Okay Zingaling, you have just picked your worst avatar. Freddy....tut tut

Freddy Krueger is a bigger icon than Sylvester Stallone. :razz:

Wouldn't you rather have the face of America to be Rambo, than a child molester?

http://www.truth.com

Hey, Freddy never molested kids, and Rambo's killed more people. Who's worse?

There is always somebody bigger and better than one's self. So i'm not suprised that you think that.

Tom Cruise is a bigger icon than both of them, squared, woo hoo.

I was kidding. I could care less who's a bigger "icon," they're friggin' movies.

I do care. Rambo only killed bad people. Freddy killed children. It goes without saying that Freddy is worse.

As for which is the bigger icon, i couldn't care about that. Although i do love looking at the BO grosses for the Freddy movies compared to Stallone's movies.

7 x Nightmare on Elm Street Movies: $225 Million

3 x Rambo Movies: $251 Million

...These are the only facts that are worth bringing up about this because they were both 80's franchises, even though Elm Street moved into the 90's a little. They both spanned the 80's too. As far as popularity goes, Rambo wins. Being more of an icon, well, thats an impossible question and impossible to measure. Then again, if a child killer is an icon, that says alot about the American public. :razz:

Yeah, we'll see if Rambo 4 comes close to Freddy vs. Jason. Speaking of which, you conveniently left FVJ out of your little box office breakdown for the Nightmare series.

Ben Gannon (Josh Lucas), Kara Wade (Jessica Biel) and Henry Purcell (Jamie Foxx) are three of the world's best pilots. Working together as a team, they have been recruited by the U.S. Navy to join a top-secret military program. Going through endless training sessions as well as actually initiating battle, they establish a strong bond and go through everything together. This is why there is some resentment when their commanding officer, Captain George Cummings (Sam Shepard), announces there will be a new member of their team. His name is Eddie. More like "it's" name is Eddie. In fact, Eddie is an artificial intelligence program inserted in a jet that can operate on its own.

Immediately feeling threatened by the new machine, Ben holds some resentment while training the jet all the basic manuevers. His team seems oblivious to his fears though. But when a lightning bolt strikes Eddie during a training session, everything changes. All of a sudden, it becomes able to think and retain information, enabling it to make its own choices and decisions. Thinking that its sole purpose is to select a target and destroy it, on one mission Eddie goes haywire. It abandons the group and puts the lives of everyone at risk. Now, the three pilots must band together once again to stop a force that is one of their own.

STEALTH is directed by Rob Cohen, who could be branded the unofficial king of summer blockbusters. After the 2001 surprise hit THE FAST & THE FURIOUS spawned a new franchise by becoming one of the year's biggest success stories, he followed suit with xXx, another film based primarily on action sequences. STEALTH follows suit in terms of being a summer blockbuster, offering up plenty of action sequences and eye candy and a complex and seemingly ridiculous storyline. However, like Cohen's FURIOUS, the film still works better than it should due to the likable characters and the decent performances.

Josh Lucas turns in a good performance as the film's main hero. He proves himself as an action lead and is very likable in his portrayl. I've been a huge fan of Jessica Biel ever since she escaped the malicious Leatherface in 2003's THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE and she gives another solid performance. She actually gets the most to do out of anyone in the cast and probably had the most grueling shoot of the three main characters. Both Biel and Lucas have decent chemistry together in a small subplot involving a love story. Foxx is charismatic and appealing in his brief but memorable role. Sam Shepard is the worst of the cast, overacting almost all the way through. Plus, his character change at the end seemed a bit abrupt to me. The rest of the cast does a good job, but aren't really given a whole lot to do.

Cohen has become famous for his action sequences and this film showcases his talent for that. The scenes in the sky are intense and well-shot overall. It could have seemed very special-effects oriented but it actually has a real-looking feel to it. The film also gets surprisingly gritty during the final act, where one central character crashes in North Korea and must escape the grasp of several vicious soldiers.

Overall, STEALTH is a fun and entertaining action film with three likable leads. It didn't deserve the critical slaughtering that it recieved, for it is one of the summer's best popcorn movies. It gets a definite recommendation from me.

8/10 (B+)

---------


This rating may very well change to a 7/10 ( B ). It's on the borderline at the moment. By comparison THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS got an 8/10 (B+) from me and xXx recieved a 6/10 (C+)

Freddy vs Jason is not a "Nightmare on Elm Street" movie.

It was made in 2003. Which means even if it was a NOES movie (whic it isnt) it still wouldnt be added because it would show anything.

Please. It's a Nightmare movie with Jason as a guest star. And since when did year of release have anything to do with this?

Think Algren would have counted a Rambo spin off movie if it had been released? Yeah, me too.

From Dusk Till Dawn A- - Really fun movie, although it's rather annoying how long the movie takes to get going, though when it does it goes full blast.

Jason bumped up the numbers which makes the movie invalid to the NOES franchise.

The year is crucial. They were all made at the same era, so its valid to see which is more popular. You can't compare movies more than 10 years apart, it won't show you anything.

The fact is that the NOES franchise had 7 attempts, yet still didnt make as much as Rambo's 3 attempts. But i was only talking about popularity then. For Icon-ness, look above.

I wouldnt need to. The NOES numbers are so dire i wouldnt even need to. :razz:

Can we get back on topic

Sorry. Please do.

MARCI X - 6/10 (B-)
Wow, this is an example of a movie where people take it way to seriously. Was it a bad movie? Well, yeah, I guess it was but it was so entertaining it was fun to watch. Lisa Kudrow makes the movie, without her, it probably would be pretty bad. Her whole rapping thing is hilarious and how she doesn't know "black talk." I thought it was hilarious, if you're looking for a fun movie on a rainy night, rent MARCI X!

THE HOURS - 5/10 (C-)
THE HOURS seems like a film I'd love. It's depressing, it has amazing actresses in it and it got some amazing reviews. After I watched the film I was wondering if this was the Oscar nominated film made back in 2002. I thought it was boring and the acting was average at best. The story never goes anywhere, normally it wouldn't bother me but what was happening in the movie was just too boring, I didn't care about any of the charactors at all. THE HOURS could have been a great film but was a big ol' bore.

MONSTER'S BALL - 7/10 (B-)
The performances are what really makes the movie. Halle Berry was amazing, as was Billy Bob. It's one of those movies that gets all of this praise and when you see it, you figure it's basically because of the acting. I doubt I'd ever watch it again. It was good but not great.

Saw Wedding Crashers last night. It was very very funny in parts, but dragged towards the end. The entire Cleary family had me cracking up, especially the grandma and the brother.

B+

First Blood - A+

Classic.

Blade - C

Cheesy shite action. Effects are crap. Wesley Snipes is rubbish. Cheesy lines. But i enjoyed it slightly.

Sarah (Diane Lane) is a recently divorced pre-school teacher in her forties who is afraid she will never find true love. Thanks to the help of her two sisters Carol (Elizabeth Perkins) and Christine (Ali Hillis), she winds up back in the dating circuit through PerfectMatch.com, a personals website where members create profiles to woo the opposite sex. Initially reluctant about the process, she eventually decides to go along with it, resulting in many botched first dates. But Sarah manages to find a hidden gem in Jake (John Cusack), a reserved and caring man who also recently went through a divorce.

At first, Sarah thinks of Jake as a lonely and strange man, but Jake immediately falls head over heels for her. After some persistence, the two continue seeing each other and their attraction grows. But there is someone else after Sarah's affection, a single dad named Bob (Dermot Mulroney) whose son attends her preschool. With many obstacles in their way, is this really a match made in cyberspace?

Based on the best-selling book by Claire Cook, MUST LOVE DOGS is one of the few romantic comedies being offered this summer amidst the explosions, alien invasions and gunfights. Directed by newcomer Gary David Goldberg and starring Diane Lane and John Cusack, it is everything that you would expect and more. It is arguably the best romantic comedy of the year so far and a charming and entertaining experience at the movies.

The main reason the film works are the great performances. Diane Lane, who is no stranger to starring in romantic comedies after 2003's UNDER THE TUSCAN SUN, gives one of the year's strongest female performances. She is likable and believable in her role and the audience really forms a bond with her. John Cusack is also great as a romantic lead, once again proving himself as one of the most underrated actors working today. Lane and Cusack have great chemistry together as well. Dermot Mulroney makes the most of a fairly mediocre character and does a respectable job. Elizabeth Perkins and Stockard Channing both give fine supporting performances. A scene-stealer is Christopher Plummer as Sarah's widowed father, providing both comic relief and an emotional backstory.

Goldberg, whose line of work previously included a few television shows, writes and directs MUST LOVE DOGS with the skill of any romantic comedy veteran. The film has the usual cliches of the genre, but there is enough comedy and sharp dialogue to keep the audience from caring. The scenery and camerawork is very calm and not too chaotic, as it should be. It is nice to look at and serves as a good backdrop to the story.

Overall, MUST LOVE DOGS is a great romantic comedy. The leads both give great performances and have excellent chemistry, and there is enough humor to please all audiences. A charming, sweet and sophisticated film that audiences everywhere will enjoy.

8/10 (A-)

I, Robot - B+