Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

anyone seen the trailers for butterfly effect? it looks pretty interesing.. especially for having ashton kutcher play a serious role

anyone planing on checkng this flick out it looks good
change on thing change everything

check out these cool desktops and aim icons that i found for the movie
http://www.butterflyeffectmovie.com
iam icons

ahahaha omg its like the simpsons episode from halloween
exactly alike like the one where homer goes back in time.....

Well the story sounds pretty good and the trailer looks good but Ashton Kutcher?!*sigh*

ashton kutcher looks like he does a good job in it, hes also one of the producers on it.. just cause hes only played stupid roles i wouldnt count him out

Yeh he doesnt look bad in the trailer but I just find him a bit annoying.Maybe he'll change my mind with this one.

Oh my gosh, i was at the theatre and i saw a preview for this movie...IT's going to be so great, i was like so pumped for that movie now~~~~

I cant wait either, Ashton Kutcher is hot, and a wonderful actor. But its also gonna be a big change for me, and im sure as well for him, because im actually seeing him in a serious movie..lol, its gonna be quite wierd, but a wonderful movie.
I like on viva la bam when don vito goes "Im gonna stick ashton koosher on your butt!!" "Bam goes haahahah ashton koosher!!"

This movie is such a serious role, because , omg, look at the preview...but that is such a big change for mr.kutcher...but i don't really find him that attractive,sorry! but he is such a wonderful actor, and i love his work.....

The movie looks pretty interesting but I don't know if Kutcher is a "wonderful" actor. As stated before, he's never done anything serious so I don't think we can call him "wonderful" yet.

I hate Ashton and all his movies so i dont think i will give this movie ratings.

this movie looks very damn good ... im for sure gonna buy it

errr uhhh see it

Any movie with ashton kutcher is good~~~

wonderful actor!?! GGGGAAAAAAHAHAHHHAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAA
AAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAA *pant pant* *giggle* *smirk* GGAAAAAAAAAAAHHAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAA
AAHAAAAAAHAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

The movie does look good.Dont like Kutcher thou, dont think he's a good actor. They could have picked someone better but maybe he'll surprise me and do something good.

the movie looks really good but if you think about it this isn't really Ashton's type of movie to be in.

ashton is awesome

your'e right .. this isnt his kind of movie .. but in the previews he looks like he plays the part pretty good .. oh well we jus gotta wait for a lil bit eh ?

In the previews, i love where he is talking to that guy, when he is in prision,and he's like "look at this, tell me if anything funny happens"
and when he's talking to that guy who is in jail,and he jumps across the table at him, those are like really big attention grabbers for me

yeah .. but its all about a girl .. jus like every damn movie .... except a few .. and those few rule !

Yeah, but every movie needs a love part to it,and i mean, that is just how it goes....i like them kinda movies...they are great,they make me cry...i like movies like that

i dont .. they make me sick .. why cant they jus have it with no love ... then it would be great .. and by no love i mean .... i mean not all about a girl

The movie was awesome (other than a few parts that didn't make sense).

the movie is awesome .. some parts were really confusing like when he blacks out ... then he ifnds out he can go back and he is actually liveing out his blackouts ... now that was confusing

Those parts weren't confusing to me. He can live out memories other than his blackouts, not just what he has in his journals. What was confusing was the things that he changed. Like the part with the knife and his father were changed before he went back, yet nothing else was changed.

recently on spike tv, i saw a show where a lady was interviewing ashton and amy. from what ashton said, sounded like he wrote or co-wrote the script. is this true?

yes that was confusing to i jus wanted to see mroe boobies .. lol ... the funniest part was when her toes go numb after she has an orgasm ... im still laughing at that ...... why did i hide this up ??

oh god tho i saw it ans its awsome!!! but beware there are naked chicks in it and tons of swearing ..(if your under age) but it is a awsome movie and plus the kid who plays Ashton at the age 13 is very hott!!

Actually... he can live out the blackouts too, that's how he figured out that it wasn't a dream. When Lenny told him about what happened during his blackout when Tommy set the dog on fire. He quoted from that incident when Evan "dreamed" it. Also, with the knife, the reason he didn't know why he had the knife is because the future (our present) him was trying to destroy the firecracker. I hope that made sense.

I have yet to see the movie because I think that Ashton is a major goober... is the movie good enough that I can forget about that and actually enjoy the story?

I totally agree drool

Yeah, I know why he went back with the knife, but it didn't make sense because that was changed, yet nothing else was.

i saw it last night.

IT IS SO GOOD!

i totally loved it. really, really amazing. i'm not a fan of major swearing and nudity, but in a way it adds some realism to the movie. 'cause... well, i don't need to explain it. people swear. people get naked. *shrugs* although it was slightly disturbing... not for guys i guess, but i didn't like it all that much.

great movie nevertheless, Ashton did a SUPERB job. and the kid actors were really great too.

Just a bump to remind everyone that "The Butterfly Effect" was released on DVD today. I would have posted this in the DVD Forum, but I figured it would get better exposure here.

The DVD itself is absolutely loaded, being an Infinifilm. When I say loaded, I mean LOADED. Commentaries, deleted scenes, "pop up" interactives during the movie, FOUR alternate endings, and best of all, it includes BOTH the theatrical version AND the Director's Cut of the film, with an additional 6 minutes.

As for the Director's Cut, this is basically what was added:


There is a segment where teenage Evan stumbles upon his fathers case file, which shows that he, too, suffered from the same blackouts as Evan did. While Evan kept a journal, his father kept a photo album.

The other addition ties into the alternate ending of the Director's Cut. Evan and his mother visit a palm reader after the dinner segment. The palm reader informs Evan that he has no lifeline (the fold in your hand near your thumb?), and that he was never meant to be born. His mother explains that she had a couple of stillbirths before Evan.

Now, the ending. Evan crawls underneath the doctors chair and begins watching a home video of his mother being rushed through a the hospital, to give birth to Evan. True to what the palm reader said, Evan wasn't born in this alternate reality! The movie is all about how Kayleigh and her brother ended up actually moving back in with their mother, and in the end, Kayleigh getting married. In the theatrical version, Evan and Kayleigh met at the party, where Evan told her to stay away, thus never meeting her. This time, however, he was never even born. Crazy, crazy ending.

The other 2 alternate endings, in the deleted scenes, are basically the "corporate" versions of Evan and Kayleigh, as they pass each other outside. One, Evan truns and follows her, then fades to black. The other, they actually speak, and go out for coffee, which is weird for 2 people that never met.


So, if you haven't already seen the film, I encourage you to do so. It's very underappreciated, IMO, and don't let Ashton's name fool you. This is his crowning achievement.

My mom rented it, I didn't bother watching it. She said the premise was dumb, but the movie wasn't too bad.

I might rent it tomorrow im a big fan of ashton

Im going to buy it tomorrow, I really liked this movie.

the premise of the film was a fine idea for a movie, a bit common, but it lacked depth. It felt like the movie diddnt believe itself to be as riisk It is enjoyable for what it is, but a failure for not being what it could have been

Examples?

I thought it exploited the most extreme of circumstances with every fluctuation in time.

Is this out on dvd yet? I think it is, they have a big B.E banner at the store..but i didnt look at the date

lol this movie had one chick naked for like 2 secs. and there was a little swearing but wasn't bad or even noticible to be. but anyway i thought this movie was great, nice story and good acting. i wa scared the whole movie though that he would die or something stupid would happen at the end but it even gave the movie the perfect ending.

I think it was filled with too much sex! Thumper had a new girl everyday, it showed Evan and his gf doing it......

lol they had like 4 scens with sex and only one had nudity ,which is pretty good. and some people actually have sex that much and swear that much. so its kinda realistic but kinda not. but either way i dont think that the sex or swearing did anything bad to the movie.

I rent to rent it today and it was all out

Hmm, places like Hollywood Video have an "In Stock" guarantee, if they didn't have it in, when they did, the rental is free.

BUT, if you can't get it on DVD to where you can watch the director's cut, don't bother with the VHS.

I go to blockbuster im dodgeing crediters from HollyWoodVideo

I think the movie was too complicated. And the ending was disappointing. But I enjoyed it .

I saw it twice in theater, the 2nd time with my parents and my friend. I had to sit up in the front to hide the embarrasment lol. My parents hated it.

You dont have to be embarrassed just because your parents dont like what you like . Its always that way .

NO thats not what i meant, I meant to hide the embarrasment of all the nudity, I just feel akward watching something like that with my parents, so i scooted up. Believe me I would've never seen it TWICE in theater if i didnt like it the first time.

lol yeah i understand, i feel the same way.

I just watched it. It was pretty good, better than I expected.

They are grown-ups, they can take it .

Yeah you know what im talkin about, ven.
Forget it..sheesh..

yea i remmeber as a kid feeling the same way, thats why i tried not to watch alot of movies with them.

fanatos sig-drool

thats sick man her sig has a bunch of pre teen wanna be drug abuser's. but thats just speaking out on the fact that alot of younger stars become drug and achool users. plus its sick for me to think of them becuase of the age diff.

Err, they are all over 12, and I doubt, like anyone else, they want to be, or will be, drug users. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

your prolly right, but i mean like im 20 and to me that being a petifile. so bad stuff. plus there only around 16 well duff is. and thats cool for stormy becuase he's only 13 but sick to me. and plus it just seems alot of the child stars from the past became drug abusers, or crazy plp. like the kid from the brady bunch.

how do they get so many hot girls on a picture?

Hilary Duff, Amanda Bynes ,Lindsey Lolhan...need I say more ?

Cinemaddiction,isnt your sig a rip off of VenomFans?

It's called free publicity in their case. What young actress would deny the change to be exposed along with their fellow Hollywood starlets?

As for my signature, it's an Alex Ross original piece. All VenomFAN every did was add his name. I found the picture the day after he made his signature, and have been holding onto it until he got a new one, so that I could use it. So, no, it isn't.

Don't get me started on similar sig pics.

there still hot

Agreed.

By the way, I don't know how many of you enjoyed "Final Destination 2", but the same writing/directing team tackled this movie as well.

Just some trivia for ya.

I loved FD2

DARNIT!

My brother was suppose to go get me the movie but he got TIMELINE instead .Oh well he said he'll get it for me tomorrow I CANT WAIT!

Timeline was horrible.

I just viewed the film and I have to WOW

Ashton Kutcher is at his best performance of his career.The story takes so many turns and takes you to so many possibilities of what happens if you could change the future.Amy Smart wasnt to bad either it hurt me to see her all run-down and trashed like in that scene.I really felt for these characters I wanted to see where they where going to end up and the overall conclusion was bitter-sweet but it worked.I was sqeemish throughout the first half hour of the film because it showed to name a few Child Porn filming,burning dogs,etc etc... it was shocking and I like films like that it really touched me.

I was completly shocked how much I liked this movie..I didn't even want to watch it because of ashton kutcher..I couldn't stand him.

but the movie was lent to me and I circled it for about 2 days till I finally watched it,and I honestly couldn't pull myself away from it,it keep me interested and it will be my nomination for next months movie

I'll defintely be seeing this movie when it's available. Does anyone know that song by creed and it goes something like 'It's been a while something something.'?

There was a 50%-off promotion on Botox.

Ashton Kutcher has never been a bad actor in my eyes just because he plays some goofy roles doesnt make him less of an actor.Im mean just acting like Kelso in That70sShow takes talent but I geuss people didnt stop to think about that

Takes talent to play a high strung high school stoner? Not too much. His problem is role selection. He allowed himself to be typecasted to the point where when he finally breaks out, nobody will care.

He played Kelso in "Dude, Where's My Car".
He played Kelso in "Down To You".
He played Kelso in "My Bosses Daughter"
He played semi-Kelso in "Just Married!" and "Cheaper By the Dozen"

"The Butterfly Effect" was his break out role, after finally toning down his characters, movie wise.

Ive just always been a fan of Ashton I always knew that he was a good actor and that despise some of his goofball roles there was a good actor inside and this film proved it

I don't understand how you like this film so much..it's pathetic.

He goes back in time to put holes in his hands to show the guy in prison what he can do - now ignoring for a moment the holes this creates in the plot - don't you think that's a pretty life changing thing to do ? And all that happens is he turns up in the same prison only with scars on his hands ? " The Butterfly Effect " relates to how something so small can change something so large. This lad puts holes in his hands at school and his life goes almost completely unaltered ?

It's soooooooo bad.

I believe it's called personal appeal?



He goes back in time to save his childhood sweetheart and confidant, Kayleigh, who commited suicide, due to Evan's questions that drudged up bad memories on his reappearance.

In prison, the last place where anyone would help anyone, he came across a cellmate who had supposedly found God. Evan made a pact with him, that he could prove that knows God, by way of stigmata we came to find, he'd gain his trust and allegiance. He went back in time, to where he knew he could do such a thing, and did it.

I don't think it's a "life changing thing to do", because if you had paid attention to the entire theme of the movie, he could change it back just as quickly.

I have to say that if that is your solitary reason for disliking a movie, I'm sorry, because it's abundantly clear you didn't understand it. Atleast you haven't proven it in this thread, if you did.

Not a life altering event ? So he wouldn't have ended up having councelling as a child ? Maybe even ' put away ' ?
And that he ends up in the same prison..please ! If he had gone back, put holes in his hands and SOMEHOW ended up in the exact same prison then he wouldn't have ended up in that cell showing the guy his scars would he ?! He would have had them already.

It's not the sole reason but there are just too many things wrong with the plot, the whole idea and the acting / directing for me to take that film seriously.

If a film wants to be taken seriously, it has to be presented as such.

Would your parents have you put away if you stepped on a nail?

He did it consciously, to prove a point in the future. He was only young in body, not mind, when he went back to elementary school.



Yes he would. He wouldn't already have had the scars before he got to prison, because he hadn't slammed his hands down on the paper pins. Can't show someone what you don't already have.



How serious can a Science Fiction movie about time travel be, when you're forced to totally suspend reality? I thought the human emotional aspects of the movie were very credible, which was honestly the only thing that could be fairly critiqued.

Guess we'll just agree to disagree. You didn't like it, and I'll respect that.

The only trouble Evan ever had were his black outs, otherwise, he was a great kid. Not one that would consciously inflict bodily harm on himself. Like I said, when he did that, he knew full well what he was doing, as it was an adult Evan who travelled back to a segment of a young Evan's life.

The point with the scars on his hands is that when he changes the timeline HE is the only person to see/remember the changes/ differences.

When he goes back and changes the past to get the scars the future he arrives back at should have been altered so that he had the scars his whole life.

Therefore the guy in the cell would have already been aware of them - not "watching them appear"

They ignored that so that he would be "converted" and help out. Ignoring the films own ideas for the scake of a plot device. Or in other-words, Bullshit.

The butterfly effect was an interesting idea, but badly presented and self contradicting.

As to Kutcher, I find it easier to believe in time travel than I do Kutcher as a grade A student: the guys a buffoon.

Good kid but a little traumatized..

-His friend killed his dog
-He saw his dad killed before his eyes after he tryed to strangle him
-Blackouts
-Was filmed for a child pornagraphy video at age 7
-Saw a mother and her child get blown up by a stick a dynamite he was somewhat responsible for
-His best friend killed herself
-One of his friends has serious mental problems from the dynamite iccident he caused
-One of his friends had serious anger problems and has been causing trouble for Evan

What was the point of that post ?

I ' quoted ' him and put my post under the part of his post i wanted to reply to

The point is to trick his cellmate into thinking he had just witnessed a stigmata. Who's to say how he would turn out? You're making assumptions that have no basis or relation to the actual movie.



What do his obtaining scars have to do with him landing in prison? According to this particular movies logic, he wouldn't have the scars before he landed in prison, because he warped directly from the prison, to elementary school, and back to that same prison again, only this time with scars.



Much like Mr. Zero's observation below, it's a deus ex machina, something miraculous and sometimes seemingly ignorant, to move the story along. It happens in movies all of the time.





Notice that he didn't do any of those things, which was kind of my point. He himself was a good kid, who was infact the victim in many cases, which is why his paper pin and drawing incidents were so shocking to his teacher.

Thats why I said TRAUMATIZED i didnt say he did it

Cinemaddiction -

He goes back several times in the film to change events that haven't turned out as he'd hoped for. He travels back, changes something and then when he returns to the time he travelled from things are different. Yes ? For example, he travels back, tells Kayleigh he hates her and when he returns his life his different..he's never known her at all but both of them are safe and well.

He goes back to his childhood and slams his hands down, puts holes in his hands and when he returns nothing has changed apart from he has scars on his hands ?! He's still ended up in prison ?!!

As i said earlier it's one of many holes in the film and i don't think even Hitchcock could have got away with it ( he himself admitted there are holes in most of his films, like North By Northwest, but the direction is such that they go ' unseen ' )

I still dont see where your going with thise your examples didnt seem like they had holes in it

DUDE! Where's my past?

Our point is that he changed his childhood so that he had scars on his hands. He therefore had scars on his hands HIS WHOLE LIFE. His cellmate would have been aware of them since the day they met.

Irrespective of whether that would have been the only change to his life - we will assume he would still have ended up in prison at that same point he returned to.

Even allowing for that, the "changed future" would not have been him in prison with those scars "miraculously" appearing, they would have been there all along, so the conversation would have gone.

Kutcher: "Dude, I can like totally convince you I am chosen by God! - keep watching my hands"

Cellmate: "Your hands with those old scars you have had since childhood.. ok.. I'm watching"

Kutcher: "Oh yeah, um... downer... didn't think of that..."


Understand? Within the logic that the film itself had set up this makes no sense, it goes against the rules the film itself has established.

Which showcases that this is a very dumb and shallow movie trying to disguise itself as something smarter.

Mr Addiction,

As I've been trying to point out, according to this films own logic he could not have used this to trick his cellmate because the film had already been at great pains to set up that in changing the past he changed the entire timeline - he was the only person to remember both/all the timelines and it was rotting his brain.

After scaring himself he would have returned to a time when his cellmate would have seen he had stigmat scars from the moment they met as they had been there his whole life.

This isn't a deus ex machina - because although they strain credibility they are at least feasible within the context. This scene in the film completely contradicted it's own rules and logic, which is shoddy writing in the extreme.

Anyone actually concentrating on the the film should have given up in despair after this stupidity.

I know your coments were not directed at me but perhaps you might think about that before saying personal things like "if you had paid attention" and "it's abundantly clear you didn't understand it." to those of us who spotted the films inconsistencies.

Im sorry but he wouldnt have had them his whole life I cant explain it but since he skipped back to the present his cellmate saw them appear right then.

What don't you understand? He spent the whole movie going back and making changes that altered his entire timeline from that point onwards

That was the "point" of the film. He didn't skip back to "the present" he changed his entire life - in this instance the change was simply 2 scars.

Am I not making myself clear?

Back off dude just because you think that doesnt mean everybody else has to.Am I making myself clear?

All im saying is that the scars appeared right then and its not that far fetched if you used your head.

Sorry if you took it personally I wasn't trying to suggest you were stupid - I honestly thought I wasn't explaining what i meant clearly enough - I hadn't realized that you simply didn't care that it made no sense. My bad.

Understood, but Alec wasn't too concise in making his point, initially assuming that he was going to go to prison all along, when there wasn't anything suggesting such in his childhood.




Oy. Yes, but since he himself didn't do those things, there is nothing to suggest that he, by his adolescent actions, would someday wind up in jail.

I think everyones points and feelings involving the movie have been made clear.

Finally. It's flawed, but what Sci Fi movie isn't?

I know what you mean - my friends and I call this "filling in" where you have to make allowances for inconsistencies in plot and logic: Not just in sci-fi either, but it is more common there as it sometimes relies on fantastical notions.

Case in point - Pitch Black: A film I very much enjoyed but at the very beginning was left wondering what the odds of a spacecraft crashing on a planet JUST before the total eclipse were - staggering.

In my head I quickly thought "well, perhaps the once every few decades alignment of the planets is what moves the meteors into the shipping lanes and causes the crash"

Easy - wish they had said that in the film but no big, and i enjoyed the movie.

But if a script can't be true to it's own rules and I can't even begin to work out why on earth something would have happened then I cease to care about the characters.

He doesn't just ' skip ' back !!!

Every time he travels back and changes something, the whole timeline is effected - thus after he goes back to the ' past 'and says to Kayleigh that he hates her and hopes he never sees her again, when he returns to the ' present ' he doesn't know her..their whole lives have been different because of the change in what he said.

So when he travels back to put the scars on his hands from that point on that timeline is different..he has scars on his hands for the rest of his life. Thus his whole life from that point would have been different ( his mother would have treated him differently, he would have received counselling etc his whole life would have been different ). But for the plots own sake nothing changes..he returns to the same jail cell and the same inmate notices that there are now scars are on his hands ?!!

As i said, there are many classic films out there like North By Northwest that contain " plot holes " but they are such good films with such good acting and direction that they go generally unnoticed. The Butterfly Effect has too many plot holes, isn't acted well enough and has sloppy direction..it's a 2 star film at best.

Thankyou !

It goes against the rules the film has established and the whole theory of the butterfly effect itself.

I personally think it's a film that 15's and under might appreciate. One of those films where you shouldn't take popcorn with you to watch it, you should take a huge pinch of salt

So apart from all these huge plot holes you think the film is good ? That's fine. Sorry for any misunderstanding !

HEY! I didn't get to see the Butterfly Effect in the theaters, but I rented it the first day it came out. I LOVED THIS MOVIE! I think Ashton did a great job, even though I am so used to seeing him playing a dork in a stupid movie. Amy Smart did really good, too. She had to play four different characters, but she was awesome. John Patrick Amedori, who played Evan at 13, also did an amazing job! He really played his character well, and he was very convincing. He is a really good actor and a real HOTTIE! All of the other characters were portrayed very well, too. I really liked to movie itself. It kept me on the edge of my seat, wondering what would happen next. It was very well-written in my eyes. I liked both endings. My birthday is in four days and the only thing I'm asking for the Butterfly Effect DVD. I really loved this movie!!

Which ending did you guys see/like better? I liked the theater version better.

I like the Director's Cut ending, because it isn't the usual Hollywood happy-ending, even though many of the variable alternate endings weren't exactly 'happy endings' either...

I never said anything about him ending up in jail by his actions.I merely stated that he was a messed up kid



You call issue about scars appearing on his hands a huge plot hole?!



Next time you watch a movie try to remember....its a MOVIE

Then why mention events that he himself didn't do, when I am sitting there trying to make a point that he himself didn't do anything in his childhood that would suggest him leading a life of crime?
You're throwing a wrench in things, which totally unnecessary.

The huge plot hole he is talking about is that by going back in time and obtaining those scars, he would have had them his entire life, and still ended up in jail, thus not changing his lifes outcome, which is a total contradiction of the movies plot

In retrospect, that's a huge plot hole, but I loved the movie nonetheless.

Like I said before I cant really say this in writing but I can see why they would've appeared right then and I can also see why they wouldnt have but nonetheless your right it still didnt ruin the movie.Which is why im having a hard time understanding why Mr Zero is making such a big deal out of it.My famous line ties into all of this "Thats hollywood for ya"

Thats a pretty cruddy line.....

Its the truth in so many cases tho

You call issue about scars appearing on his hands a huge plot hole?!

Yes, a huge stinking hole..because it goes against verything the film has done before and the whole idea of the butterfly effect itself. The mere suggestion that after he had gone back and scarred his hands at childhood he would end up in the same jail cell with the same person who suddenly sees these scars ? It's ludicrous.

Travels back and tells Kayleigh he hates her. Result ? They never know each other, nothing has ever happened and years later they walk by in the street and she doesn't even recognise him - That's fine

Travels back and scars his hands in childhood. Result ? Nothing but a surprised prison mate.

Then there is the suggestion that Eric Stolz's character suddenly becomes scared by a kid who's threatening him...

It's pathetic.

As i said, there are plenty of classic films out there with plot holes in but the stories are told by far better actors and directors than The Butterfly Effect can offer.


It wasn't even original enough and had come on the back of Donnie Darko - that film did it a whole lot better.

My first words to the gf after this movie ended were "Donnie Darko wannabe"

Speaking of which, can't wait for the directors cut of Darko.

You guys are pathetic not liking over a movie over something so small like that.

yeah

Something so small ?!

Imagine if Frodo had the ability to travel through time in FOTR. Gandalf tells him of the Evil that is brewing in Mordor and what Sauron plans to do. Frodo travels back in time to the point when the ring is cut from Saurons finger, he picks it up before Isildur has chance to and runs with it to Mount Doom and throws it into the fire. He then travels back to the ' present ' and Gandalf is still sat there in Bag End.
" Now isn't that better ? " he says " Cup of tea, Gandalf ? "

You guys are exactly like the man-spider nerds they find such a small flaw in a movie and deside to hate the whole series.

Comic book nerds that exploit flaws in genetics, tend to forget they are critiquing a comic book movie.

This, however, is pretty simple cause and effect that were dealing with. Their arguement is that if the movie was trying to be portrayed as a serious drama, which it was, it shouldn't have overlooked such a huge detail.

Don't forget, you're the one that doesn't like "Star Wars", because of it's dated special effects. Talk about small details.

Leave arguements in one thread in that thread ok

Gladly. Don't be a hypocrite.

Dont call me a hypocrite because you dont agree with me.

lol i dont think anything wants to be anything like donnie CRAPO, look at the money butterfly effect made compaired to donnie low budget. plus i personally dont like these kinda of movie but i loved this one and knew it did a lot better then donnie crapo. so dont even go there. and stormy im with you consatrating on small details can ruin good movies on you.

It can,so thats why I ignore the minor plotholes and dont let it affect my review

I'm calling you a hypocrite for this snide, ironic remark..



Like I said, that's like the pot calling the kettle black. You did the exact same thing Re: "Star Wars".

It isn't because I don't agree with you, it's because you're actually being a hypocrite. I'm just pointing that out for your own well being, not to make fun of you.

Thank you CA im so much better now that youve insulted me.

Insult, the truth, call it what you want to.

Watch how you label/treat others is all I am saying.

You think its truth I know its not so lets drop it

the movie was ok..i'm glad i didnt waste money at the theatre...the directors cut ending was better than the oringal ending..it made more sense and went along with the story better

I liked the original ending,didnt really see that coming.

So you "know" your not a hypocrite, even though I just called you out as one, with evidence? You're in denial, also? That's a double whammy.

Guess I'll drop it, now that there's nothing left to say.

Everyone is a hypocrite.

Not everyone some movies I like some movies I dont CA has a hard time understanding that tho

I take it all back - I tried this approach and it works. Damn I've never been so wrong.

As a test I decided to ignore stupid plots, wooden acting, shoddy direction and bad soundtrack and damn me if it doesn't make ALL films seem GREAT.

Stormy, you are some kind of genius.

Again somebody twist my words

What the hell does understanding your taste in movies have to do with the fact you tell people not to make a big deal of pathetic little details, and you do it yourself!?

Nothing!

That's my point, what's yours??

When do I do that?

k he hates star wars becuase the CG sucks well true it does but when a movie surrond its self around the CG its not a small detail. so really i dont think he's a hypocrite. but thats my view on so go ahead CD call me stupid becuase are views differ once again.

Jesus Christ, Stormy.

Remember the "Star Wars" thread, where you basically said that you didn't understand why people liked the movie, because it had bad special effects, although it was 1977?

Then, in this very thread, you had this to say:



Don't forget..



Is this registering with you now?



Well, Mr. Buttinski, we're referring to the Original Trilogy, namely, "Star Wars: A New Hope", which actually had minimal special effects. Where you got CGI from is beyond me.

Stormy has a hang up about "Star Wars", a movie made in 1977, because of it's seemingly cheesy, (while the other 99% of the world sees it is groundbreaking) special effects.

In the meantime, he's calling other people "pathetic" for disliking a movie for one small detail. A detail as small as the quality of the special effects in an old Sci Fi movie.

If that's not being a hypocrite, according to everyone on this board..then I'll eat shit.

Like Vengeance said the most of the stars wars Original Trilogy is focused on the cgi which I found cheesy.For its time no,but for now its just ridiculous that so many fans are still hanging on

Well, if Vengeance were actually right, and if I weren't a fellow Christian, I'd absolutely love to bash your skulls in with a 10 ton hammer, for all this mindless droning.

Did you even know that CGI and Special Effects are 2 different things?

Did you know that CGI did not even exist in 1975?

Did you know there were only 545 special effects shots in "Star Wars"

Finally.....

Would you like to know how many special effects shots were rendered for "Attack of the Clones", all by it's lonesome?

2,817 Yes, that is Two Thousand, Eight Hundred, and Seventeen.

That would beeeeeee..2,272 shots LESS than the original "Star Wars" movie that sooooo heavily relied on that non existant CGI!

Get your facts straight if your going to debate something, or don't ****ing say anything at all.

I'm sick of going back and forth with you.

lol you act so dumb sometimes.You try to make me look stupid all because I got mixed up.How do you have time to get all these facts dont you have a life ?

You're not mixed up, kiddo, you just don't know anything. There's a difference. In addition, I am not out to make you look dumb, you do that all by yourself by engaging in conversations either not knowing what you're talking about, contradicting yourself, or backing yourself into a corner with no way out.

I've got a life, and how I choose to spend my free time is my decision.
I'd suggest getting a life of your own, because it's become more and more obvious that you're trying to ride my coattails, if you wish to admit or deny such a claim is up to you.

Calm down folks, this thread is to discuss ther butterfly effect and that Ashton Kutcher loser.

P.S. It takes about 1 minute to type the words "Star Wars Special Effects Count" in a search engine.

BF, let me get one more response out of Stormy, and I'll be on my way.

It takes you that long ?

You must type slow. Took me about 8 seconds to type that.

I was just making a point, granted people are familiar with search engines, and know how to spell Star Wars.

Stormy, have anything to say in closing, or will silence be acceptance?

10 second for me

i know the guy who knows the therteen year old that played in the butterfly effect and hes sweet and a fun guy to hang out with

..and with that, we conclude the "Stormy vs Cine" segment of our program.

"..and with that, we conclude the "Stormy vs Cine" segment of our program."

The novel will hit stores in late november.

Possibly a bestseller

I'll either have Vengeance write the forward, or just copy our memoirs down for another book entirely.