Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 8:39 am
we had that cover in here already, and yeah, it's terrible. the r1 will definitely be better.
Page 36 of 41
Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:24 pm
There's a decidedly ugly cover on Fast Times at Ridgemont High, but I can't seem to locate it anywhere. A bright yellow cover with three of the male actors photshopped in somewhat smallish and poorly towards the bottom. Not exactly a Worst travesty, but definitely in the fairly repulsive category. Very unappealing. Now I wish I bought the edition with Spicoli/Penn at a schooldesk in front of the school.
Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 6:59 pm
Nothing particularly offensive about this apparently "new" cover for the quite old release of Days of Heaven, but at any rate it's a crime to have a giant heads design for a friggin' Terrence Malick movie, with all the possibilities it suggests...
Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:03 pm
Lemmy Caution wrote:There's a decidedly ugly cover on Fast Times at Ridgemont High
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:51 am
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 6:41 pm
I'm confused. Does it star Shatner or his book?
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:10 pm
Shatner's head is wedged in between the ass cheeks of the universe. He is the Shat?
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:49 pm
Mel's Payback cover features one of my most-hated 90s movie cliches--the too-cool-for-school method for threatening someone with a pistol: holding it up in the air next to your head with your arm fully extended and your hand turned sideways. Would that even work?
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 9:31 pm
Why no. No it wouldn't.
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 5:03 pm
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 5:51 pm
Ooh, yeah! I'm picturing this show as an uplifting family drama, with Terry Gilliam style animation, featuring an Irish priest dispensing wisdom from the back of a green flying saucer. He manages to save Colin Farrell's family from all kinds of dangerous scrapes with the law.
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2007 6:30 pm
That'd be a hell of a lot better than what the show actually is.carax09 wrote:Ooh, yeah! I'm picturing this show as an uplifting family drama, with Terry Gilliam style animation, featuring an Irish priest dispensing wisdom from the back of a green flying saucer. He manages to save Colin Farrell's family from all kinds of dangerous scrapes with the law.
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:12 pm
Region 1
from the digital bits.
why is it so hard to pull together a decent children of men cover? hopefully this isn't final.
from the digital bits.
why is it so hard to pull together a decent children of men cover? hopefully this isn't final.
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:15 pm
Well, I'm sure it wouldn't stop the bullets from coming out.Foulard wrote:Mel's Payback cover features one of my most-hated 90s movie cliches--the too-cool-for-school method for threatening someone with a pistol: holding it up in the air next to your head with your arm fully extended and your hand turned sideways. Would that even work?
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:40 pm
the only thing wrong with that R1 cover is the terrible font and the outer shadow on it.
Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:05 am
Probably not, but wasn't there a whole thing in the Rock DVD supplements that you could hurt yourself doing that? I can't remember exactly what it was but remember the guy saying that that was a "don't" Man, DVDs have really learned me.flyonthewall2983 wrote:Well, I'm sure it wouldn't stop the bullets from coming out.Foulard wrote:Mel's Payback cover features one of my most-hated 90s movie cliches--the too-cool-for-school method for threatening someone with a pistol: holding it up in the air next to your head with your arm fully extended and your hand turned sideways. Would that even work?
Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:17 am
SncDthMnky wrote:the only thing wrong with that R1 cover is the entire cover.
Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 12:19 pm
If you do it with a bow and arrow you have to remember to tilt the right way or the arrows fall off.Foulard wrote:Mel's Payback cover features one of my most-hated 90s movie cliches--the too-cool-for-school method for threatening someone with a pistol: holding it up in the air next to your head with your arm fully extended and your hand turned sideways. Would that even work?
Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 1:35 pm
Kind of a variation on the aforementioned cool guy gun-tilt a la Payback I suppose.
Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 1:41 pm
Yes, something about the recoil breaking your wrist, on top of not being able to aim it properly!cdnchris wrote:Probably not, but wasn't there a whole thing in the Rock DVD supplements that you could hurt yourself doing that? I can't remember exactly what it was but remember the guy saying that that was a "don't" Man, DVDs have really learned me.flyonthewall2983 wrote:Well, I'm sure it wouldn't stop the bullets from coming out.Foulard wrote:Mel's Payback cover features one of my most-hated 90s movie cliches--the too-cool-for-school method for threatening someone with a pistol: holding it up in the air next to your head with your arm fully extended and your hand turned sideways. Would that even work?
And never cross your body with the barrel of the gun, or aim at anything you aren't prepared to shoot! (Is is weird that I've never seen a gun in reality, yet know some of the rules for correctly handling one?)
The other big no-no would seem to be firing two guns at the same time - you should steady the hand holding the gun with the other one to maintain accuracy, I guess (although this is coming from someone who has played all the Tomb Raider computer games, so I can suspend disbelief when I need to!)
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 6:05 am
Go to a firing range and pop off a few rounds and you'll see how goofy the whole two-guns-at-once, single-gun-fired-crooked is. Firing a simple .38 snub or .22 auto without bracing your wrist without the other hands results in misfires haywire. Never mind a hoody nine.
Even braced this way, the 'kick' on a pistol causes, for the untrained shooter (not to mention the typical hoodie flying thru midair over the trunk of a car in Wooian copycat slow-mo) to accidentally fire up at nearly 45 degrees (assuming the ideal is 90degs out from the body via outstretched arm). Go to an indoor firing range and look at how many holes are right there in front of you, a yard up & out, from bullets buried in the soft corking from upshots off of untrained, weak wrists.
Ah but it's so stylish to be a douche bag!
Even braced this way, the 'kick' on a pistol causes, for the untrained shooter (not to mention the typical hoodie flying thru midair over the trunk of a car in Wooian copycat slow-mo) to accidentally fire up at nearly 45 degrees (assuming the ideal is 90degs out from the body via outstretched arm). Go to an indoor firing range and look at how many holes are right there in front of you, a yard up & out, from bullets buried in the soft corking from upshots off of untrained, weak wrists.
Ah but it's so stylish to be a douche bag!
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:48 pm
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:37 am
That flick must be killer...'cause Affleck looks zombified in that pic.dx23 wrote:
*rimshot*
Try the veal, folks.
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 4:17 am
John Cleese is really slumming it these days.
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:36 am
man about town is on HD-DVD in Spain already.