Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by MattG, May 4, 2006.
Okay so seriously...who's going to see this when it comes out?
Me, just because of how bad it looks. Who seriously thought it was Summer material?
Snakes on a plane? And there ain't a damn thing you can do about it.
This is why I always bring my mongoose with me when I fly.
Put some heavy bagage on them
Yup, i'll pass on that one.
meh.. sounds, hmm. boring.
"She's The Man" looks much worse. The trailer on iTunes is ridiculous.
But at least Amanda Bywhateverherlastname is is hot (when not dressed as a guy at least...and don't call me a pedophile for thinking someone that young is hot...according to her birthday on IMDB, she's less than 2 weeks younger than me. Fair game ). Same can't be said about Samuel L. Jackson (well, I guess some will disagree)
You would think that Samuel L Jackson would be able to find a better film than this to appear in.
It doesn't even have a good name!
If someone sent me a script called "Snakes on a Plane" I think it would go straight in the bin.
And how many snakes are there going to be? You would think they would notice thousands of snakes before takeoff.
That's actually why he's doing the movie...he's been quoted as saying he did the movie because of the title, and that he was adamant about them not changing it.
i am going to see it just because of how amazingly terrible it is going to be. That is probably the only group of people that will ACTUALLY see this movie haha. If you guys are going to see it because of this same reason, you might want to check out the "fan" blog. They post parody photos, songs, and movies that are sometimes pretty good
Yeah, I read something that said Samuel L Jackson only wanted to do it because he enjoys making all sorts of movies, including dumb ones. He said he doesn't have to make a "classic" every time. He wants it to have an "It looks so bad, it MUST be good" vibe, and while "Snakes on a Plane" was pretty much the working title, he wanted to keep it. C'mon......snakes on a plane.......that title just GRABS you. He also wanted to add more swearing so it would be more bad-ass.
I think this movie is going to make a lot of money.
There is a character called "iPod girl" though, so at least there's something good in the film.
I saw a bit on this film on CNN a few weeks back.
A fan blog put up a piece of invented dialogue for Jackson "there are mother****ing snakes on the mother****ing plane!!" and the studio went back in and added the line to the movie (the film of course loses its PG-13). That's freaking awesome.
Then they showed a clip and it just looked so hilarious I laughed out loud in a room by myself. It's very rare that I laugh by myself.
Thur's a snake in mah boot!
So, that single line is enough to bump a movie from PG-13 to R?
^^Hell yes, mother****er! It's similar to the rules at MacRumours. A mother****ing post without the word 'mother****er' in it is cool, but once you start putting cursewords in your mother****ing posts, you're banned. This is the difference between an acceptable post, and one that would get a mother****er banned!
It's gonna cost you though.
I wonder if Samuel L Jackson's character dies.
Based on his movie roles of late, I'd say his career already has.
did anyone watch the trailor? looks like a guy hits a snake with a 17" powerbook halfway through!
I can't help but laugh at how stupid that movie looks.
That's the beauty of it, though.
It's got a stupid (but strangely catching) title, the plot is summed up on the title (there's snakes... on a plane), and it's got Samuel L. Jackson. We all KNOW the movie's gonna be corny as hell. Our expectations have been properly set. They're not being even a little pretentious about the flick... there's no "setting a new standard in horror" or any nonsense like that.