
Looking forward to making the wife watch it with me next time.
Sorry dude, there's meant to be a light hearted theme going here, not always well illustrated by the ol' written word. Your opinions are just as valid as anyone else's of course. In fact, it's quite fun for me that we're often at such polar extremes.jonny5 wrote:
i wish you wouldnt always jump to the old 'your opinion differs from mine so you are wrong' thing in these threads....its counterproductive
That's kind of OT, but true. Preferred the 1955 version tho.You know what else is a good movie? "Richard III" from 1995 starring Sir Ian McKellen,
ChurchOfSolipsism wrote: ALso, this is how SKykid usually posts
The movie isn't about the war... it is set in the war, and the main character has an affliction that the war enables.Klatrymadon wrote:I haven't seen this yet, but a friend was telling me he thought it had some dodgy political tendencies (that it ignored the illegality and the war crimes entirely and basically portrayed the US Army as paragons of virtue, etc). Should I ignore this and see it anyway? Er, bearing in mind stuff like that would piss on my chips a bit.
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
Also, it's interesting to see the effect that the main character's affliction has on his teammates around him.GaijinPunch wrote:The movie isn't about the war... it is set in the war, and the main character has an affliction that the war enables.Klatrymadon wrote:I haven't seen this yet, but a friend was telling me he thought it had some dodgy political tendencies (that it ignored the illegality and the war crimes entirely and basically portrayed the US Army as paragons of virtue, etc). Should I ignore this and see it anyway? Er, bearing in mind stuff like that would piss on my chips a bit.