Sign in to follow this  
Sepiatone

Remake? Really?....

28 posts in this topic

In the thread "I just watched" there was mention of the movie HELL'S HEROES which was remade as THREE GODFATHERS twice, to my knowledge....

The one referred to in the thread was the remake of a remake(so to speak) of the same name.

The first of these I remember ever seeing was the '49 JOHN WAYNE flick.  Many years later, as I mentioned, I caught '29's "Hell's Heroes" on TCM, and while watching it caught on that it was source material for the later movie.  I had never heard of it before and was pleasantly surprised.  And yet too....

While looking into all this( and to get the years right), I discovered the FIRST "remake" was done in '36, and starred CHESTER MORRIS, LEWIS STONE and WALTER BRENNAN!  Now there's ANOTHER version Ive yet to see.  And was it ever shown on TCM?  And will it be shown again?  And if so, WHEN?

And too, have any of you watched a movie thinking it was an original but discovered later that it WAS a "remake"?  Well, the first time this ever happened to me concerned POCKETFUL OF MIRACLES, which when first seeing it( on TV at age 15) wasn't aware of it being remade from a movie called LADY FOR A DAY.  So...whaddya got?

Sepiatone

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chester Morris version of THREE GODFATHERS is my favorite. It airs on TCM at least once a year.

Tomorrow night TCM's theme is gender flipping remakes. Meaning remakes where the main character's gender has been changed. They're showing THE FRONT PAGE and HIS GIRL FRIDAY (Roz Russell took over Pat O'Brien's role). And they're showing STRANGERS ON A TRAIN and ONCE YOU KISS A STRANGER (Carol Lynley took over Robert Walker's role).

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

In the thread "I just watched" there was mention of the movie HELL'S HEROES which was remade as THREE GODFATHERS twice, to my knowledge....

While looking into all this( and to get the years right), I discovered the FIRST "remake" was done in '36, and starred CHESTER MORRIS, LEWIS STONE and WALTER BRENNAN!  Now there's ANOTHER version Ive yet to see.  And was it ever shown on TCM?  And will it be shown again?  And if so, WHEN?

 

In the version you haven't seen, Al Pacino star as One Godfather, Part Three. Reportedly, he was so upset with the part that he moaned "just when I thought I was out, they pulled me back in."

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh....

I guess these days, a movie with the title "Three Godfathers" WOULD elicit the thought of it being a "Mob" movie.  ;) 

And true, I haven't seen THAT one either.  At least not all the ay through, usually nodding off somewhere along the way......

So, I'm guessing you've NEVER seen a movie, thinking at first the one you were watching(and for the first time) WAS the original, but finding out some time later it WAS a remake of an earlier movie?

But, in another sort of "twist",  I saw the movie "The Shop Around The Corner" several times BEFORE I ever saw "In The Good Old Summertime",  which is the opposite of what I was inquiring about.  ;) 

Sepiatone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

So, I'm guessing you've NEVER seen a movie, thinking at first the one you were watching(and for the first time) WAS the original, but finding out some time later it WAS a remake of an earlier movie?

I NEVER watch a movie thinking it was something (e.g. a "remake"),  since that would be an assumption based on lack of knowledge.      Of course when I first got into studio-era movies I saw a lot of films that were 'remakes' but I didn't think about that,  one way or the other.     Once I gained more knowledge about studio-era film history I knew when I was watching a movie that had a previous adaptation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three Godfathers was remade once again in 2003 as a Japanese anime, Tokyo Godfathers.

MV5BZmUyOTBkNjgtYjIzMi00ZTk1LWE4MDAtOWVm

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/7/2018 at 7:17 AM, Sepiatone said:

In the thread "I just watched" there was mention of the movie HELL'S HEROES which was remade as THREE GODFATHERS twice, to my knowledge....

The one referred to in the thread was the remake of a remake(so to speak) of the same name.

The first of these I remember ever seeing was the '49 JOHN WAYNE flick.  Many years later, as I mentioned, I caught '29's "Hell's Heroes" on TCM, and while watching it caught on that it was source material for the later movie.  I had never heard of it before and was pleasantly surprised.  And yet too....

While looking into all this( and to get the years right), I discovered the FIRST "remake" was done in '36, and starred CHESTER MORRIS, LEWIS STONE and WALTER BRENNAN!  Now there's ANOTHER version Ive yet to see.  And was it ever shown on TCM?  And will it be shown again?  And if so, WHEN?

And too, have any of you watched a movie thinking it was an original but discovered later that it WAS a "remake"?  Well, the first time this ever happened to me concerned POCKETFUL OF MIRACLES, which when first seeing it( on TV at age 15) wasn't aware of it being remade from a movie called LADY FOR A DAY.  So...whaddya got?

Sepiatone

Good topic Sepia.
I can relate well, as a few years ago I made that same discovery regarding the "Three Godfathers" ad infinitum.
I posted somewhere on these boards about it and was educated by others to the fact that there were at least two or three silent screen adaptations (that I still have yet to see) of Peter B. Kyne's 1913 novel "The Three Godfathers" that preceded the three sound versions that you have mentioned here. 
I confess that I have yet to read the book, but all three sound versions appear to be pretty close "copies" of each other. There are some obvious character development differences, of course, perhaps most noticeably being the Chester Morris character in the 1936 THREE GODFATHERS which gives him a past history with the town that was robbed.

Since you have asked, TCM did recently air both the first sound version 1929/30 HELL'S HEROES and the 1936 THREE GODFATHERS this last Thursday, Oct 4, 2018, and they are still available for a watch (or rewatch) on WATCH TCM ON-DEMAND until this Thursday AM (10/11/2018). TCM frequently airs the Ford/Wayne version: 3 GODFATHERS (1948) and it may even show up again sometime this month? 

BTW, that same morning TCM rebroadcast the 1934 "last man standing" desert adventure THE LOST PATROL, which was adapted into a western adventure in 1939 and titled BADLANDS. The theme has been repeated numerous times in different movies over the years, and IMO is always worth a watch.
Both of these were shown last Thursday as well, and both also happen to be available on WATCH TCM ON-DEMAND until this Thursday AM, (10/11/2018).

Regarding POCKETFUL OF MIRACLES and LADY FOR A DAY, I the had same shared viewing experience as yourself.
Similarly was when I first saw the 1938 version of the DAWN PATROL, then later discovered that it was a remake of an earlier 1930 movie also titled THE DAWN PATROL (later retitled  FLIGHT COMMANDER).
The 1930 version was directed by Howard Hawks, and featured Richard Barthelmess and Douglas Fairbanks Jr. as the key "buddy" players, whereas the 1938 version was directed by Edmund Goulding, and cast Errol Flynn and David Niven in those roles. Both were based on the short story "The Flight Commander" by John Monk Saunders and because Warner Brothers controlled both films they used much of the same aerial footage from the '30 movie in the '38 movie. To avoid (or exacerbate) audience confusion, they then retitled the '30 version FLIGHT COMMANDER. 
Though I most enjoy the Flynn/Niven version over the original, I still found the earlier version quite watchable and had to have a copy of it in my collection as well. 

As a movie nut, I find it interesting when I discover older movies that have similar themes as later movies. 
I have a thing about etymology and find that I likewise have an unquenchable passion to discover the etiology of other things as well, including movies. Whether the idea or source material came from an earlier movie, a play, a book, or a story... or simply watching the evolution and repetition of themes in various film genres (foreign and domestic). 
Though more subtle than shot-for-shot remakes, there appear to be some very basic themes that repeat themselves over and over.
And then, there are the revisionists who return to the same source material and come up with a slightly different take upon it (i.e. the Coen brothers 2010 adaptation of the Charles Portis 1968 novel "True Grit." And the latest rendition of A STAR IS BORN...)
Or the earlier screen adaptations (and re-adaptations) of such as W.R. Burnett's 1941 novel "High Sierra" into the Bogey classic by the same name, incarnated into a Joel McCrea western COLORADO TERRITORY (1950), and then remade again as a Jack Palance gangster noir in I DIED A THOUSAND TIMES (1956).
Same could be said regarding various film adaptations of Hemingway's works, and numerous others...

Sometimes "remakes" appear to be made simply to capitalize on the popularity of an earlier version with a new audience, with perhaps the added enhancement of later technology (i.e. sound, color, cinematic screen, 3D, Dolby sound, CGI, etc.). Numerous repetitive examples are out there, from BEN HUR, SAMSON, MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM (1933), HOUSE OF WAX (1953), etc. ...
And then there are the various never ending sequels... 

Sometimes movies have been/are remade (occasionally by the same director) because changing times have allowed the director/producer, etc. to say something in the remake that they weren't allowed to say in the original (i.e. THESE THREE (1936), THE CHILDREN'S HOUR (1961), FIVE CAME BACK (1939), BACK FROM ETERNITY (1956), etc.). 

And sometimes rather than an entire remake, simply an excerpted scene (or scenes) is copied and reproduced in a "new" film. Case in point might be Howard Hawks using classic scenes from his own screwball comedy BRINGING UP BABY (1938) as well as William Powell's hilarious fishing scene from Jack Conway's LIBELED LADY (1936) and incorporating them for comedic effect into MAN'S FAVORITE SPORT? (1964).

Regardless of the reasons why, I almost always want to see the remake, or precursor, and especially so if one or the other is a favorite of mine. 
I may not change my repeat viewing preference of one over another, but more often than not I find the experience to be interesting and worthwhile.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Stephan55 said:

And sometimes rather than an entire remake, simply an excerpted scene (or scenes) is copied and reproduced in a "new" film.

There are supposed to be roughly 30+/- "quotes" from other Westerns in Sergio Leone's Once Upon A Time In the West.


- High Noon
- 3:10 To Yuma 
- Johnny Guitar
- The Searchers
- Shane
- Ride The High Country
- The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance 
- Duel In The Sun
- The Last Sunset
- My Darling Clementine
- The Paleface
- The Comancheros
- The Magnificent Seven
- The Iron Horse
- Fort Apache
- Western Union
- Ace In The Hole 
- Jubal
- High Sierra
- Farewell, My Lovely
- Run of the Arrow
- Man From The West
- Man Without A Star
- Red River
- Jubal  

- Firecreek

- Ace In The Hole

- The Paleface
- Winchester '73

- 40 Guns

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The red western White Sun of the Desert (one of my favorite films of all time) also includes thematic and visual references to Stagecoach, High Noon, other John Ford films, the Magnificent Seven, spaghetti westerns among other westerns.

WhiteSunOfThe-Desert77-e1428177310252.jp

WhiteSunOfTheDesert57-e1428177440965.jpg

WhiteSunOfThe-Desert137-e1428178004994.j

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, STEPHAN----

Just this past Thursday?    Where the hell was ?  :o  :angry:

Oh, well....

@James:

Of COURSE, nobody (I would think) watches any movie they've never seen before and automatically think it's possibly some sort of "remake".  :rolleyes:  Or possibly remade later.  All I was asking was:  Is there any movie any of you saw that for some time you always thought was an "original" but LATER discovered( and in some cases pleasantly) that it was a "remake"? 

I thought that was clearly stated as I posted it in the only English I know. ( which would be...plain ).  ;) 

Sepiatone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

OK, STEPHAN----

Just this past Thursday?    Where the hell was ?  :o  :angry:

Oh, well....

@James:

Of COURSE, nobody (I would think) watches any movie they've never seen before and automatically think it's possibly some sort of "remake".  :rolleyes:  Or possibly remade later.  All I was asking was:  Is there any movie any of you saw that for some time you always thought was an "original" but LATER discovered( and in some cases pleasantly) that it was a "remake"? 

I thought that was clearly stated as I posted it in the only English I know. ( which would be...plain ).  ;) 

Sepiatone

My answer is still "no" for the same reason;  I don't assume a film is an original or remake.     I.e. if I don't know, I don't assume.     Instead I do the research. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

All I was asking was:  Is there any movie any of you saw that for some time you always thought was an "original" but LATER discovered( and in some cases pleasantly) that it was a "remake"? 

 

10 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I don't assume a film is an original or remake.     I.e. if I don't know, I don't assume.     Instead I do the research. 


I had no difficulty understanding your quite plain and clear question.
And unlike James, I must admit that yes, I do sometimes make an assumption (perhaps more than sometimes).

For example, unless I am well informed to the contrary, when someone tells me something (unless the telling immediately strains credibility) I generally give them the benefit of doubt and assume that they are being truthful.
If I am interested I may research more about it later, and possibly confirm, expand upon, or negate the information that I had been told. But unlike professional research, I usually don't pursue such to any great degree.

I generally don't go out to movies anymore, but when I did (unless I was going along with someone else to see something that I knew nothing about) I generally was enticed to do so by a preview or trailer. So I had an inkling whether it was a sequel (i.e. Return of the Fly), a remake (The Fly (1986)),  or an original (i.e. Lawrence of Arabia). Today when I am checking an unfamiliar title out from the library, the first thing that comes to mind is, "hmmm, I have never heard of this movie before" (hint, it is something that I have never seen so it might be an "original"). I then pick up the DVD case and read whatever I can about it from the front and back cover (director, producer, cast, etc.) if I am still unfamiliar but intrigued by what information I have been provided I may just check the title out and see for myself.
When I checked out Guillermo del Toro's film, 'The Shape of Water' I already had an idea from television previews that it might be a 'Creature from the Black Lagoon' remake of sorts. Turns out that del Toro was inspired by the earlier film when he made it.
However, back when I first saw 'The Dawn Patrol' on TV as a kid, I thought that the 1938 version was the only version. It wasn't until a few years ago (okay, a little more than a decade ago now) that I even became aware that there was a 1930 version.
I was watching TCM late one night and this old 1930 WWI flying movie came on. As I watched, I realized that hey, the character names and plot were exactly the same as what I had previously seen in the 1938 movie. It then dawned upon me that the 1938 version was a remake of the 1930 film. Up until that time I had no idea.
I hadn't recorded it and wanted to watch it again right away, but when I tried to borrow it from an inter-library loan I kept receiving the same 1938 Errol Flynn film. I finally discovered that the 1930 version had a different title, 'Flight Commander,' so I was eventually able to check it out and then I ended up ordering my own copy from Amazon. After that I noticed that every now and then TCM would rebroadcast that earlier 1930 version, but by then I had already become familiar with the movie and the different title, so I immediately recognized it whenever it showed up.
I have re-watched it several times by now, but before that first viewing I had made an assumption that the Flynn/Niven version was the only version.
Same back when I saw 'Pocketful Of Miracles,' and other movies for the first time. I didn't immediately think, "hmmm, I wonder if this movie had ever been made before...." If I didn't know that, then yes, I assumed that it was an original. We learn these things in passing.

I grew up on TV broadcasts of the 1933 'King Kong' so as a child I rightfully made an assumption that it was a one and only, and when I first saw 'Son of Kong' I knew that it was a follow-up sequel (hey, Kong had a son!).
So when 1976 rolled around I was astute enough to figure out that the Dino De Laurentiis version was a 'remake' of the original.
But barring such prior knowledge (i.e. if I'd never heard of or seen the 1933 version) I'd likely have thought that the Laurentiis version was a one and only. As I "assume" that many un or ill-informed "youngsters" today may think that the 2005 Peter Jackson remake is an original.

Today, when I am not looking for a specific title and I just check out a movie that I know nothing about, I don't really think to myself "original or remake?"
If someone were to broach me about it at that time I'd probably say that I was unfamiliar with the title so it may or not be either. But having grown up being an avid movie watcher, and having seen literally tens of thousands of different movies in my life, it is a rare movie today that doesn't illustrate some familiar theme. Or in the watching, remind me of another film that I have seen. Generally a little research will inform me that the writer, producer, or director, was inspired by another director's style or movie (or movies), or source material (be it a play, book, story, or subject), about which I had some past familiarity.
But I will never live long enough to see, read, or learn about everything that has already been seen, written about and learned by others. That is not to say that there is nothing that isn't totally original out there... but then I am reminded of the following observational wisdom that says...

A generation goes, and a generation comes,
but the earth remains forever.

The sun rises, and the sun goes down,
and hastens to the place where it rises.

The wind blows to the south
and goes around to the north;
around and around goes the wind,
and on its circuits the wind returns.

All streams run to the sea,
but the sea is not full;
to the place where the streams flow,
there they flow again.

All things are full of weariness;
a man cannot utter it;
the eye is not satisfied with seeing,
nor the ear filled with hearing.

What has been is what will be,
and what has been done is what will be done,
and there is nothing new under the sun.


Is there a thing of which it is said,
“See, this is new”?
It has been already
in the ages before us.

There is no remembrance of former things,
nor will there be any remembrance
of later things yet to be among those who come after. 


Ecclesiastes,  Chapter 1, verses 4-11,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Stephan55 said:

When I checked out Guillermo del Toro's film, 'The Shape of Water' I already had an idea from television previews that it might be a 'Creature from the Black Lagoon' remake of sorts. Turns out that del Toro was inspired by the earlier film when he made it.

Actually, few guessed Del Toro's true remake inspiration:

😛

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, EricJ said:

Actually, few guessed Del Toro's true remake inspiration:

😛

Wow, how perceptive. I watched Splash a couple of times back in the '80s but never even thought of it to make this connection. And in everything that I've seen and read (even in the DVD extras) del Toro did not mention this once!
How deliciously misleading (er misdirecting) of him.
Unless it was a subliminal connection that even he was not aware of (which is hard to imagine)... But the similarities are undeniable!
It makes perfect sense doesn't it. The gender roles from Splash are reversed, but the 'Creature' in both the original and del Toro's remake is a "Merman" .... 

Thanks for sharing this :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that I'm in the mood, I found this clip just too hilarious!
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whew!

I guess I'm surprised( by what I can gather) that you only had an "inkling" that THE FLY ('86) WAS a remake!  :o

And James;  nice try, but nobody watches a movie(as a 1st viewing) assuming either it being an original or a remake.  But I was referrencing that down the road it might be discovered that some particular movie they saw did turn out (and to their surprise) to BE a "remake".  For example( and again  :rolleyes: )

I saw the movie THREE GODFATHERS ('49) years ago(pre-TCM) and thought it was a cute kind of story, and at that time never before saw it.  Then, many years later, (and after TCM had been around for a good spell) TCM showed HELL'S HEROES on a SATURDAY afternoon, if memory serves, and I took the time to watch it because I had never seen a Charles Bickford movie that went back that far!  It was only after about 20 minutes into it did I realize it was the same story as in THREE GODFATHERS.  :o  B)   and.....

Do you research EVERY movie you watch?  What would be the reason for that?  :blink:

Sepiatone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

And James;  nice try, but nobody watches a movie(as a 1st viewing) assuming either it being an original or a remake.  But I was referrencing that down the road it might be discovered that some particular movie they saw did turn out (and to their surprise) to BE a "remake".  For example( and again  :rolleyes: )

Like you always do,  you're now singing a very different song.  Go back and read what you originally posted.

Anyhow,  why would it be 'to their surprise???',  again,  it would only be a 'surprise' to those that assume and thus are clueless that Hollywood has been making remakes forever.      The only legit reason one would be surprised is when watching a film made in the 30s.      The reason for that should be obvious but again, someone has to know something about movie history instead of assume based on lack of knowledge.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"And too, have any of you watched a movie thinking it was an original but discovered later that it WAS a "remake"?  Well, the first time this ever happened to me concerned POCKETFUL OF MIRACLES, which when first seeing it( on TV at age 15) wasn't aware of it being remade from a movie called LADY FOR A DAY.  So...whaddya got?"

Thinking of THIS,eh?

How is anyone taking that too literally MY fault?  Didn't really require any genius to figure out what it really meant.  

And the "surprise" comes in the discovery  of some long favored movie being the remake, and NOT the original. (D'OH!  :blink: )  Like( and another what should be unnecessary  example) my thinking( all along) that the 1959 remake of IMITATION OF LIFE wasn't a remake at all, my not having heard of or seen the 1934 original until many moons later.

Sepiatone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your mentioning of the Lana Turner remake of Imitation of Life as an example of your thread's premise, has now reminded me that as a teenager I watched Lana in another remake of a earlier made film that was shown on the old ABC Sunday Night Movies, and which at the time had no inkling it was indeed a remake.

The movie was Madame X, and only later would I discover that there had been an earlier 1937 version of it made starring Gladys George of which I would eventually watch, and even before that there's an early talkie Pre-Code version made of the story starring Ruth Chatterton, and which I have yet to watch.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Dargo said:

Your mentioning of the Lana Turner remake of Imitation of Life as an example of your thread's premise, has now reminded me that as a teenager I watched Lana in another remake of a earlier made film that was shown on the old ABC Sunday Night Movies, and which at the time had no inkling it was indeed a remake.

The movie was Madame X, and only later would I discover that there had been an earlier 1937 version of it made starring Gladys George of which I would eventually watch, and even before that there's an early talkie Pre-Code version made of the story starring Ruth Chatterton, and which I have yet to watch.

Madame X is a great example of my soap-box rant that we all need to focus more on the original source material related to all films,  but especially 'remakes':   Madame X was a play that came out in 1908.    The older the release date of the original source material,  the higher the odds that there are multiple movie versions.   In fact there are two silent film versions prior to the release of the Chatterton 1929 release.

Note that the 1941 The Maltese Falcon was one of the first 'classic' films I got into back in the 80s.   After seeing it I checked out the book and discovered it was released in 1930.   Since there was over a 10 year gap between the Huston film and the book,  I checked to see if there were prior film versions, and of course there were two.

 

     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Madame X is a great example of my soap-box rant that we all need to focus more on the original source material related to all films,  but especially 'remakes':   Madame X was a play that came out in 1908.    The older the release date of the original source material,  the higher the odds that there are multiple movie versions.   In fact there are two silent film versions prior to the release of the Chatterton 1929 release.

Note that the 1941 The Maltese Falcon was one of the first 'classic' films I got into back in the 80s.   After seeing it I checked out the book and discovered it was released in 1930.   Since there was over a 10 year gap between the Huston film and the book,  I checked to see if there were prior film versions, and of course there were two.

 

     

Uh-huh, your "soapbox rant" ya say, James?!

(...so, kind'a like my whole "Ben's nasally voice" thing or "British superfluous-u" thing, right?!) ;)

LOL

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2018 at 11:46 PM, EricJ said:

Actually, few guessed Del Toro's true remake inspiration:

😛

Which is funny because whenever I referred to it when speaking to others, I referred to it as a blend of Splash meeting the creature design of The Creature from the Black Lagoon and the eroticism (and the main character being a mute) of The Piano.... Likewise, another Best Picture nominee of 2017, Get Out, was a mix of Guess Who's Coming to Dinner and The Stepford Wives.

Speaking of remakes in disguise,  I just saw Only the Lonely from 1991 on Cinemax on demand this week. A different city, a different era, different societal mores, and more jokes could not disguise that it was a remake of Marty. Only the Lonely was a good film (and with a wonderfully juicy big-screen farewell performance for Maureen O'Hara), but Marty was a masterpiece and the better film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The weirdest example of this sort of thing( that I mentioned before) was when a nephew of mine( and 19 at the time) came over at the same time I was watching my DVD of the old CHUCK JONES/ BORIS KARLOFF cartoon of "How The Grinch Stole Christmas".  (this was just this last Christmas season)

He walked in( he was dropping off something for my wife), looked at my TV for a bit and said, "Oh, don't tell me!----They tried making a cartoon out of the JIM CARREY movie?"   :o  :rolleyes:

Ah, sweet blissful youth!  ;)

Sepiatone

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us