|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 5 new of 304 responses total. |
brighn
|
|
response 300 of 304:
| 
Jun 21 21:35 UTC 2002 |
#298: That too. =}
|
fitz
|
|
response 301 of 304:
|
Jun 21 21:53 UTC 2002 |
Scooby Doo C++
Predictable cartoon antics transferred to the screen. Attention to cartoon
laws of physics, juvenile sex references (few) and drug innuendo make the the
movie more interesting for those above the age of 14 and earn an extra '+'
sign. (We knew all along why Shaggy had an insatiable appetitie and that
Vilma had something under that sweater.)
Mr. Bean Alert: Rowan Atkinson is in this movie, but fortunatly does not do
the Mr. Bean routine.
|
brighn
|
|
response 302 of 304:
|
Jun 21 22:05 UTC 2002 |
Did you see Rocky and Bullwinkle? If so, how does this compare? (Rocky and
Bulwinkle was, in my view, abysmal.)
|
fitz
|
|
response 303 of 304:
|
Jun 21 22:44 UTC 2002 |
I couldn't finish Rocky and Bullwinkle when it was offered as a frebie by
Starz during a promotion. I'm a fan of Jay Ward and Bill Scott, but the movie
seemed to be as bad as the reviewers said. Since I never finished R & Bull,
I guess I can't say.
I got my money's worth at a matinee, but I think that it would be just as good
at home on the VCR. Try to remember that most third shifters watch cartoons
because there is little else on. Tequila tends to make most kids' fare much
more interesting. (Except Smurfs: They seem to bring out the nastiness in
people.) Rocky & Bull might have actually had higher production values.
Nevertheless, I doubt few would go the Scooby Doo in order to scope out future
Academy Award nominees.
|
brighn
|
|
response 304 of 304:
|
Jun 22 03:05 UTC 2002 |
Mm. It stays on my "if I happen to see it on cable" list, then. ;}
|