SuperPoll

Post Reply
UncleMao
Posts: 1835
Joined: 17 Jun 2004 12:30
Location: The Heart of the Proletariat

Post by UncleMao » 03 Jul 2006 20:37

I really, really wanted to like this film but the second half plot-rot really let me down.

Sorry Clark.

Phife
Posts: 1266
Joined: 05 Sep 2004 14:28
Location: Somewhere West of Phoenix!

Post by Phife » 08 Jul 2006 05:05

I refuse to vote...seeing that I have yet to see this motion picture.

Pitchit
Posts: 160
Joined: 28 Sep 2004 12:32
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Post by Pitchit » 08 Jul 2006 07:18

Phife wrote:I refuse to vote...seeing that I have yet to see this motion picture.
Secondeded

AngelBaby
Posts: 1075
Joined: 29 Sep 2004 11:36
Location: Cloud 9
Contact:

Post by AngelBaby » 08 Jul 2006 10:59

Phife wrote:I refuse to vote...seeing that I have yet to see this motion picture.
<span style='color:blue'>me three.</span>

Eamon Angelface
Posts: 680
Joined: 19 Jun 2004 23:45
Location: I live in a world of shit

Post by Eamon Angelface » 12 Jul 2006 12:38

Super pole

AngelBaby
Posts: 1075
Joined: 29 Sep 2004 11:36
Location: Cloud 9
Contact:

Post by AngelBaby » 12 Jul 2006 22:23

<span style='color:blue'>Finally saw it over wkend.

I give 4 out of 5.</span>

Smash
Posts: 1925
Joined: 17 Jun 2004 15:07
Location: Warren, MI

Post by Smash » 13 Jul 2006 18:24

AngelBaby wrote:<span style='color:blue'>Finally saw it over wkend.

I give 4 out of 5.</span>
<a href='http://www.smashy.net/item.php/Superman_Returns' target='_blank'>Me2!</a>

Eamon Angelface
Posts: 680
Joined: 19 Jun 2004 23:45
Location: I live in a world of shit

Post by Eamon Angelface » 14 Jul 2006 10:25

Who tolded u 340 million budget?

Was not.

Under 250 w marketing. Fact.

Smash
Posts: 1925
Joined: 17 Jun 2004 15:07
Location: Warren, MI

Post by Smash » 15 Jul 2006 16:18

Eamon Angelface wrote:Who tolded u 340 million budget?

Was not.

Under 250 w marketing. Fact.
No sir. When you include the payouts to all the pay or play contracts: prepaid dollars to previous writers, directors and actors, the final total was &#036;340 million, give or take.

<a href='http://www.ew.com/ew/report/0,6115,1204 ... 0_,00.html' target='_blank'>Fact.</a>
Last edited by Smash on 16 Jul 2006 06:45, edited 1 time in total.

inplainview
Posts: 138
Joined: 11 Jul 2005 08:16
Location: Why not Minot...
Contact:

Post by inplainview » 17 Jul 2006 07:15

Smash wrote:
Eamon Angelface wrote:Who tolded u 340 million budget?

Was not.

Under 250 w marketing. Fact.
No sir. When you include the payouts to all the pay or play contracts: prepaid dollars to previous writers, directors and actors, the final total was &#036;340 million, give or take.

<a href='http://www.ew.com/ew/report/0,6115,1204 ... 0_,00.html' target='_blank'>Fact.</a>
Yep one link means it TRUE!!

Smash
Posts: 1925
Joined: 17 Jun 2004 15:07
Location: Warren, MI

Post by Smash » 17 Jul 2006 07:44

inplainview wrote:
Smash wrote:
Eamon Angelface wrote:Who tolded u 340 million budget?

Was not.

Under 250 w marketing. Fact.
No sir. When you include the payouts to all the pay or play contracts: prepaid dollars to previous writers, directors and actors, the final total was &#036;340 million, give or take.

<a href='http://www.ew.com/ew/report/0,6115,1204 ... 0_,00.html' target='_blank'>Fact.</a>
Yep one link means it TRUE!!
I explained the why it was tagged out at &#036;340+ and then I backed my argument with an article saying the same thing? Do I need to go pull corporate ledgers?

His fact lacked any 'proof'.

inplainview
Posts: 138
Joined: 11 Jul 2005 08:16
Location: Why not Minot...
Contact:

Post by inplainview » 17 Jul 2006 07:49

Smash wrote:
inplainview wrote:
Smash wrote:
Eamon Angelface wrote:Who tolded u 340 million budget?

Was not.

Under 250 w marketing. Fact.
No sir. When you include the payouts to all the pay or play contracts: prepaid dollars to previous writers, directors and actors, the final total was &#036;340 million, give or take.

<a href='http://www.ew.com/ew/report/0,6115,1204 ... 0_,00.html' target='_blank'>Fact.</a>
Yep one link means it TRUE!!
I explained the why it was tagged out at &#036;340+ and then I backed my argument with an article saying the same thing? Do I need to go pull corporate ledgers?

His fact lacked any 'proof'.
I dunno I don't follow movie shit,

But seriously. One link?

inplainview
Posts: 138
Joined: 11 Jul 2005 08:16
Location: Why not Minot...
Contact:

Post by inplainview » 17 Jul 2006 08:14

omg look smash and angelbaby...

i didint mean to sink your little superman theory.

Both you and smash viewed this thread for an extended period of time,

and no other link


...
Last edited by inplainview on 17 Jul 2006 08:14, edited 1 time in total.

Smash
Posts: 1925
Joined: 17 Jun 2004 15:07
Location: Warren, MI

Post by Smash » 17 Jul 2006 08:26

I didnt bother to look further 'argument'. Entertainment Weekly is a respected news source for entertainment news.

You are coming across as retarded. You seemed to jump to conclusions that I'm furiously searching, when in reality, I left this page up while chatting with Angelbaby.

inplainview
Posts: 138
Joined: 11 Jul 2005 08:16
Location: Why not Minot...
Contact:

Post by inplainview » 17 Jul 2006 08:31

Smash wrote:I didnt bother to look further 'argument'.&nbsp; Entertainment Weekly is a respected news source for entertainment news.

You are coming across as retarded.&nbsp; You seemed to jump to conclusions that I'm furiously searching, when in reality, I left this page up while chatting with Angelbaby.
*sigh* ok

EW pwns the world...

:rolleyes:

:) I'm j/p with you.

I haven't even seen SM.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests