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

i know that heath ledger was filming this when he had died(still crying) but johnny depp is rumoured to continue heaths role in this.

Apparently heath falls into something and comes out somewhere and johnny becomes his character. anyone think this will work? i know it makes no sense when im saying it, but i just summed it up...very quickly to what i had read.

That's a weird rumour, where has it come from?

I heard that Ledger was a main player in the financial side of the film, with his unfortunate death, that funding was pilled away. That's another would-be-masterpiece from Gilliam that's had its legs pulled from under it. Gilliam always likened Ledger to Depp as an actor however, so everything is possible.

I still hope Gilliam can get Good Omens on the way, cracking book.

This film has been put on hold. Nothing has been confirmed about what is going to happen to it.

Anyone remember on the Simpsons when Troy Mclure went of to make a movie backed by fox? Sounds like they're making it in real life.

Here's an update on it.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35505

if im not mistaken, Heath's character here will be replaced by Johnny Depp. They will create a scene where his character will enter a mirror that will serves as portal and when the time he will come out, there comes Johnny

It's rumored that it won't just be Johnny Depp, that 2 other actors besides Depp will also play Ledger's character. There's no way he can do the whole movie. He has way too much on his plate right now. The Rum Diary, Public Enemies, Shantaram, Sin City 2, and maybe even Sin City 3 will be coming out in 2009, which is when Dr. Parnassus comes out.

Johnny Depp rocked in 21 Jump Street yo! guitarcat

Johnny Depp if he does do this will make a good choice.

Originally posted by erikko
if im not mistaken, Heath's character here will be replaced by Johnny Depp. They will create a scene where his character will enter a mirror that will serves as portal and when the time he will come out, there comes Johnny

Well, Johnny Depp is good in this kind of film genre.

I bet this will be great since Johnny is the replacement of heath.

Entertainment Weekly said it was just a rumor. Johnny hasn't been asked to do the part and is busy right now anyway prepping for Public Enemies.

It's been confirmed. Heath Ledger's character will go through 3 changes during the movie, and with each change, the actors will change. The 3 actors taking on the role are Johnny Depp, Jude Law, and Colin Farrell.

Well, I am having high hopes that this movie still gets released. Gilliam is one of my favorite directors. Also, Tom Waits is in the movie as well. It sounded right up my alley.

It has Tom Waits. I'll see it.

I just hope they really push through with the project.

Really looking forward to this because of Heath Ledger, should be interesting.

From the film clips I've seen it does look wonderful, and I adore how they have worked around Heath Ledgers role.

You better hope Night Stick doesn't read this thread.

In his defense, what makes Ledger so ****ing great, really? Granted, he wasn't a terrible actor, but some great like a Tom Hanks, Jeff Bridges or Jack Nicholson? Nah, not even close.

Look at the collection of his work, where are his roles that standout and shine about the rest? Brokeback Mountain is the only truly great performance he had.

If he had lived, it's possible he would have grown into some superb actor, but his early death is no reason to worship the man.

Odd that people would be interested in this film because of Heath Ledger when Johnny Depp is an infinitely more talented actor.

Meh, I could care less if anyone doesn't think Ledger is great, because at the end of the day, to me, my opinion is the only one that matters to me.

Originally posted by Davis Bloome
Meh, I could care less if anyone doesn't think Ledger is great, because at the end of the day, to me, my opinion is the only one that matters to me.

So you never ask others for their opinion on any given subject?

Originally posted by Davis Bloome
Meh, I could care less if anyone doesn't think Ledger is great, because at the end of the day, to me, my opinion is the only one that matters to me.

And in turn we'll put that straight back to you and say that noone cares about your opinion...So there's no point in you posting anymore...bye.

I can't think of the third actor taking over Ledger's role in the other worlds, Farrell and Depp, can't think of the third.

Originally posted by MildPossession
I can't think of the third actor taking over Ledger's role in the other worlds, Farrell and Depp, can't think of the third.

Jude Law

Oh that's why I couldn't remember, find him quite dull.

Originally posted by Robtard
In his defense, what makes Ledger so ****ing great, really? Granted, he wasn't a terrible actor, but some great like a Tom Hanks, Jeff Bridges or Jack Nicholson? Nah, not even close.

Look at the collection of his work, where are his roles that standout and shine about the rest? Brokeback Mountain is the only truly great performance he had.

If he had lived, it's possible he would have grown into some superb actor, but his early death is no reason to worship the man.

First off, despite how overhyped it may or may not be, Ledger's Joker was truly great. That coupled with Brokeback Mountain hinted that the guy had a promising career ahead of him and I think you hit the nail on the head: people believe that he would've become one of the greats if he hadn't died.

Plus, it looks like he did a pretty good job in this Parnassus flick, based on the few clips out there.

He was also excellent in Lords of Dogtown, and Candy.

I haven't seen either of those, but there you have it, two more quality performances.

Quality doesn't translate into "great", as fact. There are many actors who have "quality" roles under their belt here and there, doesn't make them great actors.

Kurt Russel is a prime example, many a "quality" role; not many would label him a "great actor?"

So for Heath, we have BBM and arguably TDK(though his death helped the hype here greatly), so one, maybe two.

Naw, Heath was great in Lords Of Dogtown, he was the best thing about that movie. I suggest renting it just to see his character. He played Skip Engblom, a surf bum who ran the Zephyr Surf Shop who sponsored the skaters when they started out. He's classic. It's my favorite Heath roll. Also he was great in A Knight's Tale, very funny and charismatic. And in Monster's Ball, as Billy Bob Thorton's suicidal son, his role was short but very profound. I think Heath is great.

Heath Ledger was, in fact, a great, young actor who died prematurely.

Was he up to, say, the caliber of Marlon Brando, Orson Welles, or, even, Jack Nicholson? Hell no.

He didn't deserve the Oscar. 'Twas a mercy vote.

Originally posted by Impediment
Heath Ledger was, in fact, a great, young actor who died prematurely.

Was he up to, say, the caliber of Marlon Brando, Orson Welles, or, even, Jack Nicholson? Hell no.

He didn't deserve the Oscar. 'Twas a mercy vote.

Wait . . . . who are you?

Originally posted by Robtard
Quality doesn't translate into "great", as fact. There are many actors who have "quality" roles under their belt here and there, doesn't make them great actors.

Kurt Russel is a prime example, many a "quality" role; not many would label him a "great actor?"

So for Heath, we have BBM and arguably TDK(though his death helped the hype here greatly), so one, maybe two.
Well I said quality "performances," not roles. That may sound nitpicky, but there's a difference imo. And if quality performances don't make a great actor, then what the hell does?

Originally posted by =Tired Hiker=
Naw, Heath was great in Lords Of Dogtown, he was the best thing about that movie. I suggest renting it just to see his character. He played Skip Engblom, a surf bum who ran the Zephyr Surf Shop who sponsored the skaters when they started out. He's classic. It's my favorite Heath roll. Also he was great in A Knight's Tale, very funny and charismatic. And in Monster's Ball, as Billy Bob Thorton's suicidal son, his role was short but very profound. I think Heath is great.
I forgot about Monster's Ball; he was great in that, even if he only had a small role.

Also, it looks like I'll have to watch Lorgs of Dogtown now.

Originally posted by Impediment
Heath Ledger was, in fact, a great, young actor who died prematurely.

Was he up to, say, the caliber of Marlon Brando, Orson Welles, or, even, Jack Nicholson? Hell no.

He didn't deserve the Oscar. 'Twas a mercy vote.

I'm so sick of people saying that. Why didn't he deserve the Oscar? Who deserved it more than him? Robert Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder? No. Michael Shannon? Nope. Josh Brolin? Nope.

I haven't seen Doubt, but, despite Philip Seymour Hoffman being a fantastic actor (I like him better than Ledger), I can't imagine he did a better job with that role than Heath did in TDK.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it was a pity/mercy vote, that doesn't downgrade the quality of his performance. The performance is still there, it's still intact in the film so why does it hypothetically being a mercy vote mean that he didn't deserve it regardless?

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Well I said quality "performances," not roles. That may sound nitpicky, but there's a difference imo. And if quality performances don't make a great actor, then what the hell does?



Not to be picky, but there isn't a difference, a role is a performance and a performance is a role, as actors generally perform roles(characters).

To answer your question, great performances make great actors, preferably more than just one, else Cuba Gooding Jr. might be labeled a "great actor."

I've been quite vocal about Heath being a moron about getting killed and I've pratically debunked the blind "oh, he died because of timing" myth.




But, I must say that of ALL the movies I've seen, one of my favorite characters of ANY film was Heath's Joker. But I like him in that role for different reasons than most, I think: I lmao'd any time he was on screen. I was laughing just as hard as he was when Batman kept punching him. Oh man. just remembering it makes me laugh.

More on topic, the movie can't be that bad. Heath or no Heath.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes

I'm so sick of people saying that. Why didn't he deserve the Oscar? Who deserved it more than him? Robert Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder? No. Michael Shannon? Nope. Josh Brolin? Nope.

I haven't seen Doubt, but, despite Philip Seymour Hoffman being a fantastic actor (I like him better than Ledger), I can't imagine he did a better job with that role than Heath did in TDK.


Probably not as sick as the people who watched all those roles nominated and know it was indeed giving to him out of respect and because of the hysterical hype on the Joker portrayal because of the death.

Hoffman was better
Shannon was better (though Ledger is a better actor overall)
Downey Jr. was better

Originally posted by Robtard
Not to be picky, but there isn't a difference, a role is a performance and a performance is a role, as actors generally perform roles(characters).

To answer your question, great performances make great actors, preferably more than just one, else Cuba Gooding Jr. might be labeled a "great actor."

I guess we'll agree to disagree on the whole role vs. performance thing then. Because, an actor could be given a shitty role (or character) and make it memorable with a great performance. See?

But the point that people are trying to make is that Heath Ledger has demonstrated multiple great performances. There are probably some that you haven't seen.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I guess we'll agree to disagree on the whole role vs. performance thing then. Because, an actor could be given a shitty role (or character) and make it memorable with a great performance. See?

But the point that people are trying to make is that Heath Ledger has demonstrated multiple great performances. There are probably some that you haven't seen.

Well then the role would cease to be shitty.

I've seen many of his films, only one mentioned I'm ignorant to is LODT. I do like the guy.

Originally posted by jaden101
And in turn we'll put that straight back to you and say that noone cares about your opinion...So there's no point in you posting anymore...bye.

You're not a Moderator here, hence you cannot tell me to stop posting here.

Originally posted by Impediment
Heath Ledger was, in fact, a great, young actor who died prematurely.

Was he up to, say, the caliber of Marlon Brando, Orson Welles, or, even, Jack Nicholson? Hell no.

He didn't deserve the Oscar. 'Twas a mercy vote.

That's a load of bull, it was not a mercy vote, and people only say this because he died. Everyone forgets the movie had tremendous hype before Heath died, and people may have been predicting an Oscar beforehand. In any case, it wasn't a mercy vote, and to say otherwise is pretty foolish, I must add.

Originally posted by Davis Bloome
You're not a Moderator here, hence you cannot tell me to stop posting here.



You showed him.


Originally posted by Davis Bloome
That's a load of bull, it was not a mercy vote, and people only say this because he died. Everyone forgets the movie had tremendous hype before Heath died, and people may have been predicting an Oscar beforehand. In any case, it wasn't a mercy vote, and to say otherwise is pretty foolish, I must add.

I think Ledger had that oscar in the bag BEFORE he died. Dude, he did awesome at that role. It was superb.

Originally posted by Robtard
Probably not as sick as the people who watched all those roles nominated and know it was indeed giving to him out of respect and because of the hysterical hype on the Joker portrayal because of the death.

Hoffman was better
Shannon was better (though Ledger is a better actor overall)
Downey Jr. was better

Yes, there was tremendous hype for Heath's Joker, both before and after the death, but there are more rational fans out there than nutjobs that will tell you he had the best performance of the year, and I'd agree without a doubt. With the people he was running up against, besides Hoffman, what was so good about the other roles? I fail to see how Downey Jr. portraying an African American in a comedy better than Heath portraying a serious character like the Joker in TDK. I just don't see it.

Originally posted by dadudemon
You showed him.




I think Ledger had that oscar in the bag BEFORE he died. Dude, he did awesome at that role. It was superb.

Gotta love sarcasm but what'd be the point of arguing with him. I could've said something worse but I don't want this thread derailed over senseless arguing.

I think so too, and maybe the role was a little overhyped, but that doesn't change the fact that he gave a breathtaking performance. I'm of the firm belief that if he were still alive today he'd have won that Oscar.

Originally posted by Davis Bloome
Yes, there was tremendous hype for Heath's Joker, both before and after the death, but there are more rational fans out there than nutjobs that will tell you he had the best performance of the year, and I'd agree without a doubt. With the people he was running up against, besides Hoffman, what was so good about the other roles? I fail to see how Downey Jr. portraying an African American in a comedy better than Heath portraying a serious character like the Joker in TDK. I just don't see it.

Because Downey played the dude portraying the dude that was the other dude; it was flawless.

Did you really call the Joker a "serious character"? What does that exactly mean in regards to Downey's role?

Did you watch all the others?

Originally posted by Robtard
Because Downey played the dude portraying the dude that was the other dude; it was flawless.

Did you really call the Joker a "serious character"? What does that exactly mean in regards to Downey's role?

Did you watch all the others?

Compared to Downey's role, Ledger's Joker was definitely a lot more serious, and more work went into the role, no doubt.

I didn't get a chance to check out Hoffman, or the other guy, which is why my comment was mostly directed at Downey Jr. and not the others.

Originally posted by Davis Bloome
Compared to Downey's role, Ledger's Joker was definitely a lot more serious, and more work went into the role, no doubt.

I didn't get a chance to check out Hoffman, or the other guy, which is why my comment was mostly directed at Downey Jr. and not the others.

Fair enough on the "serious", but the "more work" is arguable. Really depends on the actors skill.

Then I'm not sure how you can say Ledger deserved the Oscar over the others with such certainty, seems biased.

Might as well claim chocolate s the best icecream, when you haven't tried any other flavours.

Originally posted by Robtard
Probably not as sick as the people who watched all those roles nominated and know it was indeed giving to him out of respect and because of the hysterical hype on the Joker portrayal because of the death.

Hoffman was better
Shannon was better (though Ledger is a better actor overall)
Downey Jr. was better

Like I said, I haven't seen Doubt yet so I won't speak about that.

But, I've seen Revolutionary Road and sir, you are incorrect. Obviously, judging acting is subjective, but I mean come on, Shannon had like 15 minutes of screentime and, while he did a good job, was not nearly as impressive as Ledger.

And I almost feel like I shouldn't even comment on your Downey Jr. statement. RDJ played a goofy black man and then a far too serious Australian actor; he did a good job, but it's not nearly as difficult to parody a black man, then parody an Australian guy. I could practice for a half hour or so and have an adequate stereotypical black man impression ready to go. Ledger was definitely in a different league than Downey Jr.

id disagree. i never really understood all the hubbub about heaths joker role. but he was a trillion times better then bale. bale sucks.

Robert Downey Jr. was excellent in Tropic Thunder, one of the best comedic performances in newer years. Just because it was a Ben Stiller movie, somehow makes the role he played less good. Well that's bovinae-manure. A great performance is still a great performance despite the movie being "less serious" than say TDK. No one is gonna argue if we bring up Jeff Bridges performance in The Great Lebowski. That's cus it was made by the Coen brothers and thus it must be great. But a movie made by the guy who came on his own ear somehow make Robert Downey Jr.'s acting abilities worse.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Like I said, I haven't seen Doubt yet so I won't speak about that.

But, I've seen Revolutionary Road and sir, you are incorrect. Obviously, judging acting is subjective, but I mean come on, Shannon had like 15 minutes of screentime and, while he did a good job, was not nearly as impressive as Ledger.

And I almost feel like I shouldn't even comment on your Downey Jr. statement. RDJ played a goofy black man and then a far too serious Australian actor; he did a good job, but it's not nearly as difficult to parody a black man, then parody an Australian guy. I could practice for a half hour or so and have an adequate stereotypical black man impression ready to go. Ledger was definitely in a different league than Downey Jr.

Shannon's 15 mins portrayed a far more convincing and disturbed insane person, in fact, you actually believe the guy was ****ing nuts in real life. Was a really good role, albeit short.

So you're judging down Downey's performance due the the notion of 'less difficult than'? I have to ask, what was oh so difficult with playing the Joker? What barriers did Ledger break in that role that other's couldn't?

I've heard that before "different league", it's almost like the alternative cop-out reason why people say they're so impressed with Ledger's Joker, the first being the cliche "it's so dark", which is laughable.

Heath ledger was an average actor. He is being praised now because he played one good role then died. Same thing that happened to Brandon Lee.

Come on now, he was more than just average. His Ennis in Brokeback was superb. Joker was good/great. 10 TIHAU, Brothers Grim, Ned Kelly, Patriot were all downright decent too.

Brandon Lee was nothing more than a semi-good action star, comparing the two is faulty.

I'm excited for this movie because the premise sounds great and the few sneak peaks that I've seen of it, they've all been fantastic.

Originally posted by WO Polaski
. bale sucks.

And thats based only on TDK ???

yeah you might want to check out some other movies he's been in.

Heath Ledger an average actor? I think you need to watch more films with him in RogueJedi... he is far from average. As someone pointed out, he was already praised for his role of Joker before he died, and if he had not died, he still would have been praised and I believe he still would have got the Oscar actually.



If you like him in crazy mode, I recommend the film Bug.

Originally posted by MildPossession

If you like him in crazy mode, I recommend the film Bug.

Didn't care for that movie much. Except for Ashley Judd, who is quite possibly the most beautiful woman in the world.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Heath ledger was an average actor. He is being praised now because he played one good role then died. Same thing that happened to Brandon Lee.

Heath Ledger didn't portray one good role and die, he portrayed many good roles, and then a great one, and then died. The difference between Ledger & Lee is that Ledger is far more talented, and actually did pull off an Oscar worthy performance. While I loved the movie, Lee's performance was nothing all that special.

I have not seen the other Oscar nominees performances aside of Ledger and Downy Jr., but between those two, I believe Ledger was much better. The character of The Joker in the Batman movie was extremely well crafted. Here's a guy who is not only evil and twisted, but sad. I actually felt sorry for him whilst realizing he had two or three different stories about how he got his scars, which proved he was a compulsive liar. A character like that, a character we know nothing about, a character we should hate became someone very memorable and likable. That is something. Heath pulled it off. Heath was fascinating. A coworker of mine was saying, "Anyone can wear clown make up and act like a psycho." Well, it may sound easy, and it obviously is because all the fan boys mimic it so well, but we can't forget that that came from Heath. He created that which they impersonate so well. Downy Jr. was funny in Tropic Thunder, but not very memorable in my opinion, not nearly as memorable as Ledger's Joker. I was actually disappointed with Tropic Thunder. I thought Steve Coogan was funnier than the rest of the cast, and he blew up five minutes after the film started.

Originally posted by =Tired Hiker=
I have not seen the other Oscar nominees performances aside of Ledger and Downy Jr., but between those two, I believe Ledger was much better. The character of The Joker in the Batman movie was extremely well crafted. Here's a guy who is not only evil and twisted, but sad. I actually felt sorry for him whilst realizing he had two or three different stories about how he got his scars, which proved he was a compulsive liar. A character like that, a character we know nothing about, a character we should hate became someone very memorable and likable. That is something. Heath pulled it off. Heath was fascinating. A coworker of mine was saying, "Anyone can wear clown make up and act like a psycho." Well, it may sound easy, and it obviously is because all the fan boys mimic it so well, but we can't forget that that came from Heath. He created that which they impersonate so well. Downy Jr. was funny in Tropic Thunder, but not very memorable in my opinion, not nearly as memorable as Ledger's Joker. I was actually disappointed with Tropic Thunder. I thought Steve Coogan was funnier than the rest of the cast, and he blew up five minutes after the film started.

I agree; I was starting to feel like I was the only one defending Ledger here.

I don't get the appeal. As for the film, did you like him in it though?

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I agree; I was starting to feel like I was the only one defending Ledger here.

I was defending Ledger as well, and will always continue to do so.

Originally posted by Davis Bloome
I was defending Ledger as well, and will always continue to do so.

Okay, so you, me, and SnakeEyes are the official Ledger Defenders.

I like Heath Ledger!

Originally posted by =Tired Hiker=
Okay, so you, me, and SnakeEyes are the official Ledger Defenders.

I like the sound of that.

Originally posted by MildPossession
I like Heath Ledger!

No girls allowed.

I'll likely be checking out "I'm Not There" on Wednesday. I plan on picking up the DVD, I can't wait to see the movie.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
No girls allowed.

Unless they put out.

Naturally.

Lmao

First trailer: http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/08/07/the-imaginarium-of-dr-parnassus-uk-trailer/

I'm still not liking Jude Law in this, but apart from him, looks excellent.

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus - Trailer Check it out it's so cool. This was the last flim that Heath Ledger made before he died. It breaks my heart but I know he's with God now.

I posted a link to the trailer in the existing Parnassus thread.

OFxqw0jbC2Y

This............looks somewhat interesting. The only reason I say this is because I very much enjoy the directing style of Terry Gilliam.

This movie looks crazy, I so wanna see it.

it seems as if heath had a great love for italian stories - the white mask with the long, hooked nose that all the characters wear is meant for carnavale, and it's even part of a group of masks that all have names and purposes. the one ledger wears in this movie is called "the plague doctor," because doctors who tended the ill during the plague believed the masks were resistant to the disease. at carnavale, the mask is usually worn with a black robe and a black hat, white gloves, and a wooden stick.

anyway...
this movie looks absolutely delightfully terrific. when they switched over to tony no. two in the trailer, it took me a moment to realize that they had, indeed, switched actors. tony #3 is jude law, and all i saw him doing was falling down a breaking ladder... and of course colin farrell as tony #4, rowing down a canal, was really strange at first. but i'm looking forward to seeing all interpretations of the role, especially heath ledger's. what we've been left with of him was an intensely dark, scary, sadistic character that still gives me the creeps. but now he has a chance to show something completely different even posthumously, and i'm so excited to see it.

I saw this last night and I'm sorry to say I was very disappointed. I love Gilliam's style, but this one didn't captivate me as did Time Bandits, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, The Fisher King, and Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas. It was quite a depressing film in a way. I can only compare this movie experience to what it feels like when you are in a dingey movie theater alone watching something that never really gets going, and makes you feel like you want to take a shower afterwards. And the sad fact is that I saw it in a brand new state of the art theater with stadium seating.

Ledger was good, but nothing worthy of any wow factor. I thought the effects were rather lame as well. The effects tools that were used seemed to be the same ones you would find in cheap editing software.

I'm sorry I can only bag on this movie, I wish it would have as good as I'd hoped.

This saddens me. I still haven't gotten the chance to go see it. Would you recommend I wait for the dvd then?

Yeah, definitely wait. To be honest, it wouldn't hurt to skip it altogether, unless you are like me and just have to see it because it is a Terry Gilliam flick.

I went into this movie not knowing what to expect. I enjoyed it quite thoroughly. I was very impressed with how they handled the missing scenes with Heath Ledger. I thought it was a very beautiful movie to watch. All in all it was a fun ride but i did have two slight problems with the movie. Early in the movie the focus seems to shift and concentrate on Heath Ledgers character. The movie seems to hint that he is an integral piece of the story. However, towards the end of the movie we find out his true motives and the movie then changes perspective back onto the daughter and father, leaving Heath Ledgers character feeling insignificant. This isn't so much of a problem as much as it is annoying.

My other gripe is with the father. For a monk who has been alive for hundreds of years he is quite stupid and gullible. After having been tricked by the devil several times why would he insist on trusting the Devil? Much of this can be answered using your imagination but i would have preferred that story took the time to focus more on the relationship between Parnassus and the Devil.

Still, it's a very imaginative movie with a slew of great performances and a beautiful set design. I'm surprised i didn't hear more about this movie late last year.

I have to see this on dvd since it got my nearest movie theater failed to get it.

I seen this Last night,please dont ask me to explain what it's about,but visually it was a great ride and kept me fairly entertained,Which is surprising as I could only half figure out what this movie was about half of the time,but It had some good scenes and was a delight to look out,so I give it a 7/10

yeah, the story did kind of lose focus towards the end lol

yeah I thought so as well.Just saw this movie not too long ago.it was okay,nothing terrible,nothing great either.

what kinf of movie is this? please let me know... is it worth watching????

Originally posted by residentevil3D
what kinf of movie is this? please let me know... is it worth watching????

Read the thread