Definately not as good as the first one. It explains someof the back storey but not enough chills to entertain. Worth a watch, but just barely. 6/10.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0377109/
Popular Posts
-
...These measures, based on the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) give far too much power to publishers, at the expense of individu...
-
The challenge of having the United States as a neighbour was one of the topics discussed Tuesday during a meeting with Mexican President Vic...
-
William Gibson's latest novel, Spook Country is awesome. Not as frantic or kinetic as Pattern Recognition or All Tomorrow's Parti...
-
This is not bad. A mix of 70s rock and 80s punk with some good lyrics. Songs range from boring to excellent. Id give it a B+. http://www.ama...
-
Finally went out and picked up a Nintendo Wii. My god the thing is fun. Ridiculously, ludicrously fun. Hiyat and I had to tear ourselves...
-
nother bottle of the doublewood -- arguably one of my favorite scotches. Balvenie just doesnt make a bad blend. A fab birthday gift from my ...
-
"The International Space Station will have ultra-sensitive clocks on board, and it is a good place to test the theory," said Dr. A...
-
Here's my (edited) journal entry for this event dated 12/01/98: Wow. I just sessioned and started reading "The Tao of Physics"...
-
This is from a 1932 episode of The Little Rascals . Man, I've had jobs like that. http://www.boingboing.net/2007/10/23/perpetually...
-
OK, if you have to go, this is the way to do it. Just like Spock in Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan. I'm serious. http://www.eter...
