Freethought & Rationalism Archive

jess · 07-03-2003, 04:58 PM

well, I have just decided to see it.

I can handle an unbelieveable level of fluff, I guess.

That, and friends are seeing it for the second time already...

And the New Yorker review--- it is a non-stop trailer.

apparently, the only bad thing about the movie is Demi. Who I haven't been able to stand since St. Elmo's Fire...

tronvillain · 07-03-2003, 06:50 PM

*shrugs* I enjoyed it, but then I enjoy a wide variety of fetishes. If you enjoyed the first one I don't see why you wouldn't enjoy the second one.

August Spies · 07-03-2003, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ron Garrett

Can even a hormonal fourteen year old find this film entertaining?

Odd, it was the GIRLS I know that loved the first movie... and afterwards we had to watch them do bad jump kicks. Of course, we are far past 14 so maybe that is the difference.

Apocolips · 07-03-2003, 09:06 PM

Hola!

The first Charlie's Angels movie was garbage, as well as the TV series in the 1970s. Aaron Spelling is the king of "this show sucks" TV.

On to Demi, first, how do you pronounce her name (De-ME, DE-mi, what?) Also, what is with her kids names, Scout, Tallulah (after Tallulah Bankhead?) and Rumer? I mean did she and Bruce find these names from the "Most stupid and made up names on the Planet" book, or were they on drugs? I just have a thing about people with goofy legal names.

SENOR

August Spies · 07-03-2003, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jess
apparently, the only bad thing about the movie is Demi. Who I haven't been able to stand since St. Elmo's Fire...

yeah just that... and the script, the acting, the humor (or lack of), bearnie mac, the dialogue and the directing...

IMHO, there is one reason that should make everyone avoid this movie:
Charlie's Angels one.

Jesse · 07-03-2003, 10:45 PM

I liked the fluffiness of the first movie, and I also liked its cartoonish visual style...reminded me of Zoolander somewhat, a movie I liked a lot. So, I'd be interested to hear the opinions of those of you who liked the first one, as opposed to the people who hated it.

Ispikes · 07-04-2003, 02:03 AM

I saw it yesterday. Spent the first hour trying to suspend my disbelief and then the rest of the movie trying to prevent brain collapse from the effort involved.

Right, I can accept that gravity really isn't that big a problem in "action" films as it is in real life and I can accept that the movie was mere titilation for the 14 y.o. male hormones.
What I cannot accept is how on earth they run etc in high heels like that.

My brain hurt.

The first was tolerably inane, the sequel is unbearable.

August Spies · 07-04-2003, 07:40 PM

Quote:

If the original "Charlie's Angels" had any legs nostalgically, director "McG" (that's right: no first name, no last name, just "McG") has amputated them. His nauseating direction feels like the machinations of a fast food worker at the end of his mental rope[...] Cameron Diaz, Drew Barrymore and Lucy Liu are back as female superspies, but could easily be mistaken for bored extras in a 105-minute music video tribute to classic rock.

mr. cranky

07-03-2003, 09:06 PM	#14
Apocolips Banned Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Hangzhou, China Posts: 2,402	Demi's stupid kid's names. Hola! The first Charlie's Angels movie was garbage, as well as the TV series in the 1970s. Aaron Spelling is the king of "this show sucks" TV. On to Demi, first, how do you pronounce her name (De-ME, DE-mi, what?) Also, what is with her kids names, Scout, Tallulah (after Tallulah Bankhead?) and Rumer? I mean did she and Bruce find these names from the "Most stupid and made up names on the Planet" book, or were they on drugs? I just have a thing about people with goofy legal names. SENOR

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-03-2003, 04:58 PM	#11
jess Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: rationalpagans.com Posts: 7,400	well, I have just decided to see it. I can handle an unbelieveable level of fluff, I guess. That, and friends are seeing it for the second time already... And the New Yorker review--- it is a non-stop trailer. apparently, the only bad thing about the movie is Demi. Who I haven't been able to stand since St. Elmo's Fire...

07-03-2003, 06:50 PM	#12
tronvillain Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 5,658	shrugs I enjoyed it, but then I enjoy a wide variety of fetishes. If you enjoyed the first one I don't see why you wouldn't enjoy the second one.

07-03-2003, 10:45 PM	#16
Jesse Moderator - Science Discussions Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Providence, RI, USA Posts: 9,908	I liked the fluffiness of the first movie, and I also liked its cartoonish visual style...reminded me of Zoolander somewhat, a movie I liked a lot. So, I'd be interested to hear the opinions of those of you who liked the first one, as opposed to the people who hated it.

07-04-2003, 02:03 AM	#17
Ispikes Regular Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Nowhere interesting Posts: 164	I saw it yesterday. Spent the first hour trying to suspend my disbelief and then the rest of the movie trying to prevent brain collapse from the effort involved. Right, I can accept that gravity really isn't that big a problem in "action" films as it is in real life and I can accept that the movie was mere titilation for the 14 y.o. male hormones. What I cannot accept is how on earth they run etc in high heels like that. My brain hurt. The first was tolerably inane, the sequel is unbearable.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.