
Solnes |

Solnes wrote:I call it a language syntax snafu based on nuances between Aussie and American Eengleesh. :DUrizen wrote:I saw that too and chafed at first...but flash is a good guy and wouldn't mean it like that. ;)flash_cxxi wrote:Substantially? Why not significantly? :PSolnes wrote:I have a decent ass. Or so says people.Substantially more than decent... substantially more...
Yeah we'll go with that
:)
![]() |

Crimson Jester wrote:Of the three the most intellegnet movie happens to be Cloudy with a chance of Meatballs I did not want to like that movie.I wanted to hate it as they had messed around with one of my favorite childhood books.
I did not know it was a book.
I wanted to like Ghostrider even more so Wolverene.. And yet I could not.

![]() |

Aberzombie wrote:GEAUX SAINTS!Congrats although I heard there was some ref bungling... haven't had a chance to read up on the game yet. I will be rooting for them as I don't mind either team but at least the Colts have won before.
I have to say that it was poorly officiated on both sides. Still, IMHO it was poor decisions on the side of the Vikings, coupled with the Saints winning the OT coin toss, that gave NO a chance to win.

![]() |

Urizen wrote:I saw that too and chafed at first...but flash is a good guy and wouldn't mean it like that. ;)flash_cxxi wrote:Substantially? Why not significantly? :PSolnes wrote:I have a decent ass. Or so says people.Substantially more than decent... substantially more...
I thought about my wording after I wrote it as well, but Solnes knows how much I like her Ass to not take it that way... ;)

![]() |

Urizen wrote:I geek out over any DC Universe movie.Twin Agate Dragons wrote:Thanks! I think Mac will have geekgasms over this. :PUrizen wrote:I did not know that. Is it in production right now? Any anticipated release date?June 17 2011.
Only DC movie I would totally Geek Out over would be The Flash.
The others are good, but I'm not the biggest DC fan around (apart from a couple of characters).

![]() |

flash_cxxi wrote:Any remote talk of him making any sort of theatrical appearances?Only DC movie I would totally Geek Out over would be The Flash.
There have been talks about it for a few years now. It was going to be part of the the DC answer to the Avengers buildup. Unfortunately this and this is the best info there is at the moment.
Sad huh?
Twin Agate Dragons |

Only DC movie I would totally Geek Out over would be The Flash.
The others are good, but I'm not the biggest DC fan around (apart from a couple of characters).
The one DC movie I'm really looking forward to is Justice League

Urizen |

There have been talks about it for a few years now. It was going to be part of the the DC answer to the Avengers buildup. Unfortunately this and this is the best info there is at the moment.
Sad huh?
I wasn't even aware there was going to be a Justice League movie. Is that happening for sure or in the same 'up in the air' zone?
EDIT: see post above.

Urizen |

Urizen wrote:flash_cxxi wrote:I thought about my wording after I wrote it as well, but Solnes knows how much I like her Ass to not take it that way... ;)How does her ass take it? Heh heh heh.I'm not touching that with a 10' Pole.
I'll let Moorluck field this question.
I don't think any women want it touched with a 10' pole. OUCH! is an understatement. :P

![]() |

flash_cxxi wrote:I wasn't even aware there was going to be a Justice League movie. Is that happening for sure or in the same 'up in the air' zone?There have been talks about it for a few years now. It was going to be part of the the DC answer to the Avengers buildup. Unfortunately this and this is the best info there is at the moment.
Sad huh?
Same up in the air.
They canned Wonder Woman (at least for the time being) and it looks like Justice League is on the back burner for the moment as well.
![]() |

Callous Jack wrote:I think he's a big comic fan as this is the 2nd or third comic movie he has been in.He got his action start in Blade, right?
No Ryan Reynolds has done a spat of chick flicks for some time now. He always played the jerk. he is good at it. WHich is why I think he will be awful as Hal Jordan. He would make a great Guy Gardener though.

![]() |

Last I checked they have canned the JLA movie as well. They want a full reboot of Superman as a "dark" movie since The Dark Night did so well.
They seem not to read the books they want to make a movie of. Just sad really.
Plus ol' Supes is public Domain in a few years and we will most likely see a spate of "vintage" superman movies.

Urizen |

Urizen wrote:No Ryan Reynolds has done a spat of chick flicks for some time now. He always played the jerk. he is good at it. WHich is why I think he will be awful as Hal Jordan. He would make a great Guy Gardener though.Callous Jack wrote:I think he's a big comic fan as this is the 2nd or third comic movie he has been in.He got his action start in Blade, right?
I meant was Blade his first action film? I'm very aware of his comedy resume. He got his start on that Three Guys, A Girl, and a Pizza Place comedy sitcom.

![]() |

Urizen wrote:flash_cxxi wrote:Any remote talk of him making any sort of theatrical appearances?Only DC movie I would totally Geek Out over would be The Flash.
There have been talks about it for a few years now. It was going to be part of the the DC answer to the Avengers buildup. Unfortunately this and this is the best info there is at the moment.
Sad huh?
.
They also intend to “go dark to the extent that the characters allow it.”
Yes that is sad

![]() |

Callous Jack wrote:Although it was cool that he actaully smoked a cigar since he's no longer allowed to in the comics.Let me get this straight. You can't show somebody smoking but you can show extreme violence and sexual situations. *scratches head*
Joe Quesada, the head honcho of Marvel, lost his dad to lung cancer so he banned all smoking in the comics, even for guys who have always done it like Nick Fury, Wolverine, Gambit and the Thing.
I guess I can understand his motivation although I highly doubt the Thing chewing on a cigar ever influenced a kid that much.
![]() |

Crimson Jester wrote:I meant was Blade his first action film? I'm very aware of his comedy resume. He got his start on that Three Guys, A Girl, and a Pizza Place comedy sitcom.Urizen wrote:No Ryan Reynolds has done a spat of chick flicks for some time now. He always played the jerk. he is good at it. WHich is why I think he will be awful as Hal Jordan. He would make a great Guy Gardener though.Callous Jack wrote:I think he's a big comic fan as this is the 2nd or third comic movie he has been in.He got his action start in Blade, right?
Ah yes I beleave Trinity was his first action flick. It was to have been the basis for a Nightstalkers spin off that never saw the light of day.

![]() |

Urizen wrote:Ah yes I beleave Trinity was his first action flick. It was to have been the basis for a Nightstalkers spin off that never saw the light of day.Crimson Jester wrote:I meant was Blade his first action film? I'm very aware of his comedy resume. He got his start on that Three Guys, A Girl, and a Pizza Place comedy sitcom.Urizen wrote:No Ryan Reynolds has done a spat of chick flicks for some time now. He always played the jerk. he is good at it. WHich is why I think he will be awful as Hal Jordan. He would make a great Guy Gardener though.Callous Jack wrote:I think he's a big comic fan as this is the 2nd or third comic movie he has been in.He got his action start in Blade, right?
Nightstalkers was OK. Give me Morbius or Werewolf by Night any night of the week!
Morbius is actually in my Top 10 Comic Characters and WWbN in my Top 20.

Garydee |

Garydee wrote:Callous Jack wrote:Although it was cool that he actaully smoked a cigar since he's no longer allowed to in the comics.Let me get this straight. You can't show somebody smoking but you can show extreme violence and sexual situations. *scratches head*Jow Quesada, the head honcho of Marvel, lost his dad to lung cancer so he banned all smoking in the comics, even for guys who have always done it like Nick Fury, Wolverine, Gambit and the Thing.
I guess I can understand his motivation although I highly doubt the Thing chewing on a cigar ever influenced a kid that much.
I see. I don't have a problem with that as long as it's not government censorship. Quesada can run his business any way he wants.

![]() |

flash_cxxi wrote:I don't think any women wants it touched with a 10' pole. OUCH! is an understatement. :PUrizen wrote:flash_cxxi wrote:I thought about my wording after I wrote it as well, but Solnes knows how much I like her Ass to not take it that way... ;)How does her ass take it? Heh heh heh.I'm not touching that with a 10' Pole.
I'll let Moorluck field this question.
Well lucky I'm nowhere near 10' then isn't it... ;)

![]() |

okay, that was a lot between when I posted this morning and then I go and work on some errands and sheesh.....
And I find Taylor Swift waaay to skinny as well. I mean, she's cute enough, but not so much my type. I prefer curves. :)
She is young yet, give her a few years and soem of my cooking and a kid or two and she will have curves soon enough.

David Fryer's Soul |

lynora wrote:She is young yet, give her a few years and soem of my cooking and a kid or two and she will have curves soon enough.okay, that was a lot between when I posted this morning and then I go and work on some errands and sheesh.....
And I find Taylor Swift waaay to skinny as well. I mean, she's cute enough, but not so much my type. I prefer curves. :)
Back off, I saw her first!

![]() |

Does anyone else thing that it would be a Colts/Vikings Super Bowl if Brett Farve hadn't gone back in after his leg injury?
Meh, who knows. It might also be that he had to try and play the hero yet again on 3rd and 15, trying to make a huge play when all it would have taken was a very doable 8 yard run to set up the field goal. Instead, Bret throws across his body, across the field, and BAM! - interception. Then the Saints won the OT coin toss, and that was it.

![]() |

David Fryer wrote:Does anyone else thing that it would be a Colts/Vikings Super Bowl if Brett Farve hadn't gone back in after his leg injury?Meh, who knows. It might also be that he had to try and play the hero yet again on 3rd and 15, trying to make a huge play when all it would have taken was a very doable 8 yard run to set up the field goal. Instead, Bret throws across his body, across the field, and BAM! - interception. Then the Saints won the OT coin toss, and that was it.
I think he was trying to prove last year's playoffs were a fluke, and instead proved all the doubters right.

![]() |

David Fryer wrote:Does anyone else thing that it would be a Colts/Vikings Super Bowl if Brett Farve hadn't gone back in after his leg injury?Given the other options in the stable? No.
Of course that would have still required AP hold on to the ball. four fumbles in four drives is ridiculous.