See, to me, that's a good thing. It means, whether the movie is any good or not, that the sequel got made because people wanted to make it and not simply to fill out a budget sheet (I know they're trying to make money but we're talking 10 years between movies vs. franchises that get near annual installments).Burnouts3s3 said:Yeah, I got the same feeling. The original was so long ago, I stopped caring for a sequel.
I don't think there are enough "Yes!"'es in the world to voice an adequate agreement to that statement (in case my sentence structure was a bit too... er... broken - which it probably was, what I mean by that is that I agree more than should physically be possible).Hungry Donner said:Now we need a Boondock Saints 3 and a review done entirely in limerick.
See, I was thinking it was 16 suplexes in a row. I started thinking "cool at first, but that would get tedious as hell to watching after about the 8th one."The Great JT said:"Just okay" huh? Well, it's not my thing anyway, so I have no problem just skipping it.
As for the 16 german suplexes, which would've sucked more, 16 over the course of the match or the 10 in a row Chris Benoit hit on Stone Cold Steve Austin?
I personally enjoyed Rise a lot more than the first.Scarim Coral said:It's somewhat similar to 300: Rise of an Empire in that it's not as good as the first one and Lena Headey is still kickass in it?