pagemaster_b

I asked Lou during one of the chats. She says she'll finish in 2012. It's going to be awhile for the next installment . . . Personally, I think it would be funnier if she said there was a writer's strike going on.

Lou, Your pics of Elmo and Snoopy had me laughing my head off. Reminded me of the video clip a friend once emailed me with Tickle Me Elmo and Bouncing Tigger (which I sadly don't have anymore or I would post it).

Fixed. Opps, I haven't seen that list in a while. Wow, that was a shocker. Thanks Wes for correcting me.

Yes, when nobody was noticing the missing orphans. How many licks does it take to get to the center of a salt lick?

^ I'm more willing to go with that idea as that it clearly alludes to other pieces of evidence during the "Cloverfield" incident at the beginning of the movie. Still, I like how so much is left to the imagination that I really don't want someone to ruin it by trying to "explain" it. Half the fun of this movie is all the speculation about what's going on. Look at the top highest grossing films. Only Jurassic Park, Star Wars, and Indiana Jones had sequels. THE REST OF THEM DIDN'T!!! Movies don't need sequels.

I agree with you about the Star Wars prequels. I do have better hopes for the new Indy movie, yet I do have some concerns. I've read some of the rejected drafts for the screenplay that someone posted on one of the websites for scripts. Although I was surprised by some of the names attached to the drafts, the scripts were not good. I do know that Lucas and Spielburg went through several script writers before they finally agreed to a script, so there is a good chance they finally found something that worked. (And, of course, just because it's on the internet, doesn't mean it's truly one of the scripts they were considering.) I think the new Indy flick is set during 1950s.

^ Have you tried the new Chocolate Cherry Diet Dr. Pepper? < Wishes I could have a chocolate covered cherry. v Craving a sherry covered chocolate.

I did once, but that was about seven or eight years ago. Are you sitting at an airport, bored out of your mind?

A sequel will ruin "Cloverfield". This movie works far better with so much left to the imagination. Why are so many stupid people demanding for a "sequel" just to explain what's going on? Doesn't anybody have an imagination? I get really annoyed when movie producers and writers spoon feed the audience. I also get really, REALLY annoyed when people won't use their imagination to come up with an explanation of their own. I.E. The end of the "Back to the Future" was great just the way it was with the allusion to "trouble with the kids" and a big "To Be Continued . . ." It was quite obivous that it was meant to left to the imagination where it would certainly be worse. But people demanded to know WHAT HAPPENED NEXT as if they couldn't conjure anything up on their own. And what did we get? Two piss poor movies that did more harm to the original than good. Another example: Hitchcock's "The Birds". The first movie does not at all explain why the birds are attacking. This created a lot of tension and suspence throughout the entire movie. Yet, years later, somebody had to make a sequel just to explain why the birds were attacking people. Not only was the movie horrible, but it so lacked the feel and tension that Hitchcock's original had. And there's no need to bring up the fiasco of "The Blair Witch Project" and it's sequel. (And wasn't there suppose to be a third movie? Whatever became of that?) Pardon the venting here, but I've been frustrated with the lack of originality in a lot of the movies from Hollywood over the past few years. Too many sequels to movies that don't deserve it (like "Saw"), too many sequels that the studios are trying to make a fast buck, and too many sequels that just don't make any sense. Honestly, a lot of those writers should just stay on strike. "Cloverfield" is fine just by itself. Don't f@#$ it up by making a sequel.

Lou, I was hoping for another update before I took off for Germany. Guess I'll have to wait until I get back. Oh well, I'll wave to you as I fly over England.

After spending a year in Afghanistan, I thought that was really funny. Llamas suck. I spent a week with four of them on a 50 mile hike when I was in Boy Scouts. One of the most worthless pack animals I've dealt with.

I don't know. It seems of late that I have been acting like a troll. I certainly caused an uproar in the "Cloverfield" thread before my infamous post in your thread. And then there has been all my remarks about X and Japanese X that people seem to take offense to (usually by people who claim that it's the best ride in the world). Oh, and that Denny's had some awesome food. You missed out by playing it safe.

^ Needs more mayo. < Swimming in snow. v Freezing in lava.

Your avatar is keeping me from saying "YES". (Please don't smite me, all powerful hoodie wearer!) Is your house buried in snow?

Lou, I apologise for creating a such a train wreck on your thread. I'm a GINORMOUS idiot. Feel free to Yeah, I'm notorious for misspelling words that the spell checker doesn't find. Even worse, I still don't find them after numerous proofreads.

I hope so, or I'm going to be bored. Do you whistle while you work?

Here's a few . . .

^ Suffering from Coaster Withdrawals. < No I don't. In fact, my mom is always asking why I don't stop by to visit. v You have a booger hanging out of your nose.

No. Looking forward to Valentine's Day?

Not drunk. However, I did take three melatonin tablets about an hour ago. Just about as bad.

I know of several people in the US Army that are deaf in one ear prior to enlisting. Of course, there were a lot of paperwork and review boards they had to go through. Still, passing all the aptitude tests is an accomplishment. Not really. Now, working with demo--then definately YES.

Because "Roll 'n Rock" sounds like you're doing work. Just who is "The Man"?

^^ You know, Tom, you're hard to recognize when you have hair. (I'm so use to that buzz cut.)

So, let me understand Lou Time. If "tomorrow" means five days from now, then: 1. "shortly" means two days from now 2. "weekend" means "Not this coming weekend, but maybe in a couple of weekends" 3. "soon" means "I don't have a clue when I'll post the next update" And since you're an English/Linguistics major, just what does "ginormous" mean? Or did you for get to SPELLCHECK? Oh, wait. You've got a job and I don't, so of course I'm just hanging around doing nothing all day but harassing you. You know, I should be nice to you. After all you are a mod, and if I annoy you enough, you just might drop kick me off into Bantron for a time out. (I hear the serve free alcohol there . . .) Anyways, your pics of Japan are a nice stroll down memory lane. I'm kind of surprised you don't have more pics of Space World and Umam . . . something or other . . . Park. (Come to think of it, I seamed to be lacking on pictures for this day as well. I think I was just having too much fun to think about taking pictures.) Wasn't this the day in the ice house you laid on the ice bed? Or was that later?

Hannah Montana sounds like a stripper's name, just like Britney Spears.