Movies that should be destroyed -

[Tranquil Featherman]

1. The Terminator Trilogy
2. Anything Peter Jackson has to do with
3. Fast and the Furious ( and it's sequal )
4. The NEW Planet of the apes



Post Edited (07-31-03 16:13)

[Chris K.]

Tranquil Featherman wrote:

> 1. The Terminator Trilogy
> 2. Anything Peter Jackson has to do with
> 3. Fast and the Furious ( and it's sequal )
> 4. The NEW Planet of the apes

Well, I liked THE TERMINATOR (1984) and TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY (1991), however I have never seen TERMINATOR 3 so I can't give my opinion on it. And, I also like Peter Jackson's BAD TASTE (1987), MEET THE FEEBLES (1989), BRAINDEAD (1992; U.S. Title: DEAD ALIVE). These are the films, in my opinion, that need to be kept in restoration and in good condition. These films are quite different, but are better than some of the crap of today I assure you.

Yet despite the disagreement, I agree with you on THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS. Also, put PEARL HARBOR, THE PATRIOT, DUDE-WHERE'S MY CAR?, FREDDY GOT FINGERED, and BATTLEFIELD EARTH on that list and there you have some films that need to be destroyed.

[Ash]

"Anything that Peter Jackson has to do with??!!!"

Are you insane??????!!!!!!!!

I wouldn't say something like that on this board!

Peter Jackson is probably one of the most highly esteemed directors that people on this board love.

The man is a genius....plain & simple.

[Fearless Freep]

"Anything that Peter Jackson has to do with??!!!"

Are you insane??????!!!!!!!!

With that and The Terminator trilogy I was tempted to cry 'troll!' but I'll researve judgement given as the poster only has six posts on the board yet

[superdude]

I agree about Fast and the Furious and new planet of the apes, those were just horrible.

but Terminator and Peter Jackson are good, I wonder why someone would hate them?

[Dunners]

The fast and the furious and its sequel I agree on

The planet of the apes remake I agree on.

But terminator? Are you a total knucklehead? sure T2 was only half as good as the first, but was stilla good B movie. I havent seen T3 yet so I cant say.

But putting Peter Jackson on the list show slack of intellegence, have you no respect for the amount of time effort and affection hes put into the lord of the rings trilogy? His earlier stuff was also good fun and worth seeing many times over. Are you a total dumbass!?

You're not making any friends here. Best leave the same way you came in.

[Tranquil Featherman]

My Dearest Dunners,
Did you even READ the Lord of the Rings trilogy OR like Peter Jackson did you doze off into dreamless oblivion as you sucked on your mother's teet while she attemted to read them to you.
Peter Jackson spent NO time and effort and put  absolutley NO affection into the making of these films. A true Tolkien fan would agree with me. The only things he got right were the names of the characters.
And as for my intelligence......I have MORE intelligence in ONE pubic hair than Peter Jackson has in his entire bloated carcas.

[Vermin Boy]

Dude... If all you know about Peter Jackson is the Rings movies, I'd check out his first three. I think you'll be in for a shock. (If you have, ignore this post).

[Tranquil Featherman]

post ignored

[jmc]

I like just about everything Jackson has done...EXCEPT Braindead.   I haven't been into the Pythonesque style of comedy since I hit puberty, and sorry, buckets of gore do not a horror film make.   Now Meet the Feebles, on the other hand, is a film to be reckoned with.

[Dunners]

"My Dearest Dunners"

I dont know you, dont try to put the moves on me mister.


"Did you even READ the Lord of the Rings trilogy OR like Peter
Jackson did you doze off into dreamless oblivion as you sucked
 on your mother's teet while she attemted to read them to you"

As a matter of fact I did read them, and when I was a young boy my father read them to me as well. And now That I'm in my twenties  and I'm a film student I can appriciate what peter did so much more so. He managed to cram ina good 70% of the fellowship onto the screen seamlessly. That by itself is amonumental acheivement.

" Peter Jackson spent NO time and effort and put  absolutley NO
affection into the making of these films."

Wow you must be pretty blind if you didn't notice all the details an dlittl ethings he did to make the movies come to life. He also pspent a good 5 years just on the scripts alone. that takes real dedication. hes also put 4 years into film/directing/editing these movies to make sure they're as good a spossible. and hes doing the extended editions DVD's. That takes pure love to do

 "A true Tolkien fan would agree with me"

That would be my father, and I dont think he'd agree with you.

"The only things he got right were the names of the characters. "

Yeah he didn't get the characters genders correct either, AND he made sure the hobbits were 7 ft tall, the elves were fat  evil looking monsters, the dwarves were
piles of slime with brookly accents. Idiot.

"And as for my intelligence......I have MORE intelligence in ONE
 pubic hair than Peter Jackson has in his entire bloated carcas."

I think you hold your pubic hair more valuble than your intellegence. Do us all a favor, shut up. You're obviously a loser who cant get laid who gets some kind of sexual satisfaction by complaining about a movie we all had the pleasure of viewing.

Go away you idiot.

[Brother Ragnarok]

Go stand outside your local googolplex as Kevin Murphy calls them.  See all those titles on the marquis?  There's the answer to your question.  Oh, and sic 'em, Dunners!  Kill, kill!  Damn Tolkien Hippies.  We spray for 'em once a year around the farm.

Brother R

[Dunners]

Bow wow! woof woof! grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..WOOF WOOF!

[The Burgomaster]

* ROCKY IV

* THE AVENGERS (Ralph Fiennes, Uma Thurman and Sean Connery were completely wasted)

* KING KONG (the Jessica Lange version)

* CADDYSHACK II

[raj]

Well, The Avengers did have Uma Thurman in a leather jumpsuit.  Yum.  About the only thing worthwhile in that movie.  Now something like War of the Roses has no redeeming qualities.  Ugh.