Print Story Movies sucked in 2005
Films
By spacejack (Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:02:28 AM EST) (all tags)
I was trying to think of what movies I enjoyed in 2005... not many. Also, Peter Jackson is ruining cinema.


So there were all kinds of movies I was hyped to see last year, and I can't think of a single one that came through and really delivered. Let's see, there was:

War of the Worlds - even as a Spielberg fanboy I couldn't overlook the fact that the movie slowly disintigrates in quality after the initial panic scenes. Some terriffic moments, no doubt, but just not a fully-satisfying blockbuster movie.

Batman Begins - again, a movie I so wanted to see done right, it also falls apart by the end as it abrubtly switches from being a (relatively) realistic retelling of Batman's origin to nonsensical Saturday morning cartoon stuff.

Star Wars III - Lucas finally makes a truly awful movie. Even if you accept that the series is just big-budget fluffy fun, this was the worst-made of the bunch. Tedious, boring, uninteresting, unexciting. The only thing I felt at the end was "Thank God that's finally over."

Serenity - yet again, being a Firefly/Buffy fanboy couldn't override the feeling that the movie was really substandard Joss Whedon. Watching it again on video made me realize how many scenes just didn't seem to work or feel genuine. Fan appeasement does not a great movie make.

Sin City - possibly the best of the big-budget fare that I saw. Still, it was a self-indulgent comic-art-film experiment, but not entirely successful in the sense of being a great movie. In the end I feel the trailer was more successful than the movie. At least I respect the effort.

A History of Violence - The Emperor's New Clothes movie of the year. People that saw "art" in this were completely hoodwinked. What an awkward, amateurish piece of filmmaking. Yuck.

King Kong - Peter Jackson is ruining cinema for me. He's now put out four, 3-hour epic snoozefests that for some reason I always wind up getting dragged out to see. Why? Because you have to see them. You know, you want to go to see a movie with some friends and they're like "Oh, let's see King Kong! We gotta see that on the big screen!" or "Oh, let's see Lord of the Rings #N, got to see that on the big screen!"

In general, the thing that pissed me off the most about this year in movies is a trend in effects: flawlessly-rendered but entirely unbelievable physics. King Kong wins the award for this, both with the stupid-looking brontosaurus stampede and the comically ridiculous t-rex-swinging-in-the-vines scene.

I remember the first time I noticed this while watching a movie. It was True Lies, that James Cameron/Schwarzeneggar spy flick. At some point, Arnie jumps out on to some VTOL plane and is crawling around on it, trying to... whatever. But I remember thinking "wow, this looks totally real, but also competely unbelievable." Also guilty in recent years are the Star Wars flicks: The lightsaber battle at the end of III, with them hopping like bunnies around the lava pit (come on, if they can do that, they can do anything. "High ground" isn't gonna matter in the least.) Also in Attack of the Clones - that guided missile chasing Obi-Wan's ship through a dense asteroid field looked like a simplistic, computer-plotted animation played at high speed.

There's no tension in these scenes. Ultimately I'm just left waiting for the sequence to end (the end result of which, in all cases, is never really in any doubt.)

Ironically, the best Hollywood blockbuster style movies I saw were demolished by reviewers:

Fantastic Four - there's a reason that all the copies of that video are always rented when I visit the shop. It's because the movie was actually entertaining.

Stealth - just so much more entertaining than it should have been. Yes, dumb movie, but at least it's not pretending to be an epic masterpiece.

The Island - like Stealth and F.F., lowered expectations did wonders for this movie. All three succeed in not being boring and holding my interest to the end, however lightweight they may be.

Otherwise, I was reduced to renting foreign films. In general, I'm actually a big fan of blockbusters - action, sci-fi, horror or what not. But this year in desperation I was forced to turn elsewhere for cinematic satisfaction. So as it turned out, Head On, Who Killed Bambi and Spy Bound were the best movies I saw last year.

Best viewing experience award of 2005 goes to Oz, seasons 1 and 2. Unfortunately they were made in the 1990s.

Movies I missed but might otherwise have gone to see in a theatre and put on a best-of 2005 list were it not for Peter Jackson, George Lucas et al: Munich, Hustle & Flow and The 40 Year Old Virgin.

< Rock /is/ Dead | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' >
Movies sucked in 2005 | 62 comments (62 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Am I in Bizarro world? by DesiredUsername (4.00 / 1) #1 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:08:28 AM EST
I was going to correct your misapprehension that Star Wars III was the worst when it is actually only the 3rd or maybe 4th worst when I noticed that almost every entry here was the opposite of reality.

---
Now accepting suggestions for a new sigline
Fantastic Four Was Indeed A Stinker... by CheeseburgerBrown (4.00 / 3) #15 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:35:49 AM EST
...But how do you explain a positive review of Serenity? Your cle-var theory falls apart.


I am from a small, unknown country in the north called Ca-na-da. We are a simple, grease-loving people who enjoy le weekend de ski.
[ Parent ]
'almost every' by DesiredUsername (2.00 / 0) #18 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:43:33 AM EST
That said, I'm not sure I even watched any of these movii, except SWIII.

---
Now accepting suggestions for a new sigline
[ Parent ]
I quite enjoyed Serenity. by aphrael (4.00 / 1) #19 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:48:57 AM EST
I Enjoy Lots Of Shitty Things. by CheeseburgerBrown (4.00 / 2) #21 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:51:24 AM EST
I think my mistake by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #22 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:57:57 AM EST
was re-watching it on DVD.

[ Parent ]
I forgot to mention by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #28 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:13:40 AM EST
that I concur with your recent assessment of The Exorcism of Emily Rose... it sucked.

[ Parent ]
except by theantix (4.00 / 1) #30 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:16:12 AM EST
He nailed war of the worlds.  Everything else though is backwards.

Though I can tell a lot of his reviews are based on a discrepancy between what he expected and what he got.  Unless he's suggesting that Fantastic Four was actually a better film than Serenity, which is nonsensical to the point we have to assume he's trolling.  But if he expected Serenity to rock his world and expected Fantastic Four to be the shittiest thing ever, I can see how the former would be a disappoinment and the latter a slight winner.


[ Parent ]
I saw none of those by georgeha (4.00 / 1) #2 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:08:41 AM EST
The only movies I saw that were released in 2005 were Asylum and Mr. and Mrs. Smith.


disappointments vs worst by spacejack (4.00 / 1) #7 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:24:30 AM EST
I'm not going into a Star Wars film with very high expectations w.r.t. dialogue or acting. I do expect a certain amount of thrills, tension and some cool space fights and jedi stuff. Ep III seemed to be devoid of the very things one goes to see SW movies for. It was boring, in the way that a pretentious talking-head flick can be.

[ Parent ]
oops! by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #8 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:25:33 AM EST
should have replied to DU.

[ Parent ]
d00d, Stop Making Sense rocked by georgeha (4.00 / 2) #12 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:32:31 AM EST
as far as concert films go, as good as Festival Express and The Last Waltz.


[ Parent ]
Last Waltz is phenomenal by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #14 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:35:35 AM EST
Great special effects too, what with erasing that cocaine booger. Forgot about Festival Express... need to add that to my list.

[ Parent ]
Asylum looks interesting (nt) by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #24 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:07:59 AM EST


[ Parent ]
It was okay by georgeha (2.00 / 0) #25 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:12:37 AM EST
My review from last summer:

It was okay, Natasha Richardson played the bored/depressed/ill fitting housewife of the director of an English Asylum who falls for the hunky but violently jealous psychopathic sculptor. The sex scenes were pretty good, too. I'm going to track down the director's (David Mackenzie) earlier film, Young Adam, which also sounds interesting, in that it's another adult film dealing with a triangle, and strong sexual content. Maybe we'll try for The Constant Gardener when we're kidfree again, it was sold out the night we went out.


[ Parent ]
Best movie of 2005 by ad hoc (4.00 / 1) #3 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:09:04 AM EST
Murderball
--
UPDATE bodies SET status = 'DEAD'
ah right by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #6 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:17:41 AM EST
Another one I've got to rent. Actually, it's also always out at the store.

[ Parent ]
Sin City was terrific by Bob Abooey (4.00 / 3) #4 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:11:11 AM EST
It gets 9 erections (out of 10) just for the "performance" of Jessica Alba. Hoofa.

Warmest regards,
--Your best pal Bob

Yeah, But You Could Just Watch . . . by Christopher Robin was Murdered (4.00 / 2) #29 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:14:24 AM EST
Almost any random porn flick: You'll get more naked chicks, the acting will be at Alba-level, the plot will be just complex and rewarding, and you won't have to sit through the lame narration.

[ Parent ]
Reclassification in progress by Rogerborg (4.00 / 1) #55 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:33:46 PM EST
Your name is going into the "Rocks" column.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
You've Given Me the Courage . . . by Christopher Robin was Murdered (4.00 / 5) #5 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:13:57 AM EST
To come out and say that I thought Batman Begins was a lame flick. There. I've written it. Now I can start taking my life back . . . and for the first time in a long time, I feel clean.

Confess! by ammoniacal (4.00 / 1) #32 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:19:46 AM EST
The first half was pretty damned good.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
Never! by Christopher Robin was Murdered (4.00 / 2) #42 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 12:13:27 PM EST
Let me know when the Dark Knight quits being the dude from Death Wish in a kink outfit and starts acting like the world's greatest detective again.

I'm not going to another Batman flick until the influence of that knuckle-dragging crypto-fascist Frank Miller is purged from the franchise.

[ Parent ]
Batman versus the Vampire by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #56 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:41:39 PM EST
Parts 1 and 2.  Batman started off by sucking more than a convention of Thai hookers.  Any irregular indications to the contrary are ephemeral.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]
man, you're a grump by tps12 (4.00 / 1) #9 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:27:34 AM EST
Although I suspect you're right about Fantastic Four. I missed it in the theater, but it's on my list and I seem to love any movie based on superhero comics.

And hating on Serenity...harsh, dude.

well, by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #17 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:38:13 AM EST
I just heard that Torontonians haven't seen the sun for over 7 weeks. So there could be something to that.

[ Parent ]
I ho hummed at Fantastic Four by cam (4.00 / 1) #34 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:25:11 AM EST
of the comic book to film genre, I thought Constantine was the best.

cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic

[ Parent ]
The thing with FF by spacejack (4.00 / 2) #38 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:42:21 AM EST
is that it had everything going against it: bad casting, uncool franchise (no badass antihero type characters like Wolverine or Hellboy that are so in vogue these days), no-name director. And most of all, the movie was already made as well as could ever be in The Incredibles. So it seemed there was just no way it could actually be as fun to watch as it was.

Also helps if you're a closet FF fan like me who felt they actually captured that early Lee/Kirby sensibility of the comic.

[ Parent ]
Forgot Hellboy by cam (4.00 / 1) #39 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:47:04 AM EST
I had pretty low expectations for Fantastic Four by MohammedNiyalSayeed (4.00 / 5) #10 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:28:05 AM EST

I expected it not to suck that much. It let me down by totally sucking even more!


-
You can build the most elegant fountain in the world, but eventually a winged rat will be using it as a drinking bowl.
Seems mostly accurate by TheophileEscargot (4.00 / 1) #11 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:28:38 AM EST
Have added "Stealth" to my rental list.

Strongly disagree on King Kong, strongly agree on Star Wars 3, mildly agree on most of the others.

"Crash" is worth keeping an eye out for: not a masterpiece but intelligent and interesting.
--
It is unlikely that the good of a snail should reside in its shell: so is it likely that the good of a man should?

Just remember: by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #33 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:23:16 AM EST
Stealth is dumb and funny - not always intentionally. But highly entertaining with trippy cinematography. 606 wrote up a good review about it being the best worst film in ages.

[ Parent ]
Well by TheophileEscargot (4.00 / 1) #35 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:34:46 AM EST
I recently watched "The Core" and "Battle Beyond the Stars" and enjoyed both, so I think I can cope...
--
It is unlikely that the good of a snail should reside in its shell: so is it likely that the good of a man should?
[ Parent ]
The Core is the one where they went into the by cam (2.00 / 0) #40 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:49:01 AM EST
middle of the earth to make the earth spin properly or something? There was one bit where they fell through a gas pocket in the mantle that was awesome. Was not expecting that. Nice piece of sci-fi writing.

cam
Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic

[ Parent ]
2005 was my best movie year ever by MillMan (4.00 / 3) #13 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:34:42 AM EST
because I got a netflix subscription and watched ~70 movies (starting in April).

I'm going to wait for King Kong on DVD. I had a realization a few weeks ago - if people are saying "you need to see it in the theater for the special effects" it is most likely not worth theater money. The time when special effects were something to behold was from about 1991 - 1996. After that golden age, they now either enhance the story or they don't.

Noam Chomsky: Well, forget about the hippies and so on and so forth.

IAWTP by ad hoc (4.00 / 2) #27 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:12:55 AM EST
except I'd extend it to 1999 with The Matrix. Those effects were way cool. At least until they were co-opted by car ads.
--
UPDATE bodies SET status = 'DEAD'
[ Parent ]
matrix by MillMan (2.00 / 0) #48 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 01:30:55 PM EST
I liked that movie in the theater for two reasons - one, the darkness of the theater added to the (physical) darkness of the movie, and the crowd added to the suspense, as everyone was on the edge of their seat.

For me the "need to see it in the theater" thing was more for the "immersion" in the video and sound of action flicks. Starting in the mid 90's it was becoming pretty common for people to have home theaters that weren't much worse than movie theaters.

Noam Chomsky: Well, forget about the hippies and so on and so forth.

[ Parent ]
Speaking of which by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #50 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 03:36:35 PM EST
I intend to see this really soon if you're interested.
--
UPDATE bodies SET status = 'DEAD'
[ Parent ]
sure by MillMan (2.00 / 0) #54 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 08:05:55 PM EST
I am up for that, when are you thinking about seeing it?

Noam Chomsky: Well, forget about the hippies and so on and so forth.

[ Parent ]
Probably this weekend by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #59 Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 06:24:56 AM EST
Or maybe tomorrow.

There's also a Murderball tournement in Brockton this weekend that I'd like to see, but it's unlikely I'll be able to find any transportation to get there and the closest train to Brockton is Stoughton. Still, Stoughton isn't that far away, so maybe I'll try. Depends on the weather, really.
--
UPDATE bodies SET status = 'DEAD'

[ Parent ]
Oh wait by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #61 Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 09:35:05 AM EST
the tournament isn't until next weekend.
--
UPDATE bodies SET status = 'DEAD'
[ Parent ]
I'd just qualify that by spacejack (4.00 / 1) #37 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:36:29 AM EST
with "digital effects". Old folks like me used to be pretty blown away by things like realistic-looking models, dangerous stunts, rear projection, hidden wires, etc.

[ Parent ]
IAWTP by lb008d (4.00 / 1) #46 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 12:41:37 PM EST
And I'm not even an old folk. Just think of how classics like Alien, Aliens and Jaws would have been ruined by digital effects. Even though you know the shark is fake in Jaws it, to me, looks more real than anything I've seen digitally created to date.

[ Parent ]
The Phantom Menace was worse by theboz (4.00 / 1) #16 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:38:01 AM EST
Sorry, you're completely wrong about the Star Wars movie. Episode III Revenge of The Whogivesafuck was not good, but it was relieving in a way because they wrapped up the series, seemingly for good. Also, much less Jar-Jar time, and IIRC he only said one word.
- - - - -
That's what I always say about you, boz, you have a good memory for random facts about pussy. -- joh3n
Yup by The Fool (4.00 / 1) #36 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:34:46 AM EST
"Star Wars III: No Hand Jobs For You!" had an actual plot that (mostly) made sense. Therefore, it was MUCH better than "Star Wars II: Attack of the Killer Klones From Outer Space".

My main disappointment was that Padme's death wasn't the result of exposure and petrification (with hot grits).

[ Parent ]
NOOOOOOOOOOOO! by TheophileEscargot (4.00 / 1) #43 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 12:18:50 PM EST
So, Obi-Wan and Yoda are on Coruscant. The Emperor is a short cab ride away, Anakin is on the other side of the galaxy.

Obvious course of action: Obi-Wan and Yoda gang up on the Emperor, then go after Anakin.

Actual course of action: Obi-Wan and Yoda split up to take them on individually.

Plot made no sense at all: everyone just did stuff that was for no discernible reason.

But the movie's worst crime was taking a series whose only real good point was its fun... and taking the fun out of it.
--
It is unlikely that the good of a snail should reside in its shell: so is it likely that the good of a man should?

[ Parent ]
Dude by The Fool (2.00 / 0) #45 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 12:37:12 PM EST
You didn't like the shower of severed hands?

[ Parent ]
Look, there's no point fighting over this. by Driusan (4.00 / 2) #52 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 04:06:39 PM EST
I see no reason why we can't all just agree that SW3 was complete and utter shit, one of the worst movies of the year, and the best thing Lucas ever directed.

--
Vive le Montréal libre.
[ Parent ]
You are to be failing it by debacle (2.00 / 0) #62 Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 12:06:22 PM EST
Every point in Episode III was simply meant to draw away from the fact that you can't "do the Kessel run in less than twelve parsecs."

They were in fucking lava. LAVA. 3000 degrees C, and Ewan McGregor didn't even break a sweat.

General Grevious was a supposed military mastermind, yet he didn't exercise his right to run the fuck away from a Jedi Master. He had four fucking lightsabres and he was a fucking robot, yet his combat prowess was made up of the Lisa Simpson-esque windmill technique.

At least Episode I made some sort of sense, Jar Jar or not.


IF YOU HAVE TWO FIRLES THOROWNF MONEY ART SUOCIDE GIRLS STRIPPER HPW CAN YPUS :OSE?!?!?!?(elcevisides).

[ Parent ]
thoughts by aphrael (4.00 / 2) #20 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:49:08 AM EST
Brokeback Mountain was an awesome tragic love story.

Serenity was better if you weren't a fanboi.

Otherwise, I agree with your summary; almost every hyped-up movie I saw this year sucked in some fashion or another. Even "Good Night and Good Luck". And I missed "Hustle and Flow", because of Jared's opposition to it.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

other movies by tps12 (4.00 / 1) #23 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:58:47 AM EST
Looking through my 5- and 4-star lists on Netflix for movies in 2005, I liked Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Hotel Rwanda, Me and You and Everyone We Know, Constantine, and Pride and Prejudice.

Me and You by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #26 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:12:38 AM EST
and Everyone We Know - forgot about that one. It was always out at the shop, now I have to remember to look for it.

Not gonna see Charlie, since I can't stand Johnny Depp or Tim Burton (well, except for Ed Wood.)

[ Parent ]
edward scissorhands? by tps12 (4.00 / 2) #41 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:50:12 AM EST
I have a friend who is likewise very skeptical of Depp and Burton, especially in combination. But he admits to liking Scissorhands, sappy as it is.

[ Parent ]
C&TCF? by ammoniacal (4.00 / 1) #31 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 11:18:39 AM EST
Yuo <= 30

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
movies by 256 (4.00 / 1) #44 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 12:18:53 PM EST
War of the Worlds - knew from the first time i saw the trailer that i had no interest in ever seeing it
Batman Begins - i actually really want to see at some point. but i am keeping my expectations low.
Star Wars III - watched the first hour and it was so bad that i simply couldn't tolerate finishing it.
Serenity - never liked buffy, never saw firefly. still, i intend to see this movie at somepoint.
Sin City - loved it. wins my award for best comic book adaptation.
History of Violence - planning to see it in rep this weekend. hope you are wrong about it.
King Kong - see war of the worlds
Fantastic Four - caught fifteen random minutes from the middle when my housemate rented it. wasn't compelling enough to rope me in.
Stealth - see King Kong, only s/trailer/poster/
The Island - never heard of it
---
I don't think anyone's ever really died from smoking. --ni
re: aHoV by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #47 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 12:50:33 PM EST
I'll just say that I liked Blue Velvet and old Cronenberg flicks like Videodrome, but this one failed it for me. Rarely have I been more conscious of the fact that these are just a bunch of people standing around in front of a camera, saying what they're told to.

But, lowered expecations can do wonders for the experience...

[ Parent ]
History of Violence by Gully Foyle (2.00 / 0) #58 Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 12:47:15 AM EST
The second best ultra-violent comic book adaptation of the year.

[ Parent ]
i liked The Island by LilFlightTest (4.00 / 2) #49 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 03:02:00 PM EST
and i'd really, really like that boat.
------

yes, exactly! by spacejack (2.00 / 0) #51 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 03:48:31 PM EST
There's something to be said for a movie that can fetishize something so well.

Also, I could be wrong but I thought I detected some sly commentary on the innocence of clones. There's a scene where they fall off that building and land in a net (or something like that). There's a guy there that sees this and tells them "Someone up there must be looking out for you!" After that, the movie makes a wierd kind of sense.

[ Parent ]
it did. by LilFlightTest (2.00 / 0) #53 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 07:06:44 PM EST
re: the boat, i can't find any just plain pictures of it...which is odd, for something that seemed to play such a central role in the film.
------

[ Parent ]
My 2005 movie roundup by Rogerborg (4.00 / 1) #57 Wed Jan 04, 2006 at 10:43:58 PM EST
KABLOOIE! hubba hubba ook-ook KERSPLOOOSH! wankwankwank ZZZYOOOOM swoosh jigglejiggle ZWWING downloaddownload RRRAAAARRRG runjumprunjump TWANG done.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
Sin City? You're badmouthing . . . by slozo (4.00 / 1) #60 Thu Jan 05, 2006 at 07:36:55 AM EST
. . . Sin City?!? Well, you put it on the shitlist, then promptly gave it kudos . . .

AWESOME movie. Sin City rocked, dude. And fuck the blokes who just liked it because some trampy Alba character was acting her "achy breaky doe-eyes" off and shaking her teenie booty. It was a beautiful new form of art, something that had not been done before. And it was really well done, and cool as penguin piss.

Movies sucked in 2005 | 62 comments (62 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback