Log In
Create Account
SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ
Login
Create Account
Search
Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...
RSS Feed
Hosting by DigitalOcean
Support ST on Ko-Fi
Links Only
50 Results
100 Results
250 Results
500 Results
1000 Results
5000 Results
2 Weeks
2 Months
6 Months
1 Year
2 Years
5 Years
All Time
Live
Down to Post
Backboards:
Live
________________
1: Nov 29, 16:44
2: Nov 29, 08:01
3: Nov 28, 16:19
4: Nov 28, 09:42
5: Nov 27, 18:07
6: Nov 27, 12:04
7: Nov 27, 08:26
8: Nov 26, 18:06
9: Nov 26, 12:05
10: Nov 26, 08:29
11: Nov 25, 18:33
12: Nov 25, 11:12
13: Nov 25, 07:08
14: Nov 24, 13:17
15: Nov 23, 18:13
16: Nov 23, 06:17
17: Nov 22, 13:24
18: Nov 22, 09:09
19: Nov 21, 22:36
20: Nov 21, 14:03
Posts: 152
In response to
"
paul haggis should write a 26 page apologia in the New Yorker about that script -- nm
"
by
moles
ok - what didn't you like about it? -- nm
Posted by
JenBro
Feb 27 '11, 12:12
(No message)
Responses:
maudlin claptrap
-
moles
Feb 27, 12:18
7
I suppose I can understand you seeing it that way - as a writer yourself - I'm a bit more forgiving I guess. -- nm
-
JenBro
Feb 27, 12:23
5
i remember being angry in the theater at the time
-
moles
Feb 27, 12:29
4
I had a different feeling ... I remember thinking - wow - this is no boxing movie is it? I guess maybe it hit me differently because of the decision
-
JenBro
Feb 27, 12:36
3
At no time did I think it was a 'boxing movie'.
-
kelly
Feb 27, 12:46
2
not only was it sold as a boxing movie, the first 90 minutes are about nothing but boxing -- nm
-
moles
Feb 27, 13:19
1
yeah the marketing was wrong for it. But it's about as much a boxing movie as Black Sawn is a ballet movie. -- nm
-
Remlik
Feb 27, 13:37
are you talking about (spoiler)
-
amoxy
Feb 27, 12:23
Post a message
top
Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.