Laice07

I hope they pull through. As for the Olsens themselves, they are ok, but not the most attractive Teenage girl celebrities. As for the 18 year old countdowns, I think its weird.

The Lord of The Rings: The Return of The King: 9.5/10 An amazing movie. Breathtaking. I love it.

You forgot about this: Metroid

THe big question is What is she going to name the baby? Lets hope its not Pilot Ispektor 2 or anything, but you know the stars these days, they'd do anything for publicity.

Very true, Hugh Jackman as Wolverine is another one. He is perfect for that role. He brings Intensity, and after the second movie, I was sure that if they ever replaced Hugh Jackman, the series would start to go downhill. I hope he signs on to X3

What are some roles in some movies that couldn't have been played by another actor. You know whoever played that role, were born to play that role in that movie. IMO the entire cast for the Harry Potter series were perfect, the teachers, and especially the main 3(Emma Watson, Rupert Grint and Daniel Radcliffe) ANother one, which I think everyone agrees is Professor X from X-men, ever since I was little, I even knew that Patrick Stewart was the best choice, and if they would ever make an X-men movie, he would be the perfect Professor X.

They could of made a Zelda movie instead, with Nintendo agrreing of course,....it is the same genre live-action Fantasy adventure. Now I'd watch that.

I thought the Peter Pan novel was translated well in the live action movie Peter Pan that came out last christmas 2003. The difference between the cartoons and the live-action one is that the live-action movie brings the central themes closer and has more events from the novel.

Thanks for the info., and I do agree with you about Azkaban. But I also heard they will explain some of the things in later movies. We'll just see.

That will do it, Numbahs(for the harry potter review), before you go, good luck on your next Harry Potter viewings :smug: (4, 5, and 6) Before I go, need to ask you a question, is Mike Newell a good director?? I watched the ring: 6.5/10

The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker - 8.5/10 A great game, could have been even greater(like a masterpiece) if only if it wasn't so short(the main quest). Almost a masterpiece, and the visuals are gorgeous, I haven't seen Cel-Shading this good....ever. I can't wait until the next one coming 3rd-4th quarter in 2005. The trailer itself is breathtaking.

I'd get the new SMackdown game. But Viewtiful Joe is also an excellent choice. So is Madden.

I heard there's a big cliff hanger at the end, I heard from another forum, so this is pure speculation, but it is major spoilers: Jamesons son is an Astornaut in the movie, and he goes to the moon and finds a black rock, brings is back to Earth and it is rumoured to be the Symbiote of Venom.

In the trailer did anyone notice the lizard(in human form, he has the missing hand), I did, and I heard he's in a scene with Doc Ock, which I think stes up The Lizard being in the third one. Sam Raimi has also been setting up Harry Osbourne becoming the Green/Hob Goblin. I also heard they were going up to six movies.

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS* From Ebert and Roeper: Here's the transcript if any of you are interested (courtesy of cincy74 from spidermanhype) ... Roeper: I thought Spider-Man 2 was faster, funnier and more entertaining than the original. Tobey Maguire is back as the nerdy Peter Parker and his webhead alter ego, of course. And Kirsten Dunst returns as Mary Jane who divides her time between acting, modeling, and screaming for help as she clings from one ledge or another. But they do get a little quiet time. Alfred Molina is a tremendous actor, but he's saddled with a very silly villain, Dr. Octopus, who's half scientist/half mechanical monster. Spidey and Doc Ock are kind of like the comic book versions of Ali and Frasier. They square off a number of times in increasingly epic battles. Spider-Man 2 isn't just Spidey versus a monster. It's about Peter Parker's inner demons. He wants to do the right thing, but he might throw away that super hero title in order to get the girl. Director Sam Raimi is a master of pacing. We get all these great action sequences but we also get a number of character-driven scenes. And there's a dozen of inside jokes, to boot. Big thumbs up for me. Ebert: Big thums up for me, too. I was amazed by how good Spider-Man 2 was. It tells a real story and it's not just a special effects extravaganza. Peter Parker's troubled romance with Mary Jane is handled so well, it actually reflects and generates real emotions. Roeper: Mmm-Hmm. Ebert: You can't say that about Superman and Lois Lane. (Roeper laughs) The screenplay moves effortlessly between quiet dialogue and big action as when Mary Jane thinks if she kisses Peter, she may discover his secret identity. In the first movie, I was too accutely aware of the computer generated effects which made Spider-Man seem like an animated character visiting the real world. Again, this time his action scenes are all special effects, of course, but they look more convincing and are seamlessly intercut with the real Tobey Maguire. Spider-Man 2 is so good, it ranks with the original Superman from 1978. It is better than any of the Batman's- WAY better. The screenplay by Alvin Sargent actually seems to believe in the psychological complexities of the stories, instead of stringing a series of dumb action scenes. The movie captures the genius of those early, classic Marvel comics which broke the tradition and gave us heroes who were flawed, and insecure, and who could hardly make a living. Tobey Maguire makes a surprisingly plausible Peter Parker, and Kirsten Dunst is not just a disposable, vulnerable girl, but a woman with real emotions. Plus, the action ROCKS! This may be the best superhero movie I've ever seen. Roeper: Wow! High praise! But I'm with you on it. I mean they do just a wonderful job with every facet of this: the special effects, the action stuff... And you know, the thing about Spider-Man is, as a creation- as you said, he's a Marvel comics creation- Spider-Man ranks right up there with Superman and Batman. I mean, I think part of the problem with some of these movies like Van Helsing and even the X-Men movies is, the characters just aren't as interesting. They aren't as human as someone like Spider-Man, if you will. And I love the stuff in the newspaper, too: The uh, the editor who's always screaming at this Peter Parker kid. You make a great point too, Roger, about how he has no money. He's in this horrible apartment and he's always getting fired because he's late all the time because he's saving the world. All of that is done in great style, great energy, great humor. Ebert: It is such a surprise because I gave thumbs down to the original Spider-Man and, uh, I walked into this one thinking, "Well, I wonder wat they've done this time." And I was just blown away. And the wat that the screenplay and the direction balance...as you pointed out, the personal stories and the action scenes. The one thing that I would disagree with you is: I think the villain is terrific. I like Doctor Ock. And I like the fact they were able to give those tentacles personalities. They kind of look and react and threaten. Roeper: He's ok. He's ok. The Green Goblin was just a little scarier. I like to have a little menace in my superhero villains. But, uh, that's a minor quibble in a terrific film. June 30th cannot come soon enough!!

I loved the part where the knife falls right on the guys head. Golden.

Garfield: Not the worst, but not really good. Jennifer Love Hewit was sweet(and hot, but thats another story). The cgi for Garfield was pretty good, but I found it pretty boring actually. The story was also too cliche, I've seen it a hundred times with other characters instead of a cat and dog. 5/10

Didn't fit, if you have an "other", post it, Im interested.

Your all too nice But I missed the post in the movies thread which SeanDMan generally linked to me. SO let this thread die, it sreves no purpose. Just one post takes that all away. I must move on to better things now, thank you, and goodbye. Unless you want to contribute then whatever. SO let me add this movie, which IMO is a must-see film: Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban: Greatest of the 3 movies, better acting, the kids have really grown on to me and I'll stop wtahcing the movies when they get a new trio, which I hope won't happen.

Just saw Garfield, came back an hour ago. Went with my liitle cousins, they either picked Harry Potter(oh how I begged) or Garfield. They chose Garfield....it was bland, it wasn't THAT bad, and definently not the worst of 2004, but knowing that I could of watched Harry Potter instead of this, it didn't stand the chance of biasam(is that even a word) toward this movie Which brings me to this Poll, what comic strip do you want turned into a live-action movie. I would choose Calvin and Hobbes...Best...Comic...Strip...Ever. I loved it as akid, and still love it now. I also liked Peanuts I can't see that in live-action. I loved the cartoon series Charlie Brown though :smug: Horrible sentence structure on the topic name...oh well.

True. But I do say they have done well with Harry Potter and a terrific job with LOTR.

DIdn't know it would be the same, but oh well... Too much coffee in the morning

There will now be a 2 movie limit, to avoid pages becoming obscenly large. This list will represent what the members of the EWB IV Entertainment General Discussion board believe are the best movies known to man. While I'm sure some of us will disagree with what others put on the list, we need to keep our personal opinions about what other members list to ourselves. Basically, the purpose of this list is to not only see what other Entertainment members think are the greatest movies ever, but to also help new members find out what great movies are out there. Think of this as a guide of sorts. May I remind you that this list will show the best of the best (not the Eric Roberts movie). You all need to pick your top movies that you know you'll remember 10 or 15 years down the line. Don't put any stupid crap like Kazaam or Glitter as we all know that NO ONE thinks movies like those are the greatest of all-time. If you do, you need to check for mental retardation. This is how the thread will work: 1) Put a poster\screen cap image of the movie you are listing. Only one picture, please. 2) Put the name of the movie underneath it. 3) Put the director of the film. 4) Put what genre the movie(s) fall under (Action, Drama, Sci-Fi, Comedy, etc) 5) Just put a quick sentence or two why you think this movie is a "must-see". *If you guys need help finding movie poster pics, go to IMDB.com.* *Other places you can go for poster pics: Poster Image Archive & 123 Posters.* I'll begin: Movie: Terminator 2: Judgment Day Director: James Cameron Genre: Action\Sci-Fi Terminator 2: Judgment Day is one of the ultimate action films. With classic special effects that were way ahead of its time and non-stop action, T2 stands out as not only one of Arnold's top movies, but one of the top action films ever made. Pretty simple, guys. Try not having the same movie.

Well it would be about 3 CD's. One with msic from Harry Potter, Star Wars and Lord of The Rings, and the other will have musc from FIght Club, Mission Impossible, and James Bond. THe 3rd CD will be all about Quienten and have songs from Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, and Kill BIll Vol.1 and Vol. 2. Each CD will have about 20 songs. I would buy that no matter what the price is.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire(2nd time)