Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

SonOfUniversalHorror

Members
  • Content Count

    517
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About SonOfUniversalHorror

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. *Let's all cool our heels and take a nice quadruple bacon cheeseburger break.* :^0
  2. > {quote:title=hlywdkjk wrote:}{quote} > What I've witnessed recently is WebAdmin's increased comfortableness to permanently 86 the malcontents and misbehavers. Can't say that I blame him. "Zero Tolerance" makes his job go much smoother, I'm sure. I don't think that's the case at all.
  3. > {quote:title=RaquelVixen wrote:}{quote}*.... you add a page titled "Snipe and Snide", where hopefully all the petty, small charactered, self centered little ankle-biters will gravitate.---------Sepiatone* > > Your judgmental characterization of those involved is inappropriate. It is exactly that type of personal attack that resulted in the thread being locked. Even though you didn't cite the posters by user names the implication is clear to whom you are referring. And frankly, Sepiatone it is quite hostile and abusive. > > The idea of a thread for snipe and snide will only encourage abuse and rancor. > > I'm working on curtailing further instances of these contentious arguments and apologize to all for my involvement in the matter and the locking of the thread. But please, the answer is not to add more fuel to the fire. > I saw no such suggestion in what Sepiatone said. It was rather amusing, in a sarcastic way. I didn't find it "hostile and abusive" at all. "I'm working on curtailing further instances of these contentious argument" You're a forum moderator now? ?:| "But please, the answer is not to add more fuel to the fire." Remember the old saying about "Those who live in glass houses..."
  4. > {quote:title=markbeckuaf wrote:}{quote}I grooved hardest this week to: > > BURN WITCH BURN (1962) a nightmarish horror flick that really rocked!! That's a great one for the women, because the two main women in the film are controlling the lives/destiny of the men around them, one for good purposes and the protection against evil, and the other for evil purposes and the ruin of the good. ]
  5. > {quote:title=dpompper wrote:}{quote}What I've learned about zombies is from the movies . . . where they eat rather ravenously (aka quickly). . . So by that measure, by now they'd have licked the plates and moved on to storm the shelter of new, warm victims. They're in search of fresh meat. :^0
  6. > {quote:title=TomJH wrote:}{quote}*TikiSoo wrote: But my very favorite circus film will always be Freaks* > > That's where I would differentiate between a film like Greatest Show on Earth and Freaks. One, clearly, is a family-oriented depiction of life under the Big Top, while the other I would classify as a carny film, with an emphasis upon the seediness of an alternate lifestyle. Exactly...I also love FREAKS, but it's really not about the circus itself. It's about the sideshow/carny part of the circus and the human oddities within. The movie is about those people, not about the circus itself.
  7. > {quote:title=Mike00 wrote:}{quote}Who the **** are you to judge me? Mike, just ignore both willbefree and RaquelVixen. They're both nothing but bullying and antagonizing troublemakers. I've seen NOTHING wrong at all with your posts....but those two persons are simply using you as an excuse to stir up trouble, especially willbefree.
  8. > {quote:title=ginnyfan wrote:}{quote}I think this film gets a bit of a bad rap. Because it won Best Picture and is probably the most controversial winner, people don't think it's a worthwhile film. > > It's an enjoyable film, I think, just not in the Best Picture class. I agree...I enjoy it, but it did NOT deserve to win best Picture. It's definitely considered to be probably THE most misbegotten Best Picture winner.
  9. > {quote:title=clore wrote:}{quote} > > {quote:title=hamradio wrote: > > }{quote}It should be shown in letterbox and has a great train wreck scene. > Please, no, don't say that. It was released in 1952, it's not a widescreen film. Exactly...Hammy is wrong. It was not filmed for widescreen.
  10. I really like the 1965 version made by Hammer. I don't care for the 1935 RKO version....it's rather dull and IMHO overrated.
  11. > {quote:title=Mike00 wrote:}{quote}What are you talking about? Ignore her. She likes to cause trouble.
  12. > {quote:title=willbefree25 wrote:}{quote}Do you know how to respond to a post? > > You INCLUDE part of the post you are questioning, so: > > a. the poster doesn't have to go look for their post > > and > > b. the poster can respond to whatever it is you are questioning? > > Been on the internet long? SOUH, is that you? No, it is NOT me. Why do you keep asking that? Also, there's no need for you to be so rude and insulting to Mike.
  13. > {quote:title=RaquelVixen wrote:}{quote}You're the most polite poster here. Why do you keep replying to yourself in this thread??
  14. > {quote:title=willbefree25 wrote:}{quote}Wow. > > It's on YouTube (amazing thing, YouTube), albeit in 6 parts, but it sounds as if this might be one to sit through. It's on YouTube in one part, actually: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66Blp-3dXi8 No need to sit through the six-parter that's up there.
© 2019 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...