MovieChat Forums > mav100000 > Replies
mav100000's Replies
I'd say he wanted mayo over mustard, but if I were him, I would ask for extra meat!
Glad to hear you liked it! I'm hoping to see it one day, but I rarely go to theaters (will go for Halloween, but I rarely go unless something truly special comes along... at least as I judge it!). Also, I just seconds ago found out that my step-brother-in-law worked on the film and has his name buried in the credits, so even better!
I've seen his season of True Detective. He could prove to be an excellent director, but while he is great with dark material, he will need to lighten it just a bit for Bond! Can't completely lose the sense of fun!
I agree with this and just hope that this next one, Craig's last, is both excellent and true to form, or as true as the Craig films were (and I really like... 2 of them... and think Craig does a fine job!).
Please do!
Sad to hear it too, though I'll see it at some point and form my own conclusions. Reviews are slightly negative but mixed. For a horror film, that's enough of a win for me to see it at some point! (Note I rarely go to theaters.)
Not if I get to her first!
I didn't know they did! Probably because she has aged enough that casual fans wouldn't notice her... I know I would though!
Hockey mask or sack head? Gotta watch for either!
At least we don't have LL Cool J narrating his new novel and discussion of "round melon breasts."
Nice sweater!
Sorry, incorrect wording. You are correct, he was not, but A harbinger was. The director brought the essential role back, but not the same actor. We should have just left the role of the harbinger out of this entirely. The part 2 director was fine in padding the body count, but the part 3 director / writer should have left the eyeball-carrying harbinger out.
Just don't shift slightly to the side!
Actually it sounds to me like Laurie goes after him this time, and he simply starts killing at random until she seeks him out... but we'll see in under a month!
What do you mean??? I do it all the time!!!
Maybe, but think of the continuity in the series... there isn't any! He was a minor character. We really didn't need him. The mistake was in the director of part 3 for bringing him back, not for killing him in part 2 to pad body count.
Naw, I think it was ok. The issue was the part 3 director wanted to keep him and instead created a new version for that film, but I don't fault the director of part 2.
Guys, it is a F13 movie... I wouldn't get too caught up in the inconsistencies...!
I loved this one, and it is possibly my favorite, but Crispin was excellent in it! The dance alone pays the price of admission!!!
Never saw it, actually. But also do remember that Michael is non-communicative. "He hasn't spoken a word in 15 years..." I'm not so sure they could have rehabilitated him!