http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39314 (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39314)
It's fairly unbelievable that they made an Arthur II -- much less think there's enough content for a remake.
the best that you can do
the best that you can do
is fall in love
And now I have to hurt you, hatty. Sorry, but it's an imperative.
Quote from: Gamplayerx on December 04, 2008, 02:08:53 PM
And now I have to hurt you, hatty. Sorry, but it's an imperative.
I'm down with that. :whip:
Never touch another man's french fries.
LOVED that movie!!
Also, a Thing remake might be interesting. It certainly lacked for effects and most copies I've seen are in bad condition from the film's decay.
Quote from: VikingJuice on December 05, 2008, 08:32:27 PM
Also, a Thing remake might be interesting. It certainly lacked for effects
?!!!!
Quote from: Beefy on December 05, 2008, 08:41:10 PM
Quote from: VikingJuice on December 05, 2008, 08:32:27 PM
Also, a Thing remake might be interesting. It certainly lacked for effects
?!!!!
Lacked quality effects. The creature looked awful and the cup of blood looked like paint.