Author Topic: Sam Raimi admits the obvious (Read 5093 times)

TVC15 · « **Reply #60 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:37:04 PM »

Fellowship - 8/10
Two Towers - 4/zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
RotK - Never watched because the second one was so boring and I couldn't make it through it.

Return of the Jedi may have been a lousy movie, but at least I never fell asleep during it. Same can be said about the prequal trilogy.

MrAngryFace · « **Reply #61 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:37:43 PM »

TT shoulda been TREEBEARD THE MOVIE

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #62 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:38:25 PM »

Michael Mann? Please. He makes nerd movies for dudes with testosterone issues. Heat is a drag to watch -- it's like watching a trucker masturbate. Collateral was good, though, even if casting Cruise was a mistake. He's what you'd get if you gave The Dark Shake a 120 IQ and let him make movies. I'll take Jackson over him ANY day. Tarantino alone renders Mann obsolete.

Richard Linklater

Solo · « **Reply #63 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:39:42 PM »

Hell, I liked GEORGE FUCKING LUCAS' latest film more than Jackson's. Now thats saying something. Kong still holds the spot for worst mainstream blockbuster of the decade for me thusfar. I'll watch Salo on infinite repeat before Ill watch KK again.

EDIT: Heat IS overrated, and Ive always said so. But The Insider atones for all sins.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #64 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:41:32 PM »

The Insider atones for Miami Vice. It does NOT atone for Heat.

I could not get past the first two hours of King Kong. I swear, I felt physically depressed when I realized there was at least an hour remaining.

Solo · « **Reply #65 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:43:00 PM »

Ive loved Mohicans, Insider, Thief and Collateral.
Ive been lukewarm on Vice, Manhunter and Heat.
I hate Ali.

Still a great track record in my books. And at least when Mann masturbates on film, its watchable. Unlike PJ.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #66 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:46:39 PM »

Jackson has Meet the Feebles, Fellowship, Dead Alive, and Heavenly Creatures. How can you not love Dead Alive -- it's the movie the Super Raimi Brothers would make if they could! The Frighteners is also good, off-kilter fun -- it rides that typically Jackson line between goofball and disturbing.

Then again, he also has RotK and King Kong. :/

Solo · « **Reply #67 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:49:04 PM »

I have no problems with PJ's early filmography - before he got loads of success, clout, and an ego the size of Auckland, he was a filmmaker I was interested in watching. I love the Frighteners, and FOTR was my favorite film of 2001. But after the success of that movie, things went to hell in a handbasket.

Now I fear the 5 hour cut of The Lovely Bones.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #68 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:49:42 PM »

well, i don't disagree there. i suppose i still hold out hope.

Cheebs · « **Reply #69 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:50:15 PM »

Quote from: Solo on April 17, 2007, 01:32:32 PM

Off the top of my head, Id put Michael Mann, Chanwook Park, Terry Gilliam, Paul Greengrass, Martin Scorsese, Jean Pierre Jeunet, Michael Gondry, Fernando Mereilles, Alfonso Cuaron, Chris Nolan, Steven Spielberg, Quentin Tarantino, David Fincher, Sam Mendes, Oliver Hirshbeigel, Ridley Scott, Wong Kar Wai, Richard Linklater, and even Bryan Singer over Jackson, in terms of currently active directors.

Bryan Singer, suprising! Usual Suspects was one of the best of the 90's and I am really looking forward to his Hitler film that he is doing next (before his next superman).

Solo · « **Reply #70 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:53:29 PM »

I havent loved a Singer movie yet, but I do tend to find they are well directed.

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #71 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:57:12 PM »

Quote from: Solo on April 17, 2007, 01:39:42 PM

Kong still holds the spot for worst mainstream blockbuster of the decade for me thusfar.

That means its worse then anything Roland Emmerich, McG, Micheal Bay, Nancy Meyers, Brett Ratner, or Rob Cohen has done in the last ten years.

are you sure you don't want to reconsider that last statement? At least Kong had the bugpit scene, that was hella cool.

Cheebs · « **Reply #72 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:58:06 PM »

Quote from: HyperZoneWasAwesome on April 17, 2007, 01:57:12 PM

Quote from: Solo on April 17, 2007, 01:39:42 PM
Kong still holds the spot for worst mainstream blockbuster of the decade for me thusfar.
That means its worse then anything Roland Emmerich, McG, Micheal Bay, Nancy Meyers, Brett Ratner, or Rob Cohen has done in the last ten years.

are you sure you don't want to reconsider that last statement? At least Kong had the bugpit scene, that was hella cool.

Has Emmerich done anything of importance since the 90's though? Outside that global warming movie.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #73 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:58:14 PM »

Bryan Singer and Gore Verbinski are two directors I think have legitimate talent if they'd just stop whoring themselves out to Hollywood and pick some decent fucking scripts that don't involve existing franchises.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #74 on:** April 17, 2007, 01:59:32 PM »

I'd sit through all of King Kong if it meant I could forget Pearl Harbor, Attack of the Clones and/or Revenge of the Sith.

Solo · « **Reply #75 on:** April 17, 2007, 02:00:14 PM »

Quote from: HyperZoneWasAwesome on April 17, 2007, 01:57:12 PM

Quote from: Solo on April 17, 2007, 01:39:42 PM
Kong still holds the spot for worst mainstream blockbuster of the decade for me thusfar.
That means its worse then anything Roland Emmerich, McG, Micheal Bay, Nancy Meyers, Brett Ratner, or Rob Cohen has done in the last ten years.

are you sure you don't want to reconsider that last statement? At least Kong had the bugpit scene, that was hella cool.

As bad as these hacks are, none have had the audacity to release a 3 hour self-absorbed, pretentious piece of crap that tried miserably to turn what should have been a fun 90 minute, B romp into a 3 hour, serious drama.

At least Michael Bay makes no bones about being, well, Michael Bay.

Cheebs · « **Reply #76 on:** April 17, 2007, 02:00:28 PM »

Usual Suspects was fantastic. X-Men was a slightly above average origin story but it paid off with the very well done X2. Superman Returns is by no mean a great film, but is one that gets far too much un-deserved hate. I am hoping he can pull of another x-men to x2 type of jump with the next one. Returns made a good deal of money(over 200 million in the states) but it still knocked his ego down a few notches, that can only help.

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #77 on:** April 17, 2007, 02:06:12 PM »

Quote from: Cheebs on April 17, 2007, 01:58:06 PM

Has Emmerich done anything of importance since the 90's though? Outside that global warming movie.

he did Godzilla 98' (still within last decade) which makes him and me enemies for life. Also he did Bravehart in America, um, I meant The Patriot(also shit).

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #78 on:** April 17, 2007, 02:07:26 PM »

Emmerich did The Patriot? For some reason, I thought it was all a Mel Gibson Production (tm Not Them Hollywood Jewz). OMG NOW I KNOW WHO TO BLAME

Cheebs · « **Reply #79 on:** April 17, 2007, 02:07:37 PM »

Quote from: HyperZoneWasAwesome on April 17, 2007, 02:06:12 PM

Quote from: Cheebs on April 17, 2007, 01:58:06 PM
Has Emmerich done anything of importance since the 90's though? Outside that global warming movie.
he did Godzilla 98' (still within last decade) which makes him and me enemies for life. Also he did Bravehart in America, um, I meant The Patriot(also shit).

well he said he said in this decade, not in the last 10 years.

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #80 on:** April 17, 2007, 02:10:31 PM »

my hate for the American Godzilla trancends time.

Eduardo24 · « **Reply #81 on:** April 17, 2007, 03:07:30 PM »

In ROTK, were the ghost guys in book or not?

I have only read Fellowship and Two Towers, but Fellowship was MUCH better to me, because the characters were traveling and it felt adventurous and epic at the same time, I didn´t like TT because its basically just battles.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #82 on:** April 17, 2007, 03:11:45 PM »

the ghosts were in the book.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #83 on:** April 17, 2007, 03:16:44 PM »

I really liked The Two Towers, because Helm's Deep was boner inspiring. Fellowship deserves the credit it got. Return of the King is kind of a mess, though. In retrospect, Peter Jackson gets a lot of credit for putting out all those films in three years time, but it was probably a bad idea. The quality pretty much declined, while the effects shots and running time increased and he continually needed more time.

Cheebs · « **Reply #84 on:** April 17, 2007, 03:18:24 PM »

helm's deep lasts a bit too long.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #85 on:** April 17, 2007, 03:19:39 PM »

I wish it you last forever, you tree-hugging pussies.

Cheebs · « **Reply #86 on:** April 17, 2007, 03:20:27 PM »

Another "LOTR" movie? lol:
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=19929

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #87 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:02:40 PM »

Quote from: MrAngryFace on April 17, 2007, 01:18:39 PM

Nolan's style is just incredibly engaging even without big budget. Whereas with Jackson, I need him and his special effects group to engage me with expensive visuals. Granted The Frighteners is a great movie, but its really not as engaging as say Prestige or Memento. Jackson got lucky with LotR because while the screenplay adaptation was excellent, he really just needed to bring OMG special effects to the table.

I mean if you take away the LEGACY of LOTR you end up with King Kong. Which sucked.

Bullshit. First off, Jackson helped write the screenplay adaption with was indeed steller. Second, he didn't just need to bring special effects to the table. If he did that we would have gotten the Star Wars prequels in Middle Earth. Instead Jackson was able to bring the characters to life across the board. LOTR was an epic undertaking in film making and Jackson perfectly steadied the ship from beginning to end. For that alone he deserves credit - especially when you look at past trilogies and the pits they fell into overtime.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #88 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:13:52 PM »

Phoenix Dark sounds like he wrote the forward for the Making of Lord of the Rings book.

Jackson's involvement with the screenplay was limited at best, it was mostly Boyens and Walsh. Jackson has never been a good screenwriter, so you can't really credit him with its success. Also, it was an adaptation - meaning it wasn't original. Even Jackson said the more faithful they were to the source material, the better it was. MAF is right, Lord of the Rings just needed high production values and Jackson brought those. Most fantasy films die or prosper on their visuals.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #89 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:17:22 PM »

I dunno if I'd agree, at least with regards to Fellowship -- he chose the locales and directed some of those really grand shots. He also managed to make Orlando Bloom -- a terrible actor if there was one -- palatable. If "effect shots" truly were his sole contributions, there wouldn't be this huge disparity (as I see it) between FotR and RotK, since the latter movie is ALL effect shots and hamfisted editing.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #90 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:24:11 PM »

Quote from: Willco on April 17, 2007, 05:13:52 PM

Phoenix Dark sounds like he wrote the forward for the Making of Lord of the Rings book.

Jackson's involvement with the screenplay was limited at best, it was mostly Boyens and Walsh. Jackson has never been a good screenwriter, so you can't really credit him with its success. Also, it was an adaptation - meaning it wasn't original. Even Jackson said the more faithful they were to the source material, the better it was. MAF is right, Lord of the Rings just needed high production values and Jackson brought those. Most fantasy films die or prosper on their visuals.

I said he helped write it. And it's pretty easy to see where Boyens had to "fill in" certain aspects of the screenplay. For the entire intro scene at the beginning of FOTR is all Boyens. There were of course other scenes throughout the movies that weren't in the book, yet served to further shed light on the characters for the audience - just as Boromir picking up the ring. Then you have the added stuff that just didn't work - Aragorn getting pulled off the clff by the warg in TTT was especially offensive. God I hate that scene.

LOTR needed more than "high production values" to work. That's an unfair way to discredit Jackson's dedication and work on the movies. As movies like Narnia have shown, you need more than pazazz to create a truly good fantasy adaptation. As Drinky said, he perfectly nailed the look and atmosphere of the book.

Cheebs · « **Reply #91 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:31:10 PM »

Jackson says on the EE commentaries he barely wrote and the girls did most of everything writing wise and he laughed that he was lucky enough to get credit for the script. I say this as a fan of LOTR, PD his involvement in the scripts is barely there.

He is the public media face, his wife does not like the spot light at all.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #92 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:32:43 PM »

Quote from: Cheebs on April 17, 2007, 05:31:10 PM

Jackson says on the EE commentaries he barely wrote and the girls did most of everything writing wise and he laughed that he was lucky enough to get credit for the script. I say this as a fan of LOTR, PD his involvement in the scripts is barely there.

He is the public media face, his wife does not like the spot light at all.

I know this. He was involved obviously, just not nearly as much as Boyens and Walsh.

TakingBackSunday · « **Reply #93 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:34:39 PM »

I'll do my own rating that's a page late, but whatev.

ANH: 7.5/10
ESB: 9.5/10
ROTJ: 6/10

FotR: 10/10
TT: 7/10
RotK: 9.5

RotLA: 10/10 easily
ToD: 5/10
TLC: 8/10

I really enjoyed Return of the King. *shrugs* I realize it's basically a CG jerkfest, but I thought it was very well executed. The multiple ending shit was pretty annoying, but hey, that's pretty much the novel too. And fuck yeah, Howard Shore's score is fucking totally UNF UNF UNF. Love love LOVE that score. Really made the films 20 times more emotional.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #94 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:37:34 PM »

Quote from: BrandNew on April 17, 2007, 05:34:39 PM

I'll do my own rating that's a page late, but whatev.

ANH: 7.5/10
ESB: 9.5/10
ROTJ: 6/10

FotR: 10/10
TT: 7/10
RotK: 9.5

RotLA: 10/10 easily
ToD: 5/10
TLC: 8/10

I really enjoyed Return of the King. *shrugs* I realize it's basically a CG jerkfest, but I thought it was very well executed. The multiple ending shit was pretty annoying, but hey, that's pretty much the novel too. And fuck yeah, Howard Shore's score is fucking totally UNF UNF UNF. Love love LOVE that score. Really made the films 20 times more emotional.

I think the majority of people who complain about the ending didn't read the book. The end was as close to fan service as you can get. I mean, even the last words of the movie are actually's Sam's last words in the book.

Mupepe · « **Reply #95 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:38:03 PM »

Quote from: Drinky Crow on April 17, 2007, 05:17:22 PM

I dunno if I'd agree, at least with regards to Fellowship -- he chose the locales and directed some of those really grand shots. He also managed to make Orlando Bloom -- a terrible actor if there was one -- palatable. If "effect shots" truly were his sole contributions, there wouldn't be this huge disparity (as I see it) between FotR and RotK, since the latter movie is ALL effect shots and hamfisted editing.

fellowship is the best in the trilogy.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #96 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:42:45 PM »

Yeah, we all read the book, but nobody wants to sit through that shit. Goddamn, was that annoying. My mom, who warmed up to the movies, got so annoyed after that she will now check the running times on films - something she never did before.

I honestly think Return of the King made everyone do that. Prior to that film, I've never really heard people complain about or check for long running times before hand. Especially film geeks (omg its longer awesome!). Now people are like, "Oh no, over three hours? I hope it's not like Return of the King!"

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #97 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:43:28 PM »

It's illogical to expect such an epic trilogy to have a quick ending. At the end of the day there needed to be certain things: The actual return of the king, the return to the Shire, and the journey to the Grey Havens. Jackson had to of course cut the entire Industrial Shire stuff out of the movie because it simply wouldn't work (especially after such an...epic climax)

I cherished every moment of the ending you bastards

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #98 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:46:15 PM »

No, it's not illogical. It's logical to have a coherent, concise ending. What you wanted was dumb fan service, because despite the fact that you've not bedded a woman yet, your true fantasy is to nestle into Peter Jackson's man boobs as Orlando Bloom garbed in elven battle gear cornholes you from behind. If you're lucky, you could give ManaByte a reach around (is he a LOTR geek too, because I'm assuming at this point).

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #99 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:48:05 PM »

Where in the Tolkien book did the following occur:

"Frodo blinked in the bright sunlight, but his eyes were glazed over with some sort of strange translucent substance. It felt as though he dwelt in a waking dream, albeit a dreamland typified by heavy sepia saturation and high radiosity post-processing effects. And where was Sam? Oh, there he was, running into the room. "Oh Mister Frodo!" his life companion breathed, and his dulcet tenor was ripe with homosexual tension. And Merry, and Pippin too! Oh joy! Frodo grasped each one in turn, and they leapt upon the bed, where they bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and "WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS GAY SHIT" boomed Gandalf despite his own notorious penchant for sodomy. "Ah fuckit," the old wizard muttered, and smiled a simpering grin of pseudo-fatherly affection. The music swelled."

MrAngryFace · « **Reply #100 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:48:39 PM »

God that damn bed bouncing scene.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #101 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:49:48 PM »

Quote from: Drinky Crow on April 17, 2007, 05:48:05 PM

Where in the Tokien book did the following occur:

"Frodo blinked in the bright sunlight, but his eyes were glazed over with some sort of strange translucent substance. It felt as though he was in a dreamland, albeit a dreamland typified by heavy sepia saturation and high radiosity post-processing effects. And where was Sam? Oh, here he is, running into the room. "Oh Mister Frodo!" his life companion breathed, his dulcet tenor ripe with homosexual tension. And Merry, and Pippin too! Oh joy! Frodo grasped each one in turn, and they leapt upon the bed, where they bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and bounced and "WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS GAY SHIT" boomed Gandalf despite his own notorious penchant for sodomy. "Ah fuckit," the old wizard muttered, and smiled a simpering grin of pseudo-fatherly affection. The music swelled.

:kylielaff :kylielaff :kylielaff

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #102 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:49:52 PM »

I loved that scene. Especially when Sam came in and just looked at Frodo like "yeah, we did it massah"

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #103 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:50:23 PM »

Phoenix Dark's homosexual LOTR fantasy confirmed.

Cheebs · « **Reply #104 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:52:08 PM »

I am no rotk hater but to throw something out there:

The original novel of Planet of the Apes ended with the fucked up abe lincoln monkey statue with apes in modern america but that didn't excuse the burton film critizism of using the original dumb ending.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #105 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:53:41 PM »

Did we ever get a coherent explanation for that ending? I remember when it was released, FOX was like, "Oh, well, you'll find out... in the sequel!" But I guess nobody wanted to do one.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #106 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:53:58 PM »

Quote from: Cheebs on April 17, 2007, 05:52:08 PM

I am no rotk hater but to throw something out there:

The original novel of Planet of the Apes ended with the fucked up abe lincoln monkey statue with apes in modern america but that didn't excuse the burton film critizism of using the original dumb ending.

Could you rephrase that? I don't know what you're saying.

I saw the original Planet of the Apes for the first time a month ago or so (didn't watch it all though), and I was surprised at how good it was. That ending was pretty damn cool too. Imagine if you knew nothing about the movie and then saw that ending.

Cheebs · « **Reply #107 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:55:25 PM »

Quote from: Willco on April 17, 2007, 05:53:41 PM

Did we ever get a coherent explanation for that ending? I remember when it was released, FOX was like, "Oh, well, you'll find out... in the sequel!" But I guess nobody wanted to do one.

well it was used in the book exactly as is in the burton film and the guy never wrote a sequel(same guy who wrote the novel bridge over the river kwai oddly enough)

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #108 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:56:53 PM »

Did you not see the Tim Burton re-imagining of Planet of the Apes that came out a few years ago? Thankfully, it was something that has been quickly forgotten from pop-culture, like declining franchise sequels (see Superman IV or Jaws: The Revenge) or awful remakes (Vince Vaughn in Psycho). It had good Rick Baker makeup, but that's about it.

At any rate, it ends with Marky Mark sent to some future or past or something where he lands at the Mall in Washington D.C. Where the Abraham Lincoln monument should be stands an Abraham Lincoln MONKEY monument, and monkeys are in charge of this modern human-like society.

MrAngryFace · « **Reply #109 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:57:03 PM »

-- hobbit bed bounce scene redubbed. Some of you may remember this.

Cheebs · « **Reply #110 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:58:01 PM »

PD here is a timeline
PotA Novel: Ends with the main guy traveling back to his home to find it's modern time with apes and such in DC

PotA adapted into a film in '68: ends with the DAMN YOU statue of liberty stuff, stops before the whole back to home in DC with apes of the novel

PotA remake: Uses the original book ending with the main guy traveling back to his home to find it's modern time with apes and such in DC

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #111 on:** April 17, 2007, 05:59:30 PM »

Quote from: MrAngryFace on April 17, 2007, 05:57:03 PM

-- hobbit bed bounce scene redubbed. Some of you may remember this.

I literally laughed so hard I cried.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #112 on:** April 17, 2007, 06:02:29 PM »

Quote from: Willco on April 17, 2007, 05:56:53 PM

Did you not see the Tim Burton re-imagining of Planet of the Apes that came out a few years ago? Thankfully, it was something that has been quickly forgotten from pop-culture, like declining franchise sequels (see Superman IV or Jaws: The Revenge) or awful remakes (Vince Vaughn in Psycho). It had good Rick Baker makeup, but that's about it.

At any rate, it ends with Marky Mark sent to some future or past or something where he lands at the Mall in Washington D.C. Where the Abraham Lincoln monument should be stands an Abraham Lincoln MONKEY monument, and monkeys are in charge of this modern human-like society.

Oh ok, thanks for explaining lol. Yeah I saw that remake, but I can't honestly say I remember anything about it

I'll look for it on Youtube lol

Cheebs · « **Reply #113 on:** April 17, 2007, 06:08:17 PM »

the original is one of my favorite sci-fi films ever but even with the bad ending the book is far superior to both films. The humans in it were FAR more "de-evolved" mentally compared to the more tame verisions in the film. All were completely naked and basically asked like chimps. Not the mute slaves of the movie. Much creepier.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #114 on:** April 17, 2007, 06:13:54 PM »

Am I the only person who wanted to kill some monkeys after watching that movie? There should be a trust fund or something so you can contribute money towards this goal - sort of like those "save a child" charities, except here you'd be getting monthly reports on how many apes were killed in your name

Cheebs · « **Reply #115 on:** April 17, 2007, 06:18:00 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on April 17, 2007, 06:13:54 PM

Am I the only person who wanted to kill some monkeys after watching that movie? There should be a trust fund or something so you can contribute money towards this goal - sort of like those "save a child" charities, except here you'd be getting monthly reports on how many apes were killed in your name

watch the sequels. Heston is the reason of the take over! In the second Heston has his monkey pals from the first go back to earth(HUMAN earth) to save themselves the monkey couple get there and their offspring lead the monkey rebellion lol.

News:

Author Topic: Sam Raimi admits the obvious (Read 5093 times)