Yeah I forgot about the third front - perhaps the most perceptive of the three groups, because you guys realized the truth from the beginning.

Garden State is the best example of that. People talk about that movie like Natalie Portman talks about the Shins. If you saw it before it became the shit then you probably liked it. If you saw it after, you probably hated it. I fall in the latter camp.

Yes to all of those

Based on what you're saying, your parents just had good taste and wanted to pass that on. Good for them.

Moving faster was the biggest flaw about that monster. I can't get into the reality of a giant monster that can zip around like that.

I actually love 3. I'm alone it seems, but I really think they get better with each installment (except for the fourth, which I really don't hate, I just don't love). I like the fact that there really is character development going on with every character, including the villains, and even the most dastardly of those…

Exactly. To put it this way, I have very few memories of X3, despite the fact that I saw it twice (once by myself and once with my Dad because he was mad that I saw it without him).

Yeah. It also seems like they based Davy's face a lot on NIghy's facial structure.

Yeah, Kong is really good too. I think that just about anytime Serkis is wearing the blue suit the results are fantastic. I know he has nothing to do with the CGI part, but it's a happy coincidence.

I will never argue this opinion with any one because for all I know I'm wrong, but I love all three of the Pirates movies (fuck Blackbeard), and I think each one is better than the one before it. But like my love of Snyder's Watchman, I realize that this opinion flies in the face of common sense.

Yeah it's totally true. Also, I don't think there is another example I can think of where the CGI in a movie looks as tangible as it does on Davy. Any time he grabs a character by the throat with his tentacles it is very convincing.

He wasn't in X-Men Origins: Wolverine (sorry, now I have to use the full name or it's just confusing). So he definitely wasn't in the worst X-Men movie. Plus, he was in that American Carol bit of nonsense.

Davy Jones is easily the pinnacle of CGI characters, with Gollum trailing a close second. Both of those examples show one important thing though - without an amazing actor CGI can't do shit.

If you're going to make this claim about Daniel Johnston then you might as well write off Syd Barrett as well. Or Skip Spence. Or Brian freakin Wilson. I'm not saying that Johnston is Brian Wilson. But I think maybe a lot of those "exploiters" over the years might have seen in him something like what Barrett had…

Fuck, nevermind, I can't read. Carl from Family Guy, not Carl from ATHF. Fail on my part.

He didn't do Carl's voice, but you have a point.

I'd say that he's basically right for those first five, except I'd switch reasonable doubt and Blueprint around. But I'd take even Kingdom Come over Magna Carta. MCHG is his weakest record in my opinion. Blueprint 3 is a very good record in my opinion and I like the entirety of the upbeat side of Blueprint 2.

I nearly stopped watching in Season 3, but only finished because of the inevitable confrontation with the Governer… which never happened. Also, there is never a time on TWD when killing "walkers" is ever difficult. They always get taken out with one shot, or one stab. The only difficulty they have is when there is…

I should have known when Dowd gave this a B- that something was wrong. But I wanted so bad to like it… I learned my lesson.

Yeah I went ahead and saw it. Did every reviewer forget completely what happened in the original? Because as you say, there is nothing faithful about Lee's (Protosevich's? The Studios?) ending.