web
counter

the walking dead / snl / mindhole blowers / netflix / celebrity facts / marvel / liveblogging the 90s


10 Movies that Should've Made an Assload More At the Box Office Than They Did in 2012

By Dustin Rowles | Box Office Round-Ups | December 10, 2012 | Comments ()


tumblr_mc7jn8GP2V1qfc08wo1_500.gif

Looper ($65 million) -- Maybe we should be content with $65 million on a $30 million budget for a movie this smart, not to mention the fact that it literally made nearly 20 times more than Rian Johnson's last movie, The Brothers Bloom. But then again, it was Bruce Willis, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and Emily Blunt, plus one of the most purely entertaining smart films of the year. It's the kind of film that deserved to make at least $100 million.

tumblr_mcix2hJf3V1rs25p4o1_500.gif


End of Watch ($40 million) -- It was perhaps the found-footage angle that turned some away from David Ayer's exceptional engrossing, harrowing cop film, but it's not exactly the movie that was advertised. End of Watch was the hardcore version of Southland for the big screen: Heart-pounding, morally complex cinema. Look: Dan Carlson loved it (he called it "a strong, gripping police drama," and "an inversion of typical cop thrillers") and it takes a lot to impress Dan, so you know it's a better movie than you might have expected.

Cabin in the Woods ($42 million) -- Given how long it sat on the self, and considering it's technically a horror movie, maybe we should be happy with the $42 million this film made, too. But I'm not: Cabin in the Woods was the most original horror movie in years, it was wicked smart, and terribly fun. If two warmed over found-footage flicks, The Devil Inside and Paranormal Activity 4 can gross over $50 million, Cabin in the Woods -- which starred The Avengers' Chris Hemsworth, for God's sake! -- deserved at least as much as those films.

tumblr_mcu8i2clH81rgafc4o1_500.gif

Lawless ($37 million) -- I don't know if it was the dark subject material, the period setting, or the fact that director John Hillcoat is not exactly a household name, but with a cast that included Tom Hardy, Jason Clarke, Shia Labeouf, Jessica Chastain, and Guy Pearce, plus exceptional writing and strong performances, Lawless was the movie that Public Enemies ($97 million) wanted to be, and it deserved the box-office it earned.

Cloud Atlas ($26 million) -- I understand, now, the smattering of folks who stood behind the Wachowksi's earlier box-office failure, Speed Racer, and defended it to all the naysayers. Yes, there was a strong mixed reaction to Cloud Atlas, but it mostly came from critics because audiences didn't bother to show up for one of the most heartfelt, complex, and ambitious sci-fi films in a long time. It didn't suit everyone (Dan disliked it, while both Joanna and I adored it, with Joanna calling it a beautiful disaster), but more people should've at least seen it so they could make up their own minds about it, rather than let the meager box-office totals speak for it. The movie stuck with me for weeks, and I honestly can't wait to see it again once its available for home viewing.

tumblr_mdckexrXVv1rqf3yzo1_500.jpg

Haywire ($18 million) -- An action film starring Charming Potato, Ewan McGregor, and Michael Fassbender, plus the amazing Gina Carano's feature film debut? Sure, the bummer of an ending sank the Cinemascores (I think it fetched a "D"), but Haywire was so much better than the better performing female-leading action flicks, Resident Evil 87 and Underworld: XXXII and it deserves at least the same, or more, box-office recognition.

Seven Psychopaths ($14 million) -- Ahead of its release, people were raving about the cast -- Sam Rockwell, Colin Farrel, Woody Harrelson, Tom Waits, and Christopher Walken -- so it makes no sense to me why the cool kids didn't show up in droves for Martin McDonough's follow-up to In Bruges. The latter found a cult following on DVD, so I figured that the same people who considered In Bruges one of the best movies of the Aughts would come out in support. Apparently not. I think it may ultimately find that cult audience again once it's released for home viewing.

tumblr_mbyns0p4XV1r6r4pyo1_500.gif

Dredd ($13 million) -- A remake of a 80's Stallone flick, Dredd 3D was everything that the original was not, namely in that it was good. It was cool, ultra-violent, dark, and geeky. Far better, more violent, and smarter than the original, audiences still thumbed their noses at it, while another action movie remake, Contraband with Mark Wahlberg, was as generic as they come, yet still mustered $66 million at the box office.

Killing Them Softly ($11 million) -- The Brad Pitt starrer with James Gandolfini and Richard Jenkins likely will barely break even on its $15 million production budget, but like Andrew Dominick's last film, The Assassination of Jesse James, this one deserved far better than its box office fate. Like many other films on this list, the box-office failure of Killing Them Softly simply proves that audiences don't want anything that doesn't leave them with warm, fuzzy satisfying feelings, even if they get to look at Brad Pitt for 90 minutes.

Goon ($4 million) -- The thing about Goon is that EVERYONE that's seen it has loved it, from hockey fans to movie critics to female audiences that typically eschew hockey or violence. It's a huge crowd pleaser, bloody as hell, and has a ton of heart, and should've been the sports movie of the year. Meanwhile, $42 million worth of moviegoers turned out for Kevin James' Here Comes the Boom. Boo!

tumblr_mcq0tsZflh1qelb7ro1_500.gif







Are you following Pajiba on Facebook or Twitter? Every time you do, Bill Murray crashes a wedding.


Comments Are Welcome, Bigots and Trolls Are Not


  • Idle Primate

    Some of these didn't hit theatres here and others vanished faster than I could see them. There are so many huge budget movies now that it often causes poor performers to get jettisoned quickly. Also with a massive depression going on maybe a lot of people look for light fare.

    As far as cloud atlAs goes, the trailer looked like impenetrable pretentious garbage.

    Cabin in the woods made exactly how much successful horror movies make despite Joe public being annoyed because they didn't understand the satire. That's not bad at all.

    Looper is surprising though.

  • Ben

    Killing them softly and cloud atlas both haven't been released in Australia yet, Cabin in the Woods and Goon never made it to the cinemas, Haywire was delayed like 6 months for an Australian release (And during those 6 months everything said it was cancelled) Dredd was delayed like 2 months, I think Looper was too?

    Man this list makes me depressed to be a movie fan in Australia.

  • Slash

    And while I'm at it, you know who kinda makes "Looper" worth seeing, more so than the rest of the cast? Emily Blunt. She's pretty awesome. She does not have an English accent, but she's still compelling to watch (not to imply the accent is the only reason to like her, just saying, it's delicious). But in this movie, she's very kick-ass, very interesting to watch.

  • Slash

    I've seen Looper, Haywire and Cabin in the Woods and plan to see End of Watch, Seven Psychopaths and Killing Them Softly sometime.

    No intention of seeing Cloud Atlas. It just looks dumb. And unnecessarily convoluted (yeah, I know it's based on an equally convoluted book, I don't care).

    I am not aware that Goon has played anywhere in the Dallas area. If it does, I'll make an effort to see it.

  • Mel C.

    I just need to say that Haywire is a top contender for worst movie of all-time. That is all.

  • mairimba

    Haywire had a great cast. And that's about all it had. Replace Gina Carano with Steven Seagal and you would've had the same movie. Just an excuse for the main character to beat the shit out of people. Only pretty people in this case.

  • Tracey

    I think it boils down to the economy sucks and people aren't paying for movies anymore. I LOVE to go to the movies, but I haven't been to a single one this year. I also cancelled my cable and just watch hulu and netflix now, and I love my cable almost as much as my child. People are trying to save money any way they can, and extras like movies are the first thing to go.

  • Grahamnation

    In Chicago, Cloud Atlas was around for maybe 2 weeks. After that, crap like Taken 2: Retaken and Sky Fall hogged every theater.

  • Tinkerville

    Here's the thing.. I'm broke as hell and live in Los Angeles, which means that it costs about $12-14 just for the ticket price, and that doesn't include the additional cost of parking (because this city offering free parking would be a sign of the end of days). I can't afford to see every good sounding movie that comes out, as much as I'd like to, so saying that I should've seen Cloud Atlas in the hopes that I might like it doesn't really work for me. What I'm saying is, it's not always the audiences fault for not getting out and supporting the good ones.

  • beletseri

    where do you live in LA? I live in the South Bay and make the trek up to the Palos Verdes Promenade on Tuesdays because the regal there has $5 movies. Even first run stuff. I saw Wreck it Ralph, Lawless, Brave for $5 and it was glorious.

  • Steve Baker

    I cant believe Goon only did $4million, it was not Slapshot, but compare it to any Adam Sandler movie, it was better.

  • Belkwintih

    GOON is the basterd child that limped from my broke-down uterus that I never even had the opportunity to have. If I could have given birf to anything in my messed up life, it would have been a movie like this. How I love everything in that movie. And I hate violence. Good Lord, I am messed up.

  • Blake

    Great list but you missed:

    The Raid: Redemption, Pitch Perfect and Safety Not Guaranteed...

    Both R:R and S.N.G only made around $4 Million (BoxOfficeMojo) in their limited releases.

    Pitch Perfect has made $72 Million (BoxOfficeMojo) on a $17 Million budget so it has done very well.

  • Slim

    What Blake says here about Pitch Perfect is part of the point. You can take a young person of some age to that movie - half the audience was probably Glee-lovin' 14 yr olds. None of the above-mentioned movies, laden with violence, are appropriate for young'ins.

    I love Brick and Brothers Bloom... love/love them. But couldn't recommend Looper because I found the plotline that no one talks about for sake of spoiling too disturbing. I nearly walked out.

  • logan

    I never saw any of these movies but none of them had RDJ in them so can you really blame me?

  • John G.

    "both Joanna and I adored it"

    saying that Joanna adored something is like saying "my dog loved it. He totally ate it off the floor". It's the same with prime steak or vomit or shit.

  • AudioSuede

    What sucked about Seven Psychopaths was that it opened the same weekend as Argo, so the cool kids who can afford a movie maybe once a week at most were stuck with a conundrum, and almost all of them chose (as did I) the Oscar bait. Because of this, Seven Psychopaths had a terrible opening weekend, and combined with word-of-mouth that was basically people explaining over and over, "It's not what you think it is! It's so different from the trailers!" (which is true, and good, but in actuality is a pretty terrible way to get people to the theaters), people just assumed it was a flop and left it to die.

    I went to see it the next weekend and adored it, and told all my friends to see it, but it's just like it was with Scott Pilgrim: No one will listen until its on DVD, and then they'll be just as outraged as the rest of us by its box office showing.

  • Schadenfraulein

    I'm sure Cloud Atlas is a great movie, but the use of yellow face in 2012 just turned me away for good. Just hire an Asian actor, how hard is that?

    That said, I really want to see Goon just based on that gif. As a child of a Slavic immigrant, that insult had me rolling! Plus, I love hockey and I'm surprised I missed it when it came out. It went totally under the radar.

  • mattcarlucci

    I agree with everything on this list. (Note: Judge Dredd was not an 80s Stallone Flick. It came out in 1995)

  • Idle Primate

    It also might be better put that dredd3d was a new adaptation of the comic rather than a remake of the Stallone film

  • I think word of mouth killed Seven Psychopaths. Once people found it it wasn't the film being advertised at all, they lost their enthusiasm for it. Mind you, the film being advertised is terrible compared to what actually happened on screen, but you try selling a meta-mob thriller where half the film has no actual action in it.

    End of the Watch is actually getting pushed back out again because of awards consideration. I know it's slipped into a few critics top 10s already and got in on, what, National Board of Review? It went from one screening a day at my local multiplex to 8, and this theater is 10 minutes from NYC. It's right by the suburb that a bunch of NYC celebrities live in so this kind of expansion is never a coincidence. This one will find an audience.

  • Perfect Fish

    "Dredd" is "A remake of a 80’s Stallone flick?" I can think of at least three things wrong with that assessment. I suppose BATMAN BEGINS is "a remake of a 70's Keaton flick."

  • TK

    Baiting achievement: UNLOCKED.

    Well played, Rowles.

  • Perfect Fish

    Eh, not baiting, just pointing it out -- I agree with the assessments of the movies, at least towards the ones I've seen. (I would have also liked to have seen The Raid: Redemption make it past the cult movie ghetto, but I guess foreign films are non-starters, the same way Attack The Block didn't make a dime last year.)

  • TK

    I actually meant that Dustin was deliberately baiting by calling Dredd a "remake." He knows full well that it isn't, the dink. I think he does it to annoy me more than anything else.

  • Perfect Fish

    Hah, I figured, though the "80's" thing also threw me off.

  • I feel like I let down some movie people, because these are all movies I wanted to see and didn't.

  • Looper, Cabin in the Woods, TDKR... There were so many huge disappointments this year, it's confusing. How come everyone loves Looper? It fast-forwards on the interesting parts and spends an whole hour on a corn field. Oh man...

    CITW was a great idea on paper but didn't work out at all. Did you see Tucker and Dale vs Evil? That was a good satire.

    And while we're at tit, TDKR? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

  • brian

    At least half the points Honest Trailer brings up can be answered

  • Pawesl

    I absolutely think Tucker and dale was better than CITW. I didn't find cabin smart at all. Felt like it was trying way too hard.

  • I wish there were more Honest Trailers out there.

  • La Schmoove

    Children of Men. That movie deserved waaaaaaaay more love than it got

  • cicatricella

    didn't that come out like, 6 years ago?

  • Some of us never got a chance to let these movies take our money. I had to watch Goon on Netflix and Seven Psychopaths will be exactly the same. That movie never came within an hour of where I live. Literally. I checked. Every damn weekend.

    Man. I gotta move.

  • beletseri

    I lucked out and managed to catch it at the Nuart in Santa Monica for the one weekend it was there, and got my hockey obsessed roommate to go.

  • Devil Child

    I saw a few of these. Killing Them Softly and Lawless were the tits. Seven Psychopaths offered a lot of commentary on how cliché it's points were, but still used the clichés in spades, and, worst of all, didn't actually subvert the significant problems the structure it used presented at all. In fact, Seven Psychopaths pointing out how often it fucked up made me enjoy the film less than if it was a straight piece.

    Looper's time travel rules were completely ridiculous and inconsistent even by the standard of time travel movies. The fantastic performances, great characters, and badass action weren't enough to distract me from the fact that:

    a) The entire plot of the movie could've been rendered moot by strangling people to death in the future, and tossing them and their rope into the Atlantic Ocean 30 years in the past.

    b) No consistent rules were brought in for the time traveling. I know it's impossible for anyone except Michio Kaku to tell a time travel story completely devoid of a plot hole, but no consistent rules were given for:

    1) How far they could or couldn't head back in time.

    2) What allowed the universe to change or loop depending on the actions of the people involved.

    Despite Looper being very well made, MIB III actually made more sense with it's rules:

    MIB III SPOILERThe film takes place across the span of three universes.

    When Will Smith jumps off the Apollo 11 rocket and heads back in time a few seconds, he takes Elder Boris with him, and both fall to their deaths in one universe. Younger Boris lives and loses his arm. Kid Will Smith and his dad both live, and K erases both their memories, letting Younger Boris live because he didn't kill Will Smith or his father. K doesn't take long to regret this decision, and Will's father, being in the US military during the 60's, is likely killed in Vietnam.

    The second universe is the one which exists in the temporal plane where Will Smith has no reason to head back, because as long as K's in the universe, he can't remember why he needs to head back. K dying leaves no one to erase his memory, but the existence of this universe is critical for Will Smith to have a reason to head back in time. Will Smith's dad also dies while Will's young in this universe, likely in Vietnam again.

    The third universe is created after Will Smith time travels off the rocket. He still died in the universe he fell off the rocket, but his new knowledge allows him to keep his life, and kill Elder Boris. Younger Boris then kills Will Smith's dad, which he didn't do in the first universe, thus giving K a reason to kill Boris and erase young Will's mind, likely using Vietnam as a cover, and tying up all the universes ends.END SPOILER

    Sadly, Looper was significantly less tight. Thus, I can't call it truly great like it could've been. I might even have to put it below MIB 3.

  • Slash

    To you and everyone else here RE time travel: let go and just go with it, don't think too hard about it.

    Because time travel isn't possible. It makes no fucking sense at all. So don't try to make it make sense. You'll enjoy time travel movies a lot more if you don't insist that they follow logic. The concept of time travel is just a device to express people's desire to change the past.

  • Devil Child

    Einstein made it quite clear time travel is possible. Obviously any way to do it based on what we have the vaguest notion of requires obscene amounts of energy, and I'm not asking for that.

    What I'm asking for is that the characters use time travel in a logical way, and that their behavior is consistent with whatever rules of time travel they're playing under. For all its positives, Looper didn't have that.

  • Mr_Grumpypants

    Well said about 7 Psychopaths, that movie disappointed me incredibly.

  • AudioSuede

    What I preferred about Looper's time travel rules (and really, I've yet to hear a convincing argument against the film as a film rather than as a scientific study on the possibilities of time travel) was that they gave us enough information to accept it (I mean, the diner scene pretty much sums up the whole thing, and I have no idea what you're talking about in terms of consistency because they never stray from what Bruce Willis explains about time traveling) and didn't make that the focus of the movie. I'm not watching Looper to answer all my questions about time travel, I'm watching Looper to see an entertaining film with a strong emotional core, wonderful performances, moral dilemmas, and harrowing action sequences. And it delivered on all of those fronts.

    If you want to learn more about a fictional plot device that is probably completely impossible, I'm sure there are books that answer all your questions. Me, I'll just take as much information as it takes for the story to make sense and call that good enough.

  • Devil Child

    I mean, the diner scene pretty much sums up the whole thing, and I have
    no idea what you're talking about in terms of consistency because they
    never stray from what Bruce Willis explains about time traveling

    Seeing as how Bruce Willis's explanation was a lack of explanation, I think you just proved my point.

    Like I said, my problem isn't that it's entirely lacking in possibility. If I were going on that basis, I'd argue the inherently lack of logic in a world where no one notices the people using illegal time travel given the huge amount of energy it'd take to surpass the speed of light. I'm not to concerned with that. My problem is the inherent logic of the characters actions.

    Remember that scene in Attack of the Clones where Bobba Fett's dad hires an assassin to whack Natalie Portman even though he himself is an assassin? For me, too many parts of Looper felt like a better acted, sexier, prettier version of that. Even if I could ignore why they didn't just strangle people in the future, I couldn't see a coherent logic to the time travel itself like I could with MIB 3.

    There are three different types of universes I can see the film operating under, Terminator-style time travel, Dragon Ball Z style time travel, or some sort of hybrid:

    With Terminator style, the action you head back in time to prevent causes the action to happen in the first place, but this can't be happening in Looper because Joseph Gordon-Willis acts differently in every universe the film shows us.

    With Dragon Ball Z style time travel, you essentially create a new universe every time you head into the past, but your actions don't actually change the universe you're from, but this can't be happening in Looper because of the cut messages.

    If it's some sort of hybrid, which I'm sure the creators intended, I never made sense of it at all. I'm upset by that not because Looper is bad, but because it's good, and it could've been great with a bit more logic as seen in MIB 3, which Looper by all rights should've been better than.

  • AudioSuede

    But he DOES give an explanation, which is that it's about the probability of the future, meaning if something changes when they go back in time, it doesn't necessarily make the future change and it doesn't create an alternate reality, but it increases or decreases the probability of the future as the time traveler knows it. So if Bruce Willis has to change something in the past, he has to be careful to remember how things were in his time so he doesn't make it impossible for his version of the future to exist. And that comes up again and again as they show his memories shifting so that he has stronger visions of a new, more probable future than of the one he actually experienced.

    Therefore, it's not a Terminator or Dragonball Z time travel reality per se (though, really weird that those are the two most airtight, logical examples of time-travel according to your standards), but something of a new idea that's similar to both.

    Willis explains that much at least and then lets most of the rest of it go, because the rest of that doesn't really matter to the story.

  • Devil Child

    Terminator and DBZ both have deep logical flaws, namely that it's impossible for the futures their universes use time travel in to have enough energy to actually use it given the apocalypses they both went through. I merely picked both to use as examples because they're easy to specify, their artistic merit is secondary.

    The narrative logic holds up well in both Terminator, assuming you ignore all the sequels, and DBZ. In Terminator, the very fact that Arnold Schwarzenegger heads back in time to kill John Connor leads to John Connor's existence being possible, thus no holes. In DBZ, Trunks heading back in time merely makes it possible for their to be a universe where the bad guy didn't win, but his own home nonetheless remains a shithole where almost everyone he loves is dead so that he could exist in the first place, thus no holes.

    Obviously, Looper has better acting, better characters, is sexier, and cooler than either of the three examples I mentioned. That was never Looper's problem. It's the basic holes in the narrative structure that give Looper it's problems. Even in a universe which exists under the rules Looper creates is possible, the way the characters act doesn't have the logical narrative consistency it needs for the story to go from being good to great.

    How time travel is possible isn't important, as you said, but the way it's used is. I can overlook any lack of scientific possibility in a plot, seeing as how everything James Cameron and Akira Toriyama ever made is scientifically impossible. I can't overlook the lack of basic narrative possibility, which the better made but still structurally broken Looper possesses.

  • AudioSuede

    Well, that's just going to have to be a disagreement we're never going to resolve, because I have no idea what you mean by a lack of narrative consistency in that film. I found it to be consistently resonant and found the characters and their actions to make sense in the context of the film, and could thus not find an element of the narrative that is at all inconsistent.

  • Buck Forty

    I have come back from the future to tell you all that you are both completely, laughably, wrong. Time travel is quite simple, once you grasp the basics, but you won't learn this until 2075.

  • Brooke Michelle

    "I saw a few of these. Killing Them Softly and Lawless were the tits. "

    Is being "the tits" a good thing? Or a bad thing?

  • Good

  • Fiendish Dr. Wu

    Tits are always good.

  • Thank you. My thoughts exactly. Well, almost, anyway.

  • Jim

    I contend the majority of people who loved Cloud Atlas (me included) read the book first so the movie was like a slightly jumbled memory. There was so much happening and so many characters to track, I'm not surprised people (my spouse included) found it a difficult watch.

    We were lucky to catch it on an IMAX screen on the way through Toronto. Breathtaking.

  • Miss Laaw-yuhr

    Completely agreed. I loved the book and therefore loved the movie. And the music. And the shiny.

  • That .gif illustrates why I fucking loved Goon. Yeah, the sweetness and all that was great, but underneath it all it was just gloriously and profanely hilarious.

  • Even Stevens

    I saw Looper, Lawless, Haywire, and Cabin in the Woods and I completely agree with you - they were all really solid movies.

  • sean

    I saw everyone one of those movies in a theater, except GOON. Which never opened here. I did download last year, and love the hell out of it.

  • $27019454

    I live in a biggish city on the left coast and Cloud Atlas and 7 Psychos barely stayed around long enough for me to crawl out of my dope smoke haze to look up the fucking showtimes.

  • Lee

    I am in a small city in Australia, and I doubt they will show up at our cinema at all :(

  • PDamian

    I wanted to see Cloud Atlas in the theatre, truly I did. But I can't sit for three hours without either cramping or needing a bathroom something fierce. I'll see it on DVD or VOD, whichever becomes available first, so I can pause when need arises. And yes, I'm getting old. Shut up.

  • sean

    I actually got lucky during Cloud Atlas. The projector broke, and it took 20 minutes to fix. Got to get up and go to the bathroom. Get a refill on popcorn and pop, and go back in. And got a free pass for the next time, which was SKYFALL

  • PDamian

    Rub it in, why don'cha ...

  • Devin McMusters

    That's what FDR said.....apparently!

  • lowercase_ryan

    GOON!!!! I loved every second of that movie!!!

    Know who didn't love a single second of it? Stevens.

    Cool kid card REVOKED!

  • Maguita NYC

    Loved it too, and cannot get over the fact that I loved a movie starring that annoying guy from the Apple Pie franchise. Stiffler with a thick Prairies accent (I think it was Prairies..? Apologies to all Canadians if I'm mistaken) was simply and very naively hilarious.

  • Bert_McGurt

    I think in the movie he's supposed to be from New England. But it WAS filmed on the Prairies, even though the teams he was playing for were in the Maritimes.

  • Maguita NYC

    ô Canada, land of diversity!
    But that accent was not a New England one..? It sounded like a very particular brand of part-Canadian at least, ey?

  • Bert_McGurt

    I agree, his was not a very New England-y accent, eh? Lord knows Baruchel tried, though I don't quite have an ear for his accuracy. Come to think of it, I'm geographically incapable of having an ear for a Prairie accent either...though I'm pretty sure I recall a good bit of attempted Newfie.

  • Maguita NYC

    The thing with accents, North American ones anyways, and I soooo apologize in advance for anyone taking offense in this, but Minnesota, Prairies and Maritime all sound the same to me.

    For the life of me, I cannot tell the difference!

  • Bert_McGurt

    Well, the Maritimers sound a bit like Irish auctioneers while the Minnesotans/Wisconsonians have more of an eager Swedish/Norwegian lilt to it.

    And I don't have a clue what our f*cking problem is, but I'm guessing it's got something to do with trying to enunciate through chattering teeth.

  • Maguita NYC

    Thank goodness I'd apologized first!! Still to this day, I mistake Minnesotans for Canadians. Yes, I am the owner of barbaric and uneducated ears when it comes to accents.

  • Bert_McGurt

    Don't feel bad. If there's one thing Canadians are used to, it's being mistaken for some other nationality.

  • Even Stevens

    Ha! I was just coming down to say not EVERYONE who watched it liked it. Seriously though, that movie blew.

  • lowercase_ryan

    It still blows my mind that you feel this way.

  • Even Stevens

    I'm ok with it. Quite frankly I'm surprised I only got one downvote.

  • lowercase_ryan

    People like you.

  • TherecanbeonlyoneAdmin

    Well that was borderline treasonous, and a disgrace to our nation and its proud and storied history. My father didn't kick the Nazis'... and the puck drops!

  • lowercase_ryan

    so good and often repeated by me. Not enough people get it.

  • digsyyyy

    I seriously cant believe how much i loved that movie ! I wana have sean williams scott's babies !

blog comments powered by Disqus