Daniel's Reviews

→ in
Tools    





Bond and Solitaire prepare to be fed to the sharks
Live and Let Die (1973)

It's James Bond day in celebration of 50 years of 007 and Sky have launched a new channel on which they are show casing every Bond film ever made (at least I think) as we wait for the release of Skyfall.

As a kid the James Bond films were favourites of mine, I'm not exactly sure why because I didn't pay much attention to films back then although I recall collecting a video collection of all the films up to Brosnan.

One of my favourite films was always "Live and Let Die", certainly the most memorable, so when I saw I had the chance to give it another viewing today after many years I was happy to do so.

Baron Samedi
It is far from the perfect film, I understand that but watching it again gave me a lot of enjoyment and a lot of thoughts regarding my initial love for the film. What exactly did I think when I watched the film originally, it's filled with racial stereotypes (created at the height of the blaxploitation era), sexual innuendos and is centred around a druglord who is secretly farming heroin.

Whilst I can understand others may see this film as silly and stupid, it remains one of my favourite Bond films and I was able to recall just why the film left a bigger impact on me than other Bond films. Roger Moore makes his debut as Bond and brings a calm and likable character to the screen. The film is fun and action filled, with the fictional island bringing us tarot card readers and memorable villains such as Tee Hee Johnson and Baron Samedi.

Baron Samedi, portrayed by Geoffrey Holder, is one of my favourite Bond villains and his appearance is certainly one that you'll remember with the spooky character literally having the last laugh of the film, probably my favourite shot as we hear Paul McCartney’s famous title song that was always part of my memory and love for this film. The creepiness and eerie atmosphere generated by this character and the voodoo backdrop to the main plot will be remembered for giving us what is one of the most crazy and weird set of villains in Bond history.

The final half hour of the film is particularly memorable and is one of my favourite of all Bond films, unlike other efforts the film is a more enjoyable and fun effort which is aided by Moore as bond. People who dislike the film will argue that it’s unrealistic and filled with action movie clichés especially towards the end of the film as we see Bond face off against his villains. Perhaps Roger Moore is a bit to ‘camp’ and takes the seriousness of James Bond who had previously been portrayed by Sean Connery but it is these elements that other people dislike that make the film so enjoyable for me, you can sit back, relax and enjoy “Live and Let Die” without taking it too seriously.

With "Live and Let Die" we get a fun Bond played by new to the series Roger Moore. Is the film bizarre and stupid? Maybe it is, but when you sit back and enjoy the film for what is is you don't get many more enjoyable and memorable films than this one.


RATING:



That's one of my favourite Bonds. Comfortably top 10, maybe top 5.
I haven't really watched most of the old Bonds recently, last time was when I was a much younger (17 now) but this has always been the one I've found most enjoyable and memorable, it's bizarre and strange at times but just so fun

The two others I think I enjoyed the most were Goldfinger, probably the best of the older ones and Casino Royale with Daniel Craig which I thought was excellent.
__________________



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
The two others I think I enjoyed the most were Goldfinger, probably the best of the older ones and Casino Royale with Daniel Craig which I thought was excellent.
Goldfinger is my absolute favourite of the Bonds, and one of my favourite ever films period. Completing the top 3 would be Goldeneye and The Spy Who Loved Me. Not sure which other two would make up the top 5, really need to revisit them all again (something I've been planning on doing for ages). However it would probably be between the likes of Live and Let Die, Man With the Golden Gun and just about all the Connery flicks. And I think one of the Dalton films I really like but not sure which.



Goldfinger is my absolute favourite of the Bonds, and one of my favourite ever films period. Completing the top 3 would be Goldeneye and The Spy Who Loved Me. Not sure which other two would make up the top 5, really need to revisit them all again (something I've been planning on doing for ages). However it would probably be between the likes of Live and Let Die, Man With the Golden Gun and just about all the Connery flicks. And I think one of the Dalton films I really like but not sure which.
Goldeneye and TSWLM are good yeh, need to watch the other ones again to be honest I can't remember them all clearly.

Watched Casino Royale again today and whilsts it is a very good film and good seeing Craig create a new Bond I reckon it's about half an hour (at least) too long.



Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969)

This film is far from your usual Western, unlike the works of Leone and Ford this films takes a different approach to the genre under the direction of George Roy Hill, it is a feel good, enjoyable film made that way by focussing on the loveable relationship between its two lead stars Paul Newman and Robert Redford.

The two play a pair of infamous train robbers, the leading men of the ‘Hole in the Wall gang’ with the history of the duo shown in an enjoyable silent film as the film opens. In fact the duo have become so good at what they do that E. H. Harriman hires a ‘supper-posse’ to track them down due to the costs they are causing his rail company from their robberies.

The first half of the film focussed on introducing us to the two characters whose dialogue allows for some humorous and enjoyable moments, we see Paul Newman as Butch Cassidy ride around in his new bicycle to the tune of ‘Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head’ in one of the film’s most memorable scenes.

From about the half way point the story completely changes, the plot that we have been given now becomes less focused on what is happening and more focused on the relationship setup between the three main characters (the third is Sundance’s lover Katherine Ross ) as we have to endure what feels like a never ending chase between the lead duo and the posse.

From a production viewpoint I can understand the complaints about the film, with the middle ending in particular seemed to be exaggerated as much as possible, the focus on this could have been used elsewhere with a stronger plot to make this film truly great.

The film’s downsides thankfully don’t decrease our enjoyment for our film that much, the relationship of Newman and Redford dominates the film, once they get hired to transport money working in Bolivia we once again get to see their chemistry and great dialogue at the strongest with some great scenes again.

The film won Academy Awards for its song and score but also for best original screenplay and cinematography, these are two of the film’s strengths – the screenplay has some of the most memorable and funniest quotes between Newman and Redford and the cinematography creates some beautiful landscapes for us to enjoy in the scenes such as the posse chase and the rural terrain in Bolivia. And although the ending has been criticised I feel it sums up the film perfectly, we see the duo in an extremely difficult situation and the two exchange conversation with such brilliant and humorous dialogue -“For a moment there I thought we were in trouble".

“Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” is one of the most unique Western films that there is, and it is one I would definitely recommend watching to fans both of the genre, it is definitely one of the most likeable and enjoyable films of its kind despite its flaws.

RATING:



Dial M for Murder (1954)

My last two viewings of Alfred Hitchcock’s work before this film were “Rope” and “Strangers on a Train”. What do all three films have in common? They are all based around the theory that one can commit the perfect murder and like “Rope” this film is once again an adaptation of a play.

In “Dial M for Murder” Tony Wendice discovers that his wife Margot has been having an affair and after stealing a letter sent from her secret lover he uses it to blackmail an old college friend of his Charles Swann. The perfect murder in this film sees Swann follow a precise set of instructions that are based around a phone call made by Tony who would himself have the perfect alibi.

When things do not go to plan, Tony Wendice improvises a brilliant plan B that would see his wife framed for the murder of Swann.

The screenplay is superb, the film is 105 minutes long and largely takes place in one room, yet our interest is engaged for the full 105 minutes as we listen carefully to every line that is spoken. Every line is greatly delivered by the cast and each character brings their own unique personality, the screenplay is so intelligent and tight that it plays like a classic Agatha Christie murder tale, we are engaged so closely to the tale as it keeps us thinking throughout. We listen to each line of dialogue, searching for clues as the landscape changes throughout, the characters know things we do not and we are scrambling to work out who knows what and what will be the end for each character.

The film’s lead stars Ray Milland and his wife Grace Kelly are both superb. Milland gives a performance you would expect from a Hitchcock lead man such as Grant or Stewart, he is calm, intelligent and ruthless, although what he is doing is wrong we do not really oppose his evil plan to start. But the beautiful Grace Kelly steals the show as we really sympathise with her following her wrongful verdict of guilty, she shows her talent in this film in what was a great year for her, also starring in Hitchcock’s more famous “Rear Window”.

I have to give a mention to another actor who I was very much impressed by. John Williams is superb as the detective who becomes involved in the case, his character combines the serious element of the crime with humour, he provides some great and memorable dialogue and is the character that engages our interest the most throughout the second half of the film.

“Dial M for Murder” is another excellent Hitchcock film that I have seen from the great director, certainly one of his stronger and more enjoyable efforts. It has the same elements of many of his other films but feels very much different, it is not a murder mystery as we no exactly who murdered who but it feels like one because of the way we are constantly engaged in the story and its dialogue as we eagerly wait for the film’s conclusion.

RATING:



Road to Perdition (2002)

So the inclusion of this film in the recent Top 100 films from 2000-2012 list compiled by the great Brodinski has certainly raised a few eyebrows, not because of the films’ lack of quality but many members have simply yet to have watched the film, some have not even heard of it and finally those who have seem to have completely forgotten about it.

“Road to Perdition” is a film by Sam Mendes, a director who is largely known for his film that picked up five academy awards – American Beauty. Road to Perdition is a crime film but unlike others in the genre it takes its own unique approach with the great Tom Hanks portraying the lead character Michael Sullivan.

The cast also includes a mixture of other famous names; we have the stellar Paul Newman portraying John Rooney, an old man who is the boss of the criminal organisation that Sullivan worked for. Then we have the opposite to Paul Newman, a star who is better known for his earlier works such as “Cool Hand Luke” and “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” with Daniel Craig (who will be teaming up with Mendes once again in the highly anticipated Bond film “Skyfall”) portraying John Rooney’s son Connor Rooney who hides behind the protection of his father as he attempts to murder Sullivan following the witness of a murder by his son Michael Sullivan Jr.

The main strength of “Road to Perdition” lies with its cinematography and beautifully artistic world it creates in which its violent characters interact in. It deservedly won an Academy Award for its cinematography and the film has everything you could want from this aspect of filmmaking; beautiful sets, costumes, colours etc. One scene in particular sums up the entire film, a visually superb scene that creates a dark, eerie atmosphere as we see a number of characters face off in a dark street filled with shadows, the rain is pouring down and we can see finely each drop as it soaks them and drips from their hats.

Another famous name that stars in the film is Jude Law. Whilst I am not a massive fan of the actor I felt his role in this film was great, providing us with an emotionally detached, strange and sick character, a manifestation of evil that can compared to that of Javier Bardem in “No Country for Old Men” – of course on a much lesser scale. His character represents the sad and depressing story at the heart of the film for Michael Sullivan and his son and although some criticise the predictability and relatively straightforward plot that the film follows it is this perhaps realistic path and realisation that such involvement in a world filled with crime will inevitably never have a happy ending that brings out the most of Tom Hanks and Tyler Hoechlin as father and son. Also we have the wonderful score of Thomas Newman that is used extremely well where it should be, to amplify the sad and emotional centre of the film.

You can not compare this film to any other films in the genre such as “The Godfather” or “Goodfellas”, to do so would be unfair and wrong. This film is a an absolute joy to watch for what it is, an emotional story shown through brilliant cinematography, individual performances and a fantastic score. As a piece of art, this film is definitely one of the best of the 21st century so far.

RATING:



^The liked the remake A Perfect Murder, sort of a sleek mod version, I also like Michael Douglas though.



Snatch.
Snatch. (2000)

As a big fan of Ritchie's "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" I was looking forward to watching Snatch, which is a similar film, taking place in London where various parties become involved in a series of intertwining events.

One difference in the films is the actors involved. Although stars such as Jason Statham and Vinnie Jones reappear after their first feature film performances in "Lock, Stock...”, Ritchie is able to add bigger stars to the cast, notably Brad Pitt and Benicio Del Toro.

If you’ve yet to see either “Snatch or “Lock, Stock…” then here is what to expect: a unique, high-paced film that is filled with a mixture of fun in the form of both comedy and violence, memorable characters and unpredictable and intertwining character stories. It is easy to compare his work to that of Quentin Tarantino, they are both able to achieve two of the most enjoyable crime films around so do not be surprised to here “Snatch” described as England’s very own “Pulp Fiction.

One of the main criticisms I have heard for this film is that it lacks in originality and ultimate relies on the same formula that made "Lock, Stock..." so good. Whilst I can understand why you may want to see something new from Ritchie I was still able to enjoy this film, if it was released as a one of its kind, say Ritchie's first feature film then I am sure it would have much more positive reviews.

again Ritchie gives us a variety of different characters, each one unique and memorable as they become involved in their own way, each having their own style and unique nicknames ranging from "Turkish" to "Brick Top". The cast is excellent, Del Toro and Pitt are great additions but possibly my favourite was Stephen Graham as Tommy, a slightly less intelligent character who is Turkish's partner throughout, a character who likes the criminal presence when compared to “Brick Top” but manages to hold his own as one of the funniest characters.

The plot and editing keep us on edge as the tales intertwine and take unexpected twists and turns throughout with some great editing work to create a whole host of different style scenes such as flight sequences from America to England, and fight scenes the viewers looking on in despair at the incapable Mickey (Brad Pitt) landing his friends in a whole lot of trouble.

It is this trouble that drives the plot at the centre of the film as Mickey, Turkish and Tommy find themselves deep in debt to the ruthless Brick Top, a criminal boss who feeds his victims his pigs. Of course nothing is straight forward as a series of other parties become involved in a chase for a missing diamond, originally belonging to Franky Four Fingers (Benicio Del Toro).

Snatch is a highly enjoyable and fun film, filled with an excellent cast and bizarre plot with many twists and turns. If you haven't seen "Lock, Stock..." then I think you'll enjoy it more as the plot twists and humour will seem more fresh. Snatch is an upgrade on "Lock, Stock..." where Ritchie gets to have fun upgrading each aspect of his films to get the most out of his extremely fun and extremely funny style. When you sit back, relax and watch this film then you don’t get much better for entertainment value.

RATING:



Film Review #3



Jackie Brown (1997)

Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction were my first two Quentin Tarantino films that I watched and I instantly fell in love with him, I watched Jackie Brown with high hopes and I wasn’t disappointed. If you are going to compare the Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction to Jackie Brown then they are totally different films and unlike Tarantino's first two films that are filled with fast-paced, bizarre and 'cool' scenes filled with pop culture references and flashy violence, Jackie Brown appears to be a more mature effort from the director with focuses more on the story's substance as he gives us a well-paced tale filled some brilliant performances from the likes of Samuel L. Jackson, Pam Grier and Robert Forster. For Jackie Brown the characters within the film are key as they each devise their own plans in order to benefit themselves, the story of the film revolves around criminal boss Ordell (Samuel L. Jackson) who uses Jackie Brown (Pam Grier) in order to smuggle a large amount of money in to the country, as we watch the film we eventually see the individual plans from each character combine as the film reaches its climax.

Although different in style, Jackie Brown has some similarities to Tarantino’s other films, first of all it has a crime based plot and we are familiar with the lifestyles of some of the characters. The film also uses chapters to clearly distinguish between parts of the film but unlike Pulp Fiction the story is showed in a linear way which is more suited to the story and the unfolding plans of the characters. The main character of the film is of course Jackie Brown who is portrayed by the brilliantly Pam Grier who is able to hold her own up against ruthless criminals, one of the best scenes that shows her strong character takes place in a bar when she has a discussion with Ordell over the percentage of money she should get from the deal. Ordell Robbie is portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson and he provides another memorable performance a clever guns dealer following his famous performance in Pulp Fiction.

The film lasts almost two hours and a half and this can certainly be felt, some will complain this is too long however I fell that it works well as the story slowly unfolds and the plan becomes more complex as more layers are added by each individual character, I enjoyed the way the film was set out and felt the time allowed the extremely interesting characters to develop, in Jackie Brown there are only a handful of key characters in which we see their own angles, a good decision by Tarantino as he allows them to develop their own personalities and clever ideas unlike Pulp Fiction in which we see double the characters and less character focus. As mentioned earlier the interlinking plots from different perspectives come in to play during the money exchange chapter as each character plays a different role in Jackie Brown’s plan to fool the police and also capitalise on the money available for her own benefit, the majority of the film (at least the first half) is spent building up to this chapter, when we finally reach it the film ups it pace, giving us an exciting and dramatic finale with sudden and unpredictable plot twists resulting in the consequences of each characters' actions being felt. Much like the rest of Tarantino’s films, Jackie Brown has a distinctive soundtrack, this time instead of focusing on a mixture of classic pop we hear a mixture of Soul and R&B that has been chosen to suit the feel of the film and atmosphere, we also see Tarantino work his magic in terms of dialogue, although perhaps more normal he allows the characters to interact naturally and spontaneously based on their own personalities that we have seen developed.

Aside from Jackson and Grier the film sees a number of other great roles played out throughout the film, one of the best performances is Robert Forster as a bail bonds seller Max Cherry who becomes involved in an unlikely relationship with Jackie Brown. Pulp Fiction is famous for reviving the career of John Travolta and Tarantino has seemingly had the same affect on Forster who's career improved after a great performance in Jackie Brown. One man who's career didn't need reviving was Robert De Niro who brilliantly plays the role of one of Ordell’s friends, an ex-convict stoner with a short temper, he becomes mixed up in the money exchange events and becomes increasingly key to the film as it progresses.

After the initial success of Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, Tarantino was not always praised for his style, often being criticised for his use of violence and lack of substance, instead focussing on style. Jackie Brown completes a trio of great films and a great decade for Tarantino who has proven his maturity and ability as a director with the film.

My Rating: ***1/2 (out of 4)

Calculated % Rating: 90%
Yes it's interesting to further note that Jackie Brown brought a great character actor out of obscurity. In 1967, Robert Forster first appeared in a small role in Brando's
Reflections In A Golden Eye and since stayed busy in a variety of bit parts, small roles and B movies. Thirty years later comes Jackie Brown and opens all kinds of doors for him at really a later stage of the game. He's been very busy since. Some of the notable movies he's been in : Mullholand Drive (2001) and The Descendants ( 2011). In the mean time he intertained us with some interesting characters such as in American Perfect (1997), Psycho (1998), Diamond Men (2000), Lucky Number Slevin (2006), Kalamity (2010) and is rumored to be envolved in six major projects starting 2012.



Horrible Bosses
Horrible Bosses

"Horrible Bosses" is as the title suggests, centred around three friends who find themselves complaining to each other as the victims of their bosses. Whilst drunk they discuss a hypothetical plan to end their problems by murdering their bosses, even referencing Hitchcock's "Strangers on a Train" as we watch their pathetic and incompetent attempts to carry out their plan.

These men are Nick Hendricks (Jason Bateman), Kurt Buckman (Jason Sudeikis) and Dale Arbus (Charlie Day). All three give decent enough performances, the strongest I would say is Charlie Day who is probably my favourite actor in the comedy TV show "It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia" so it was refreshing to see his highly enjoyable comedic style in the film.

The film works as a comedy because it is light hearted and although it is set around a dark action, it approaches it in a fun comedic manner where we can enjoy what can be scene as real idiotic friends. The three villains all give good performances too, Kevin Spacey is my favourite and pulls off his role of 'ass hole boss' to great effect, Jennifer Aniston gives us probably the most surprising performance in her role.

Whilst this film has its flaws, such as its predictable and pretty easy ending, you can forgive it because that is not the point of it. We are watching the film to watch the ridiculous attempts to murder their bosses of three friends. These ridiculous attempts include paying a shady character who they meet in a bar called 'Motherf*cker' Jones (Jamie Foxx), five thousand dollars just for advice over murder.

Most of the film's enjoyable scenes take place inside the houses of the bosses, my favourite being the recreation of the Pulp Fiction adrenaline shot scene which takes place between in my opinion the two strongest actors in the film.

A light hearted and enjoyable comedy, "Horrible Bosses" is a film I recommend if you are looking for something fun and not too serious.

RATING:



The Day of the Jackal
(1973, Dir. Fred Zinnemann)




Based on true events (and a book written about them) that took place in the early 60s of France, a professional assassin that goes by the codename of 'Jackal' is hired by an underground French group the AOS after a number of botched attempts at assassinating the French President Charles De Gaull. The film, 143 minutes in length follows the preparations taken by Jackal and the attempts from the French police to stop him.

The part of Jackal is portrayed by Edward Fox who does it with strong conviction, we believe he is a real cold and calculated killer who pays extreme attention to detail in order to pull of his plan to perfection. A mystery throughout, we begin to see the brutal killer that he is as the film progresses. A slight spoiler here but after he discovers the French police are on his trail he continues to go ahead with his plan, almost now fascinated with the project he has become involved in, going to extreme lengths to complete what he had started - even sleeping with a man.

The rest of the cast is made up of unknown names, but even they are convincing and we feel like we are watching in on real people, in particular the man appointed head of the French investigation in charge of tracking down the Jackal.

The film works extremely well as a thriller, with the 143 minutes runtime allowing for suspense to build extremely well throughout, even though I was aware of what the ending was likely to be I was still on the edge of my seat as I awaited the Jackal's next move, waiting to see whether the next step in his plan was to be successful or not.

The film plays like a documentary, with some great and extremely realistic footage included. The shots are all extremely well shot and handled with care. There's plenty of memorable shots in the film such as when Jackal is attempting to fix the sight of his gun whilst firing at a watermelon. My favourite scene was in fact the films opening, I'm not exactly sure how long it is but there is almost no dialogue involved at all yet we are gripped to the screen as we follow the President's car as the AOS attempt to assassinate him.

My only complaint, and what stops the film from receiving a potentially higher rating is the ending. I have seen people mention the length of the film as a negative, in fact I felt almost the opposite. With the pacing allowing suspense to build I felt the ending felt slightly out of pace, the ending seems to take place at extreme speed from the initial part of the ending to the end credits. It just seemed really abrupt when you consider the build up to it. I do not know what I was really expecting though, perhaps I just did not want it to end.

RATING:




I've tried to watch that a few times, but it just doesn't hook me in. Next time it's on Film4, I recommend Carlos. It's in three parts, but I think it's worth it, especially for the first two.


Carlos
__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
^ Great thriller. Reviewed it myself a while back as well, though I gave it a higher score (
+ I think) than you did.

I really like all the attention to detail when it comes to detailing the Jackal's preparations. In particular I love the watermelon scene. Could easily come across as really silly but was perfectly filmed and results in quite a chilling moment when it explodes



^ Great thriller. Reviewed it myself a while back as well, though I gave it a higher score (
+ I think) than you did.

I really like all the attention to detail when it comes to detailing the Jackal's preparations. In particular I love the watermelon scene. Could easily come across as really silly but was perfectly filmed and results in quite a chilling moment when it explodes
Yeh I actually noticed your review before as I went back to read the No Country one, and seeing as it was literally the last film I watched I thought I might as well do a review I was going to give it a 4* but I just thought the ending was a bit to abrupt after all the build-up.



Wild Hogs
(2007, Dir. Walt Becker)



John Travolta, William H. Macy and Ray Liotta are just a few of the big name stars involved. Each of those three are partly responsible for three of my favourite films "Pulp Fiction", "Fargo" and "Goodfellas" so on paper the idea of them working together sounds great, doesn't it?

Unfortunately though, "Wild Hogs" does its best to waste almost every ounce of talent these actors have, in particular Ray Liotta who is extremely annoying in his role as the leader of a hated gang of bikers the 'Del Fuegos'.

In fact the film goes down hill (although it is not particularly good in the first place) as soon as we get the confrontation between the two sets of bikers, the 'Wild Hogs' and the 'Del Fuegos'. I will admit that in parts the film is funny, stupid kind of funny that brings out our inner child. At least when they are together the 'Wild Hogs' look like their having fun, which means we can enjoy their light hearted and stupid antics.

So back on to the films negatives that mainly come from the overacting and just pure annoying characters that are the enemy bikers that chase down the good guys. Ray Liotta overacts so badly to create a character that really is embarrassing and cringe worthy, in a film that is meant to be a comedy it feels like he is just trying so hard to come across as some aggressive hard man and is well supported by an array of stupid characters that include "Lost" duo Kevin Durand and M. C. Gainey.

You can almost accept this light hearted attempt at a script up until the final act, where the town and what occurs really does seem like something written by a child. The final scenes are particularly cheesy, predictable and just so silly, filled with clichés such as the ugly and depressed 'computer geek' getting the hot girl.

I can understand why such a happy and easy ending may please less serious film watchers, children in particular. Perhaps I am being a bit too harsh and I probably would not have watched on as frustratingly had the film been produced with a lesser quality cast but if you want to see a loveable or humerus film then there are plenty of options already available that come with something this film does not have - intelligence.

RATING:



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
Note: Credit has to go to Brodinski/JayDee and possible other members for the idea to use multiple posters, really loving some of the foreign posters that I've seen posted around here.
Well I was doing it way before Brodinski so I'll take the credit! And I don't even remember anyone else doing it so yay for me!

Although that being said, you buggered up your new system by trying to hotlink. Tut tut you naughty boy!



Well I was doing it way before Brodinski so I'll take the credit! And I don't even remember anyone else doing it so yay for me!

Although that being said, you buggered up your new system by trying to hotlink. Tut tut you naughty boy!
Haha I'm still unsure on what style I should go with, think I like doing it with two big posters though like the last one. Also yeh I know about hotlinking, I need to reupload them as much as I can, sometimes I forget