your review of the movie is saying basically exactly the same as the one of another friend of mine on FB (which was the only reason I had the slightest clue what you were even talking about). Her phrase was "cameos of B- to Z-list celebrities", which sounds kind of intriguing. Presumably just looking at the movie's IMDB page can tell me enough without having to actually watch it, though...
View original postBut, according to John, everything angers me. 
Heh. I guess he's in a position to know?
View original postThey are sooo stupid that there isn't any redeeming feature BUT the stupidity. This one was at least mildly interesting for the sheer quantity of cameos they worked into the first half.
Yeah, I don't think that's really my kind of movie... at least judging by the various discussions I've had with people about my standards for judging James Bond movies, and how I gave up on Diamonds are Forever less than halfway through on account of being just too freaking stupid.
But WHHHHYY? Why are the sharks there in the first place?!
- 31/07/2014 10:01:38 PM
614 Views
Is this another "Sharknado II" review?
- 31/07/2014 10:17:48 PM
404 Views
I can't promise they don't anger me.
- 31/07/2014 10:57:04 PM
403 Views
I don't know if it's a good or bad sign that...
- 31/07/2014 11:33:14 PM
522 Views
If the entire movie isn't a drunken blur, then you're watching it wrong. *NM*
- 15/08/2014 07:47:23 PM
206 Views
*NM*
- 15/08/2014 07:47:23 PM
206 Views