2. The audience was skeptical of the Ironman trailer, but trust of lucasfilm has been botched. i was happy to see everyone talking to their neighbors about the new indy.

3. the special effects will definitely be better than the optical effects of the first three.

Well, how do you explain John Hurt's brief appearance in the latest trailer? He is clearly there, with his long straggly hair and unshaven face.

"But George, you promised that this would be the be all and end all"

"Don't worry, I put 10% of the penis into the first enlargement, 30% into the second and the rest in the third"

Fucking A it's good to see you back here.

I did start that sentence with "I thought" which usually indicates my opinion. I don't want to argue this again, as it never goes anywhere. So back to Indy.

Bridget Jones 2 is only to be watched by groups of women. It is contraindicated for anyone with a Y chromosome.

It was done then and not re-made now, so you can't fairly make that kind of leap, if that's what you were insinuating. If you were just saying the effect wasn't great, period, the I heartily disagree. It looks pretty nasty to me and certainly gave me cause to pause when I saw it as a kid. Even people that saw the film as adults recognize the effect was well done, not just for its time, but in general.

"Mola Ram, prepare to meet Kali...in HELL."

Don't remember the exact story behind that, but I always found it a funny coincidence that Ackroyd had that cameo as well as a cameo at the end of Twilight Zone, which SS directed part of, too.

I don't even care if the dude did see the flick, which I know he didn't because there was no public screening and Lucas/Spielberg wouldn't have a public screening because they don't want spoilers out there. But even if he did see the flick in some fantasy world, posting some anonymous review on such a big film and using it as a major headline on this site is nothing more than an attempt to get more AICN unique hits. It would be different if it were Harry, Quint, or Moriarty reviewing it. Or even different if it was reviewed by a CONFIRMED spy who has had a STRONG track record over the years. Instead, you post some schmuck's review that could be anybody. It could be some Jew-hating asshole that despises Spielberg.

Regardless, you should be banned bro. You're like the crappy internet version of Dan Rather;)

I then asked a 15yr old wbout it and he said "It was okay I guess. I'm mostly just want my driver's license, tho'."

Even the kids who saw those prequels won't care about them in 20 years the way "adults" now wax adoringly on the OT. Maybe it's partially a generational thing, maybe it's because the prequels aren't as "good" as the OT, maybe it's because the world has just changed too much since the OT.

Will we walk from the theaters, raise our ticket stubs in the air and exclaim, "Spielberg, prepare to meet Kali...in HELL!"

Will we leave the theater insisting to the lines of people waiting for the next showing that "Indy IS GOING TO DIE!" just to fuck with them?

perhaps

Mola ram falling down the cliff, skidding his head along it, then falling into the crocodiles, but still screaming as he is torn apart (or so we assume cuz we don't actually see anything but the crocs ripping up robes. Pussy Lucas!)

I was watching "The Exorcist" last week and loved the way the movie unfolded. Some punk today would probably walk out. All this said however, I still am not expecting much from the new Indy movie. I'm probably the only one who feels like this but BOTH of the Indiana Jones sequels sucked. I cringed throughout Temple of Doom with Kate Capshaw and hated the "comic" exchanges between Jones and Connery in Crusade. As far as I am concerned, Indiana Jones was a one-shot. "Raiders" is wonderful.

"Lucas is right; there is nothing he can do that will please the expectations regarding Star Wars and Indiana Jones because we hold them in some kind of rose colored dream state. Lucas has given us exactly what we have asked for."

Wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Look, I'm the first to admit the OT isn't what I remember it to be. As I said in a TB earlier this week, the acting is hambone, the dialogue is atrocious and there were elements that just didn't belong.

If Lucas wanted to make a movie just for his kids, he should have filmed Episode One and not released it theatrically. It would have been the most expensive home movie ever made but the fans wouldn't have had cause to complain. Instead he made a movie for us as well as himself. He knew that the Ewoks were despised. He has heard them decried for 17 years. So rather than learn from a mistake what does he do? He throws us a character that is so vile and obnoxious I would rather have an Ewok surgically attached to my back than have to watch that clumsy jerkoff on the screen any longer.

And then there's his hubris. That finger licking good, I'm richer than God, have a super secret ranch hubris that made him think he could single-handedly write all three scripts and direct all three movies. At least with TESB and ROTJ he had the good sense to let someone else direct, which is why the performances are actually slightly better in those two movies.

Nothing he can do my ass. All he needed to do was pen a first draft and then hand it off to someone who actually knows how to write dialogue. And he should have removed himself completely from the casting decisions. Jake Lloyd is almost as painful to watch as Jar Jar.

So I have to disagree with every word you typed. Lucas could have made movies that didn't have canned dialogue or villains with exposed, easy to shoot hearts or "Nooooooooooooooo!" or floppy-eared dicknosed Rastafarians or actors that delivered lines like they were working for a sandwich and a cup of coffee or would've-been-iconic-bad-guys if they had lived longer than one movie.

Lucas couldn't even get a memorable performance out of Sam Jackson for christsakes. He should have been able to do that simply by accident.

In the end, I don't really care. My childhood is intact and the sun will rise again tomorrow. It just would have been nice to sit down and watch all six movies without wanting to skip through everything but episodes IV and V.

"Wake up, childhood. I know you're in there. The adult Spud's asleep. I've been in his room..."

It's GIVING ME THE FEAR!!!!!!!!!!

ANAKIN: You look so beautiful.
PADME: Because I'm SO in love with you.
ANAKIN: No! I'm so in love with YOU!

And DICKBLOOD - maybe it depends on whether or not you like SLJ being SLJ. I love watching him play everything as Jules Winfield, just as I love Martin Lawrence playing Marcus Burnett in everything he does. In that way, I don't get what happened in the prequels, because it's as if George didn't understand that if you hired Sam Jackson post-1884, what you got was Jules Winfield. They should have just had SLJ improv the movie.

"Just pick out my lightsabre."

"Which one?"

"It's the one that says Bad Motherfucker."

But as George Lucas sucks the soul out of everything he sees these days, I'm really not surprised. Could Mace's final scene have been any shittier than that?!?

As for Indy...I would love for it to be great but will pick it up on dvd regardless and will probably be able to squeeze some enjoyment out of it much like the SW prequels (ok, so it does take some serious squeezing but it is possible). That said...yes Lucas is a flake who happens to write great stories; altho I'm starting to wonder if that is even true...imagine the man responsible for making one of the greatest landmark and culture spanning movie franchises in history but in reality its a total fluke and the man has no discernible talent past 1985. Hating the prequels is old if still somewhat fun but let's face it...they don't even come close to the suckage of many other films (basically all the 'spoof' movies and the 'american pie' shit, nonstop crapanese-ghost horror (usually just pale little girls with sringy hair...lots of stringy hair and weird inhuman crawling around, etc) and I'm sure Indy4 will follow a similar take. I can't imagine not enjoying Indy on the screen whatsoever...as long as Ford actually channels Indy..even a little bit...I'll be happy.

Here's my issue with The Beef: He's not the worst out there, he's entertaining BUT I think what you see is what you get. The guy on the screen isn't an act and is the same guy in real life: a smug, annoyed, disrespectful smartass who nobody would want to be around (unless you're family and then only every 5 years or so at reunions).

At least they weren't fucking GUNGANS!!!

And let's face it, the Ewok on the speeder bike was kind of cool. As was the bit where one died and the other grieves for it. Taking down AT-STs with only logs. The Ewoks with the bolas knocking himself out. They really weren't all that bad. You hit the nail on the head: if you hate Ewoks because you think they don't belong in Star Wars, then, hell, you have no joy and you have no soul. Next you'll be telling Node and I that you hate Jawas, and then we tell you to go fuck yourselves...

I hope this review was fake, it probably wasn't though. Who cares in the end? I'll see it. I'm looking forward to it. Speilberg seems to have gone out of his way to show nothing in these trailers. That's annoying. Hoping Karen Allen is in the movie for a good amount of running time is probably wishful thinking. Anyway, I expect this movie to be good.

Concerning the lack of buzz in theaters from the trailer. I heard one guy next to me, and granted he wasn't a film geek, say "Indiana Jones, are you serious?" after the trailer. Star Wars was a culture event. It lasted 20 years. People were hungry for it by the time the prequels were in formation. Be interesting to see how many people really want this movie.

I also enjoyed SOLDIER. I will not apologise for this . Don't let these bitter old bastards get you off your love for the movies. Fuck us all.

BUY MONSTER HOUSE ON DVD

Conversely, if you take the last letter of the last word in each sentence starting from the bottom up, it spells out:

Grendel ate Beowulf's Balls!!!!

Hey, where I come from, that's EXACTLY how a Rancor drools. That's how I roll, braw.

And that JACK BURTON WASN'T FUCKING IN IT?!?!?!?

Where I come from, that's blasphemy, yo. A motherfucker could get killed over some shit like that.

That woman is every kind of fine, and sexy too.

Besides, gany made up his mind Indy would suck shit before the first still even hit the interweb. He is no "true believer" in Indiana Jones

Still didn't think BATMAN BEGINS was all that, though >:D

In fact, near the end of the film, Blanchett will fight Jones with the Skull, while Jones wheels out the Power of the Ark to combat her. But Blanchett's manly power starts to overcome Jones and the Ark...which is when Marion rips open her shirt and there between her breasts is the HEadpice to the the Staff of Rah!

ALl hell breaks loose until Shia runs up with the blazing Shankara Stones to save the day, but he trips on a gnarled tree root, drops the stones all over the floor of the old temple they are in, allowing Blanchett to suddenly fall parallel to the floor an escape through a trapdoor vent while cackling.

Indy looks over at Shia, who's holding his skinned knee and says "have a nice trip?" To whic Marion laughs and says "Yeah, se eyou next fall!" Indy and Marion high five each other, Shia laughs, but covers his eyes as those two kiss. Cue the Raiders MArch and roll credits!

that's what really happens. In a nutshell.

finky089 I wasn't that bonerfied over photos of Blanchett as Stralka, but there's one recent shot of her practically straddling this big gun on a truck, and she looks good there. Plus, Gummer would approve her usage of appropriate ammunition.

He had another chance in TPM to show as an amazing warrior race and gave us the Gungans instead.

Jedi has some great stuff. The scenes with Jabba, the speeder bikes, Luke confronting the Emperor, the space battle with Lando, etc. But the Ewoks felt too much like comic relief every time they were on the screen. That's better suited for a Chris Tucker-Jackie Chan movie, not Star Wars.

Anyhoo, flame on.

DOn't worry, she'll be back in your bed soon, and hopefully without a giant scarred image of the Headpiece in her Canyon of the Supple Breast.

Freakin' 2:30 and I have yet to do a lick of work.

Still, Indy's leap from the moving vehicle on the edge of the cliff and into the Jeep with Blanchett and Soviets is either a TOTAL GUmmer move, or just recklessly stupid for abandoning everyone else in that vehicle when it is so near to peril.

But this ifromt he guy who cut the fucking rope bridge.

"He no 'nuts', he CrAzY!"

I wanted to be Egg Shen for Halloween when I was in 6th grade.

I'm really looking forward to SPOILER the part where the commies capture Marion and give her another white dress to try on, and this time in the mirror we get to see all the action, and then Ilka comes into the tent to seduce her with a hypnotic crystal phallus

You know, knocking you senseless so that she can take advantage of you and give you a Shia Suprise in 20 years.

BARB WIRE is a remake of CASABLANCA!

Think about it! Pamela Anderson is Humphrey Bogart; Udo Kier is Sam, Temeura Morrison is Lauren Bacall. Xander Berkeley is the corrupt French cop, and Steve Railsback represents the Nazis. They even do the same scene at the end, where Barb sees off the Resistance fighters with the MacGuffin AT A FUCKING AIRPORT and ends the movie with a very similar line:

Casablanca: "This could be the start of a beautiful relationship."

Barb Wire: "I do believe I am falling in love" (to Barb).

Next time you see BARB WIRE or CASABLANCA, this revelation will just mess wit your head. Pamela Anderson IS Humphrey Bogart :D

GHOSTS OF MARS just sucks balls. That was the point where the weed and the fried chicken took precedence in the old man's life. And why the fuck shouldn't they?

That said, I to whittle this stack down by a foot so I'll be away for the next little while.

"Have you paid your dues, Jack? Yes sir, the check is in the mail."

Apologies for that - I sound like a twat on there. What an arse I am! I do how ever still believe that (a) Christian Bale is a miserable bastard who should LIGHTEN THE FUCK UP and (b) That X-MEN variant is out there...

Apologies, man. Lapse in etiquette.

of course they followed that up by losing 2 of 3 to the Dodgers...

When the madness was capped by Cain's brains hitting the pavement, my acid washed jeans filled up with Frankenberrys.

China is here?

I don't even know what the hell that means..

Plus, Belinda Bauer was fit. That is all.

I s'pose what I'm saying is: BALE, LIGHTEN THE FUCK UP!!!

But yes, the Machinist is a great movie. Shyamalamamamaman, take note, THAT is how to make a mystery movie.

Jack, what? I'm supposed to buy this shit? Five hundred years and not one broad to fit the bill - come on Dave, ya must be doin' something seriously wrong!

"Okay, I get the picture. White Tigers, Lords of Death, guys in funny suits throwing plastic explosives while poison arrows fall from the sky and the pillars of heaven shake, huh? Sure. OK. I see Charlie Chan, Fu Manchu and a hundred howlin' monkey temples, and that's just for starters, right?! Fine! I'm back! I'm ready, goddammit let me at 'em!"

Gold.

Come on, guys, don't be scared. We won't hurt you.

Harry fully admitted back in the day that he had bullshit postings made up to draw in attention.

Either this is total bullshit, which I think it is because Lucas and Spielberg did not have a public screening nor would they want to let early spoilers leak out. -OR- They posted a review on one of the most anticipated moves of the summer written by some jo-schmo that they know nothing about. Merrick even admitted he didn't know anything about this guy... rather he believes it because they've heard rumblings about a screening.

Either way, AICN fucked up. But the "powers" that be continue to hide.

Consider your Film Fan Card...REVOKED!!!

Fuck you very much.

Unless you're joking. Then FUCK YOU for pulling my leg, douche!

Why is there not a lot of fuss over Connery's character being killed off screen?, seems a little pointless to be so specific.

This has been a cool and passionate talkback, who knew the old professor had so many hard core fans, I'm still excited about his return, though I also loved Die hard 4.0 and Transformers so slay me.

Now I'm going to watch Sex and the City.

Smashing- I did let the Quatermain argument go fucking ages ago- if you look I kept responding to assholes by reposting DGDB's smackdown.

Spud- There's plenty of us with love for terrible movies- we're a hidden minority. I feel you are very nearly ready for a conversion to the true path offered by the church of chang.

Poeticwarrior- go and fuck yourself you eeyore eyed tosspiece. I said, explicitly that I'm cautiously optimistic about this. I haven't got my head buried in my ass because to misquote trainspotting Spielberg has been on a dizzying downward spiral since before hook, George Lucas may as well don a dog collar, pick up a packet of sweets and wear a cheeky smile, and ford hasn't made anything good in ages. If this sucks I will say so. What is fucking me off, hugely is the unedifying spectacle of sad, misreable souless geeks like yourself, Industrykiller, Nodiggity and plenty of others who are climbing over each other to bury this based on one dubious review and a shit trailer. It's revoltingly smug and is making me feel quite naseous. What do you want? a gold medal from TB-dom with "O all powerful filmic nostradamus , please tell me what I should watch from now until eternity." Or maybe you should approach this hoping for the best, but prepared for the worst. And I loathed Transformers before any of you pin it on me.

Doc- so he is, I'd forgotten that. His opinion holds less water than a colander.

JACK BURTON!!!!!!

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0 ,,20192282,00.html

(remove the spaces AICN inserts into links in talkback)

After the apocalypse all that will survive will be fucking cockroaches and misreable hard-on sporting bastards saying "knew this would happen. Told you so".

After the apocalypse all that will survive will be fucking cockroaches and misreable hard-on sporting bastards saying "knew this would happen. Told you so".

The reason it bugs me is what exactly fo you want me to say if it is shite? "So you did, happy now?"

Burt'll be OK because he always is prepared and shall have a divine flashlight.

And me wondering if she was getting anally raped based on the angle and the look on her face.

mmm, pre-Cinamax/Internet days. Not that Allan Quaterman was representative of that, but it was in the Showtime soft-porn era. Good times then.

Now if they fucked up a sequel to BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA or BUCKAROO BANZAI - the pillars of heaven would shake, and the Spud would open his vault of whup-ass upon the studios, who shall tremble at his tuberous wrath...

Still want to see a porn Indy: IN DIANA JONES. WHEN?!?!?

Ryanislyin, just so you know, I was not paid by anyone, I was not asked by anyone for my review, and Aintitcool only posted my review because it was the first one out. The ulterior motives that you refer to do not exist in this case. People wanted to find out if the movie was good or not, they posted a review that people wanted to read; it's kind of their job.

Anyway, it's playing in Cannes now so you can read more about it then and see what they think. But it really doesn't matter. In the end, you're still going to watch it and make your own opinions; whether you agree with mine or not...