Page 2 of 2
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:55 am
by TheCatt
dont forget making dinner for when u get home.
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 8:02 pm
by Vince
Why does there have to be a love interest in every damned Batman movie?
The director didn't consider the chick (what ever her name is) from this one a "love interest". She was just a tie to his past and childhood. If you think about it, she really wasn't. The role could have easily been played by a male (with little rewriting of the script).
And the article is wrong about the rumors of why she isn't slated for the next one. That decision was known weeks before the movie came out.
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 8:03 pm
by Vince
That's why I liked Reign of Fire. It was a man movie made for men.
There was still a love interest.
Best example of a "Man's movie" made in the last few years was Last Castle with Robert Redford. Only chick in that movie was the lead's daughter that came to visit him once in the brig.
Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:35 pm
by TPRJones
The Shawshank Redemption
Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:16 pm
by mbilderback
The Shawshank Redemption
I'm soo with you on that one. And it wasn't even an action movie.
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 12:40 am
by Vince
The Shawshank Redemption
Same sort of thing with Last Castle, but... different. Castle was more about redemption and honor than Shawshank.
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:32 am
by TheCatt
The Shawshank Redemption
Good call.