West Coast Connection Forum

Lifestyle => Sports & Entertainment => Topic started by: Sikotic™ on July 09, 2004, 10:11:30 PM

Title: King Arthur
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 09, 2004, 10:11:30 PM
Wasn't a bad movie, but it wasn't anything special either. I definitely prefer it more than the sissy fairytale shit.
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Throwback on July 10, 2004, 02:23:56 AM
it was a bit promoted here as a sort of braveheart movie, is it anythin like that?
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Montana00 on July 10, 2004, 08:28:15 AM
im not going to go see it, it looks extremely lame.
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Eddie G. on July 10, 2004, 02:10:27 PM
Ehh it looks pretty boring, I might check it out if there's nothing else to do
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 10, 2004, 02:17:34 PM
it was a bit promoted here as a sort of braveheart movie, is it anythin like that?

Yeah, it was just a really shitty Braveheart. To be honest, I went to see it cuz of Keira Knightly lol. Don't do it though, because she's not even really in the movie that much. Fuckin false advertisement.
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Suga Foot on July 10, 2004, 07:06:54 PM
Jon Stewart says it's a "big sack of shit" lol
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: ...'BfCfC'... on July 11, 2004, 01:41:38 PM
i thought it was a good film  :-\
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on July 11, 2004, 06:03:30 PM
Amazing how it was butchered down to a PG-13...Just like the "Alien vs Predator" movie will be.
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: JLscorpio on July 11, 2004, 06:20:32 PM
they better not make Alien vs. Predator a PG-13 that would go against everything that those movies are based on. Oh the horror.
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on July 11, 2004, 06:27:49 PM
Guess what...They are.
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: js83 on July 11, 2004, 09:48:56 PM
Guess what...They are.

are u sure?? movie aint even rated yet...got any links?
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: smerlus on July 11, 2004, 10:00:43 PM
Guess what...They are.

are u sure?? movie aint even rated yet...got any links?

the PG-13 rating was just a quote from the exec producer in a UK magazine......the film hasn't been rated yet in america.....i think i read taht it's because the director wants an R and FOX wants PG-13 or some shit like that
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Tha Crip on July 11, 2004, 10:20:43 PM
if its rated PG13 im gonna go anyways
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on July 12, 2004, 12:26:22 AM
www.bloody-disgusting.com
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: smerlus on July 12, 2004, 01:23:17 AM
www.bloody-disgusting.com

it's not an official site....the official site doesn't even have a rating and i read on a website that the reason you don't see any advertisments is because they don't know if it's PG 13 or R yet
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Jome on July 12, 2004, 06:15:53 PM
Keira Knightly said that in the "real" story, the warriors fought naked, and if it was in the manus, she would have done it..  >:(
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: bez on July 12, 2004, 06:23:34 PM
Keira Knightly said that in the "real" story, the warriors fought naked, and if it was in the manus, she would have done it..  >:(
she's georgous ain't she!
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 12, 2004, 08:39:58 PM
Keira Knightly said that in the "real" story, the warriors fought naked, and if it was in the manus, she would have done it..  >:(

WTF!!! Then why didn't they make it a straight to video porno and have her fight naked with a bunch of other women?
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Don Seer on July 13, 2004, 01:38:29 AM

i umm went to glastonbury (skareboarding) on sunday afternoon? (its not far from here..).. lol

Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: 7even on July 13, 2004, 01:49:11 AM
Amazing how it was butchered down to a PG-13...Just like the "Alien vs Predator" movie will be.

 >:( >:(
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on July 13, 2004, 12:59:05 PM
www.bloody-disgusting.com

it's not an official site....the official site doesn't even have a rating and i read on a website that the reason you don't see any advertisements is because they don't know if it's PG 13 or R yet


I know it's not an official site, but it's very reliable.
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: GoodLuvn169 on July 15, 2004, 05:41:47 PM
I really don't have a desire to see that film
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: Eddie G. on July 15, 2004, 05:51:36 PM
they better not make Alien vs. Predator a PG-13 that would go against everything that those movies are based on. Oh the horror.
Fuck makin it PG-13.  I'm sick of these fuckin pussy studios not realeasing real R rated movies anymore.  10 years ago, all these action moves like "Chronicles of Riddick" and that shit would be hard R rated flicks.  These bitches won't put any money into something that is hardcore.  They should learn, remember that MGM fiasco when they released "Rollerball" with a PG-13 rating?  Some movies were meant to be rated R.
Title: Re: King Arthur
Post by: GoodLuvn169 on July 15, 2004, 05:53:53 PM
they better not make Alien vs. Predator a PG-13 that would go against everything that those movies are based on. Oh the horror.
Fuck makin it PG-13.  I'm sick of these fuckin pussy studios not realeasing real R rated movies anymore.  10 years ago, all these action moves like "Chronicles of Riddick" and that shit would be hard R rated flicks.  These bitches won't put any money into something that is hardcore.  They should learn, remember that MGM fiasco when they released "Rollerball" with a PG-13 rating?  Some movies were meant to be rated R.
I agree