 SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to DarkLogix
Re: [Spoiler] The advengers Your title says "advengers' not avengers which is the proper spelling.
All in all, a decent movie by the guy that created Buffy verse and Firefly.
I'm willing to bet Disney is very happy that John Carter was a bomb, right about now. Imagine their tax bill if John Carter was a box office hit, and then add to it the money they will be making from this.
I just wish Spidey wasn't going to be an origin film. We had two origin flicks with the Hulk, and now will get another with the reboot of spider-man.
This movie had a few nice things in it. Sadly, they could have spent more time on Pepper Potts legs. Damn Gwyneth can rock some short shorts. Sure Scarlett was ok looking in her outfit as well. Then there was Fury's "second in command'. She wasn't to shabby either.
--
Care Bear This: If anything I say offends you, then you have a problem. As I am a stranger to you, so my words should have zero emotional impact on you. If they do, please seek help from Dr. Phil.
Tardfarmers, the home of Dr. Dan. |
|
|
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·Optimum Online
·EarthLink
| said by Snakeoil:Your title says "advengers' not avengers which is the proper spelling.
Where are John Steed and Mrs. Peel? |
|
SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1 | Interesting that the british Avengers hit the TV in 1961, and Marvel's Avengers hit print in 1963. |
|
