Probably a little too advanced for a toddler, but at 6 and 8 my kids loved both Sea Biscuit and Secretariat.  They didn't get all the nuances of course but during the racing scenes my 6 year old would look at me wide eyed and say 'my heart is going CRAZY!'   

But Tangled is probably more the speed of a 3 year old girl. 

I thought it was fantastic, will definitely be going for a second viewing with my 12 year old.  For those who still can't understand how a small book has been turned into three movies there is a lot of content in the movie that has been fleshed out from appendicies and other Tolkien material.  Its like the Hobbit plus other stuff that helps with background for the LoTR movies.  For instance, in the book the 'Necromancer' in the Mirkwood and Radaghast the Brown are throw away paragraphs.  In the movie that's an hour of content which helps to tie two very separate stories together.  You can see Gandalf starting to put the pieces of the picture together; the main story of the Hobbit is presented as a story within a larger story (LOTR) which is exactly the way the book fits in with the larger trilogy.

If you liked LoTR, or if you like Middle Earth, the extra content is not 'boring' or a slog.  It's awesome.  A lot of the extra time is spent fighting Orcs or exploring the dwarves back stories, so I fail to see how that could be considered boring at all.

Besides, most of the criticisms came around the high frame rate and 3d, not the story.  I saw it in 2d the first time; may try the HFR version the next time around.

So am I to assume that you back ATB's belief that a Mormon president would lead to the apocalypse?    

But on a more serious note.

That's the crux of the issue: traditional Christians and Mormons mean very, very different things when they say that Jesus is the Son of God. The traditional Christian view of the Trinity and the Mormon view of the Trinity are irreconcilable. From a theological point of view, this is the most important belief in Christianity. It forms the core of the historic Creeds (which themselves predate the established canon of the Bible)..

If you view Christians with that narrow a definition then you've effectively stated that the following groups are also not allowed to call themselves Christians:

Unitarianism
Binitarianism
Christian Science
Jehovah's Witnesses

I tend to shy away from sectarian definitions and just go with the belief that believing in Christ as the son of God makes one a Christian in the broadest sense of the word...which is what I go with as someone looking in from the outside.  Is that wrong?  To a Catholic or a Lutheran or any other specific group within the faith that believes so, then yes, I'm sure I am.  But as history has shown us, that's standard operating procedure in religion when discussing someone who doesn't believe exactly as you do.

You are correct that certainly Christian Science and Jehovah's Witnesses (I'm not familiar enough with the other beliefs) are not considered Christians by most if not all Christian churches.  Fireball summed up nicely the fact that there are significant differences in their definitions around Christs role. 

Lutherans / Baptists / any flavour of protestant Christianity are 'quibbling' about interpretation of the sacraments, or the liturgy, or various splinter understandings of scripture, but all have the same core beliefs.  Catholics have nearly all the same core beliefs but obviously there are significant differences in both understanding and the sacraments (hence the Reformation).  All believe in the same God and the same Bible.  Still Christianity.  However when a sect or cult starts adding new persons or beliefs, such as new books that are on the same plane as the Bible, then you are no longer following Christianity but have created a new religion, with Christianity as your random seed perhaps.

I'm not all that familiar with comic book heroes, but hopefully if this comes together they'll avoid a problem my wife and I saw in Avengers: lame heroes.

You have Thor, Iron Man and Hulk just wrecking it up and the Capt., Arrow guy and Spy girl are basically engaging in lame sub plots to make them seem useful.

I mean what is the Flash going to do in an intergalactic fight? Run around and make people dizzy?  Aquaman will help a family stuck on a sinking boat escape by having them float out away on a raft made of dolphins! Wonder Woman is just a female Captain America.

You've got superman and batman. And I guess Green Lantern.  Same problem as avengers.

I can kind of see your point about Black Widow and Hawkeye in comparison to the super-powered folks in Avengers, but you clearly don't know your DC comic characters.  Wonder Woman is the second most powerful hero in the DC universe after Supes.  She goes toe to toe with super villians all the time.  She's probably very parallel to Thor, except instead of Norse mythology they went with super powered Amazons.  If anything Batman is the one you should be picking on.  Batman in a fight with Darkseid or Doomsday is not going to have much to do.  Having said that - you should watch the DC Justice League cartoon, because they deal with that very side of things.  Batman always seems to get by by being a tactical genius and having gadgets or equipment to handle virtually anything.

I just walked by a Gamespot... and there was a line of dudes outside waiting to buy Black Ops 2. I *just* don't get the appeal of those games. I had to chuckle a little.

Hey man, I just said that I play my PC a lot, I didn't say I've become a snob! I still don't play TBS, 4X and RTS games.

LOL - you just described me to a tee.  Sniggering at all the guys lined up to by the annual release of COD before I go home to play Civ, Elemental or some indie RTS game.    Although I'm not a total snob - reviews convinced me to play Halo 4, and I picked Skyrim on the 360, not the PC, so I could sit on my comfy couch.

Thanks for the thoughts everyone...  I'm leaning towards the 4S at this point since I'm pretty dependent on apps, and also having those apps to share with the other apple devices in the house.  However, Purge mentioned the windows phone and frankly I had forgotten all about that and I am definitely interested in seeing how that turns out - a full fledged Windows device that works seamelessly with my pc intrigues me.  At the very least, it might flush out some lower prices on used iphones and recent android phones.  So I'll probably hold off on this for a few more weeks.

Ouch.  That looked really really painful.

Please help me make a decision about a new phone!

I have a Iphone 3GS which is nearing the end of it's life.  I am thinking of upgrading to a 4S (I can get one for $380) but keep waffling back and forth between Apple and trying out an Android phone.

Here are the facts - I'm an IT professional and am not put off by the more technical side of Android.  However, my household has a lot of Apple products - ipods, iphones and an ipad, so I kind of like that everything is centralized in Itunes.  I also love the app store, although I don't have any experience with apps on the Android side.

I use my phone for calling, GPS for bike riding (and tracking my rides), Golf (GPS for distances, have a great app!), internet radio, Facebook and some surfing, and four or five times a year for games and video watching while flying on business trips.  Converting video from torrents or whatnot to mp4 for my phone is sometimes a pain, although lately most of the shows I download come in the mp4 format already.

I'm kind of intrigued by the Galaxy SIII or the HTC one... but knowing that I like (not love) the Apple infrastructure and not being sure what comes with Android I'm on the fence.

What say you?  $380 for a 4s seems like a good deal... not sure if I should take the plunge, or if any of the Android phones would meet my requirements better than my iphone.

That's awesome!  The best part is that you can keep the colors on the walls as long as you don't move your gaze away from the dot...  I've been able to see the red and tan buildings and the trees for 5 seconds as long as you don't refocus.

Sid was the loop.  If it wasn't for Sid none of the conflict between young Joe and Old Joe would have ever happened...  Sid was the reason Joe's loop got closed, and Joe was the reason Sid grew up and started closing loops.  Seems pretty integral to the storyline.

[Spoiler]

I saw it last weekend and agree that it's a really good movie...interesting concept, good action, and it's a time-travel movie that actually holds up pretty well under scrutiny. It's definitely one of the better scifi movies that I've seen in quite a while 

I actually thought that while it was pretty interesting take, and I loved how the lines between good guy and bad guy were very blurry, the time travel logic broke down pretty fast. 

Spoiler for Hiden:

The scene where they dismembered young Seth to get old Seth to come back (only to be killed), while impressively disturbing, was broken.  They proved that they changed Old Seths history by doing things to young Seth - so obviously then that should extend to the thirty years that Old Seth spent up to that point!  As soon as they started cutting off feet and hands clearly Old Seth would never have left that hospital bed, never did anything for 30 years and would never have run away, even assuming he had existed until his loop...  Wasn't the whole point of not killing young Seth because the future impact would be too catastrophic, according to Abe?

I think Young Joe killing himself was more consistent, although it's harder to follow the loops.  At that moment Old Joe ceased to exist... so that means that nothing Joe did after that event ever happened.  No future mob life, no killing off the mob (so I assume Abe and the gang appeared as soon as Old Joe disappeared), no killing of the kids, etc.  They implied that the future was totally changed, so I guess that one works.

Just felt like they were a little inconsistent in the writing around the impact of changes in the past on the future.

As for movies I hated the first time and never want to see again,

sigh...purge, just go ahead and change the initial post to include movies people hate too.  some folks REALLY want others to know what they don't like I guess.  

Are we in danger of running out of internet space?

Ya, the weeping angels are pretty creepy but the silence was probably a close second.

Serbian Film - glad I sat through it but I have no desire to watch it ever again.

I made the mistake of reading a summary of this film once after someone mentioned it as possibly the most horrific thing ever put on film.  Call me a wuss, but I was honestly really shaken simply by reading its summary on a Wiki page.  I can't imagine actually watching it.

I completely agree.  I regret even reading what the movie was about.  I was disturbed by the wiki summary for several days afterwards.  I do not understand why a movie like that should exist.

I can not fracking believe the Oilers are finally about to come out of the trench they've been in for a decade and this is when the lockout happens.  This one is on the owners.

$199 for 16GB. $299 for 32GB, $399 for 64GB.   hits the 19th.

This actually had me excited for a minute - I thought maybe they decided to join the real world as far as pricing goes.  But no, it's still $699 for a phone according to my apple store.  Yawn.

Edit - just read not compatible with existing micro-SIM cards!  Interesting.  So I couldn't buy one and put my old SIM in anyway in order to retain my existing contract and data plan.  Apparently it's sign a new contract with the cell companies or nothing.  Since that amounts in Canada to indentured slavehood to Rogers, I guess I can definitively take iphone5 off my interested list for my next phone.

They took away our used games on PC, and I haven't heard of anyone abandoning the platform for that.  I just hope that the console market has an impact on pricing like the PC market did.  Prices seem stickier on console games to me than they do on the PC side.

Price is the difference.  My PC games come exclusively from Steam Summer and Holiday sales at this point - I pay $30 at the max for a AAA game, and $5 for most of them.  When I can buy console games for $5 - $30 then they can take used games off the table without it being as big a deal.

Agreed - wouldn't install Ubisoft software and support their DRM model if the games were free.

Victor, I'm getting tired of your lecturing tone. You are talking down to everyone else in this thread. Take your superior attitude and shove it.

LOL!  Is this what happens when someone on the right side of an issue out debates the usual dog pile on the left side of the debate?  I've never seen that before, and am quite enjoying his very logical, well reasoned replies to those attacking his position.  Hats off to Victor!

The problem with the Total War series is they're limited to time periods where melee combat is a major component because of the tactical variety it brings.  You have to have units that are faster or slower, can charge or flee, etc if you want to do anything interesting tactically, which is half the game.  Besides the crippling bugs, one of the biggest problems in Empire was that combat came down to two lines of infantry shooting at each other - cavalry being the exception.  Imagine Shogun, Rome or Medieval where all you had was archery units.  Still a great game?  Empire was about the most modern thing they could do.  WW1, 2 or anything beyond that might still have a great strategic component but the combat would be broken.

If they want to stop making sequels, they should really create a fantasy themed Total War.  The engine would be perfect for elvish archers, dwarven infantry, trolls, giants, castles, whatever.  Then they wouldn't need opposing sides to be palette swapped same units - they could create truly different sides with their own unique models and completely different abilities.  I suppose a sci-fi theme could also work if they adopted a melee model.

Rome TW was my favourite time period, so Rome 2 sounds good to me; but sooner or later they are going to have to stop pumping out sequels and come up with a new idea.  Will people really buy Shogun 3 in 5 years time?  (after Medieval 3 and Empire 2, presumably?)

Also, Edmonton has had the number one pick for 3 years in a row?  Are they going to start rocking the NHL '80s style or are they content to finish in last place every year and keep getting no1 picks?

They haven't made the playoffs since 2006 and they're in a city with a population less than 1 million, I think those 2 facts answer that. That said, I don't think Yakupov is the guy who gets them there. Unless Tambellini is planning on trading him for a top D man who's in their mid 20's, but I don't see many of them around that are available.

1.1 million, actually.

Not sure about Yak, but you have to take the best player in the draft.  You can't take Murray and gift someone else with the best player when you have it available.  Besides, drafting a D doesn't help next year either.  The Oil have plenty of strong D prospects in the system in the 2 - 3 years out range.  Only way to get significant help next year is to trade or sign it.  You don't draft top 4 dmen and expect them to play right out of the draft very often.  Hedman went 2nd and didn't do much in Tampa.  Larsson was ok last year, but again didn't have that much of an impact.  Certainly a Hedman or Larsson performance on the Oilers last year wouldn't have improved the team that terribly much.

I would have liked to see them trade the pick for a top 4 d whos going to help next year - extra firepower is nice but having the best powerplay on earth (or a line comprised solely of #1 picks!) doesn't get you into the playoffs. 

That said... Yak is a right winger.  We already have Eberle and Hemsky.  Who's getting demoted out of the top 6?  Ebs is too good, and Hemsky can't produce with pluggers.  This smells of a trade bait and if they trade Ebs the city will pull a Vancouver.

Frankly looks great to me.  I have never really felt compelled to get an Ipad - there have been a few ios games I've thought might be nice, but as a productivity tool it just isn't compatible with what I need it to do.  Surface on the other hand, as long as the price isn't outrageous, looks like something I'd be much more interested in.  It combines the entertainment factor of a tablet like an ipad with serious work tools.  An ipad could never replace my laptop for work - the surface looks like it could.  Thumbs up!

D3 for some reason is just not holding my attention the way D2 did.  Early last week I hit Diablo with my wizard, died a few times and have felt zero compulsion to play again.  I don't know if it's just my general level of annoyance with all the MMORPG trappings, but I think I'm done with D3.  I've gone back to Fallout New Vegas and Civ 5 Gods and Kings and haven't really felt the pull at all.

So today I try to play D3 and after logging in get a message that a patch is available, so the game will close and download the patch.  The game closes, restarts, and tells me it's up to date.  Login again and get the same error.

Guess I'm not allowed to play my single player Diablo game today.  Unreal.

For me, having an economy that isn't completely broken is totally worth it.

I agree, and this isn't on the same scale as D1 or D2.  It's much easier to have a smoother launch with a fraction of the players even if it's 12 years earlier.

This would be a whole lot easier on people if they stop even referring to it as 'single player'.  there IS NO SINGLE PLAYER MODE.  You can group with yourself and go solo, but it's still not single player mode.  More like an instanced MMO.  The mindset makes all the difference in frustration. It's not like you're playing Super Mario Bros and get disconnected right before you jump on the flag post.

Agreed, this definitely should have been made clear.  I wouldn't have paid any attention at all to the hype or been disappointed if I had known this was not a single player game.  I have zero interest in playing Diablo online or with other people.  Between the SC2 cash grab of splitting one game into three and now this...  Blizzard has thrown away the credit they had built up for so many years.  Very sad.

Funny how BioWare tanks when EA gets involved.... now Blizzard has missteps in the first two games since Activision got involved.

Bought the game today at lunch... but based on Meta Critic, Amazon, OO and here, think it's going back to the store unopened.  No patience for this crap in a game I simply want to play single player.  What a nightmare.

The Kings have the highest percentage of x-Oilers, and I really, really like the way they're playing right now.  Go Kings!  (Go Penner.  Win a cup and show those pancake haters what's what.)

 

Did Homeboy Douchebag just pick up that dog's scat and monkey sling it at the owner?

What an asshole!  Heaven forbid the guy leave the tiny little dogs crap on the grass where it will be decomposed in 3 days and fertilize the soil!  He should have wrapped it up in a plastic bag and let it go to the landfill where it can stay nicely preserved in it's pristine plastic wrapper for the next 500 years or so!  Get crap off the sidewalks and walkways, yes, or kick it under the nearest tree out of the way of a kid, but don't be a douche about something so small.

Here's hoping Tambellini tries to trade the pick down and get a solid D in addition to a top 10 pick...  Another sniper is fine, but the Oilers need a play-in-every-situation D who can help right now, not some more D prospects that help 4 years from now.  Would love to take OEL from Phoenix and trade picks with them, for example.  Its a fine line... if he's gonna get fleeced then just take Nail.  (do not want Luke Schenn!)

With Tambo's history, he should just draft Nail.

Sadly, you're probably right.  Best move the Oil could make this off season would be to get a new GM.

Here's hoping Tambellini tries to trade the pick down and get a solid D in addition to a top 10 pick...  Another sniper is fine, but the Oilers need a play-in-every-situation D who can help right now, not some more D prospects that help 4 years from now.  Would love to take OEL from Phoenix and trade picks with them, for example.  Its a fine line... if he's gonna get fleeced then just take Nail.  (do not want Luke Schenn!)

Philly - Pittsburgh is going to be epic. 

[consistently underachieving.]

Which only serves to highlight my point about not knowing what you're talking about.  Go take a look at the Oilers road record in the second half.  Go take a look at the Oilers record in March.  Go take a look at the Oilers record back in October.  Compare the number of 1 goal losses this year to the number of 1 goal losses in 2010.  Look at the Oilers special teams this season compared to last season.  The Oilers improved leaps and bounds this year, despite our GM (and coach that doesn't understand line matching or chemistry).  Tambellini is an idiot, you're right - he trades away our best d in Gilbert and signs terrible players for support like Barker, Hordichuck and Eager (look, more ex-Canucks!) instead of getting the pieces we need.  The Oil underachieved this year because of management.  I'm not content with the status quo - it's time this team got a real GM instead of leftovers from Vancouver or old boys from the 80s.  Having said that, anyone who looks at the Oilers in 2011-2012 and says 'Lord, what a terrible team, they should be in the AHL' is someone who either doesn't understand hockey, or doesn't know anything about the Oilers.  Hall, Eberle, Nuge, Hemsky, Gagner, Petry, Smid and Dubnyk are a core that rivals any other team in the league - our GM and Coach keep picking up veterans that are holding the rest of the team back.

All of which gets a big whatever from me. I go by the stat that counts and last I looked the Oilers were 2nd to last in the entire league. I don't deny Hall, Eberle and Nuge are good players that may eventually amount to great ones; albeit I'm admittedly annoyed the Oilers have all of them due to consistently underachieving.

Eberle was drafted 22nd overall.  The Oilers have had exactly 2 lottery picks in their history - Hall, and Nuge.  Anyway - enjoy the playoffs. 

Good God are the Oilers ever a terrible team. You'd think their players would have some concern for their jobs and actually play decently in the last game of the season, but they absolutely caved to the Canucks getting outshot 42-17. Honestly, if it wasn't for the stellar play of their goalie Dubnyk they would have lost by far more than 3-zip. The NHL really needs to turn the AHL into a lower linked league like the Premier division and 2nd Division in English Football. That way they could boot teams like the Oilers and Bluejackets down to that league and stop them from whoring all the top prospects.  

Woo hoo, Hockey Night in Canuckistan just cut to the Kings Vs Sharks game with 10 minutes left. Awesome!

 

Having a D composed of several AHL players and worse than AHL players tends to ruin your chances, no matter how well the rest of your team plays.  F-ing Canucks fans...  You'd think someone who cheers for a team who's won exactly 0 cups in their entire history and who's entire playoff success consists of 1994 and 2010 would be careful about throwing around terms like 'terrible team'.  Yes, the Canucks are decent right now!  Congrats.  Shut your yap about how bad you may or may not think other teams are if you don't know what you're talking about. 

Spoken like a true Oilers fan?  Let me guess you are from Alberta.

They're so cute when they get angry, especially when they bring up how many cups the Oilers have, and the Canucks don't.  It actually gets pretty tiresome after a while.  Congrats on the dynasty.. now excuse me while I watch my team in the playoffs.. not lining up at the draft.

Enjoy!  Try not to burn down the city this time.

Good God are the Oilers ever a terrible team. You'd think their players would have some concern for their jobs and actually play decently in the last game of the season, but they absolutely caved to the Canucks getting outshot 42-17. Honestly, if it wasn't for the stellar play of their goalie Dubnyk they would have lost by far more than 3-zip. The NHL really needs to turn the AHL into a lower linked league like the Premier division and 2nd Division in English Football. That way they could boot teams like the Oilers and Bluejackets down to that league and stop them from whoring all the top prospects.  

Woo hoo, Hockey Night in Canuckistan just cut to the Kings Vs Sharks game with 10 minutes left. Awesome!

 

Having a D composed of several AHL players and worse than AHL players tends to ruin your chances, no matter how well the rest of your team plays.  F-ing Canucks fans...  You'd think someone who cheers for a team who's won exactly 0 cups in their entire history and who's entire playoff success consists of 1994 and 2010 would be careful about throwing around terms like 'terrible team'.  Yes, the Canucks are decent right now!  Congrats.  Shut your yap about how bad you may or may not think other teams are if you don't know what you're talking about.

Huh, where you get that my comments were a rah rah go Canucks chant escapes me. I was commenting on the piss poor play of a team that's been consistently bad for a number of seasons now. And BS its just their defence;  a team doesn't get blanked and outshot 42-17 in a game solely on account of their defensive core. IMO their whoas start at the most senior level and run throughout the organization down to the D-core. Great that their fail-to-nail approach has netted them some talented young gunners, but management teams them with players like Eager.   I had high hopes for Tambellini based on the sound performance he put in as a Canucks Exec, but good God his results have been dismal. I'm glad you're content with the status quo, but I personally find it embarassing that only 2 Canadian teams will make the postseason - at least the Flames and Jets put in a good fight for 8th and the Habs manged an imperssive season ender.

Which only serves to highlight my point about not knowing what you're talking about.  Go take a look at the Oilers road record in the second half.  Go take a look at the Oilers record in March.  Go take a look at the Oilers record back in October.  Compare the number of 1 goal losses this year to the number of 1 goal losses in 2010.  Look at the Oilers special teams this season compared to last season.  The Oilers improved leaps and bounds this year, despite our GM (and coach that doesn't understand line matching or chemistry).  Tambellini is an idiot, you're right - he trades away our best d in Gilbert and signs terrible players for support like Barker, Hordichuck and Eager (look, more ex-Canucks!) instead of getting the pieces we need.  The Oil underachieved this year because of management.  I'm not content with the status quo - it's time this team got a real GM instead of leftovers from Vancouver or old boys from the 80s.  Having said that, anyone who looks at the Oilers in 2011-2012 and says 'Lord, what a terrible team, they should be in the AHL' is someone who either doesn't understand hockey, or doesn't know anything about the Oilers.  Hall, Eberle, Nuge, Hemsky, Gagner, Petry, Smid and Dubnyk are a core that rivals any other team in the league - our GM and Coach keep picking up veterans that are holding the rest of the team back.

And yes, teams do get outshot and pinned in their own end when their defense is incapable of keeping the other team out of their zone and getting the puck up to the forwards.

Good God are the Oilers ever a terrible team. You'd think their players would have some concern for their jobs and actually play decently in the last game of the season, but they absolutely caved to the Canucks getting outshot 42-17. Honestly, if it wasn't for the stellar play of their goalie Dubnyk they would have lost by far more than 3-zip. The NHL really needs to turn the AHL into a lower linked league like the Premier division and 2nd Division in English Football. That way they could boot teams like the Oilers and Bluejackets down to that league and stop them from whoring all the top prospects.  

Woo hoo, Hockey Night in Canuckistan just cut to the Kings Vs Sharks game with 10 minutes left. Awesome!

 

Having a D composed of several AHL players and worse than AHL players tends to ruin your chances, no matter how well the rest of your team plays.  F-ing Canucks fans...  You'd think someone who cheers for a team who's won exactly 0 cups in their entire history and who's entire playoff success consists of 1994 and 2010 would be careful about throwing around terms like 'terrible team'.  Yes, the Canucks are decent right now!  Congrats.  Shut your yap about how bad you may or may not think other teams are if you don't know what you're talking about. 

Bioware has a panel at PAX East, as well as them dropping stuff about new DLC plans. We will see what they say. Everything I've seen is that there is going to be more DLC to "flesh" out the ending. I don't want a fleshed out ending, I want a fucking new one. So, no more money for Bioware. I'll just youtube whatever they release.

Ditto.  I'm nearing the end of my current game and guess I'll just quit soon and see if I feel like ending it in the summer.  Stupid, stupid writers and their 'artistic' vision.  Just end the game with the same level of scope and detail that you wrote the rest of the trilogy!  What a let down to such an epic trilogy of games.

edit - at least it's going to be free.  I'm glad they didn't set off that nuclear bomb.

I've been playing city league basketball for 15 years, ever since I got out of high school.  I've been on teams as high as Div 3 (out of 12 divs) where the level of play is mostly guys who played college ball or good high school ball, and all the way down to div 10 where it's more recreational but still competitive.  There's something awesome about playing organized sports with reffing and a league and playoffs.  Pickup ball is fun, but I'll play league bball as long as I can - although my kids are getting to the age now where I'm getting involved in coaching, which is rewarding in a different way.  Probably run into a conflict there eventually.

A Boston Philly or Boston Pittsburgh series would be great.  I'd be damn afraid to play the Bruins if I was Crosby coming back from a year and a half of injuries, guaranteed they'll try to take his head off.

I saw this yesterday and am baffled by all the hate.  It was good to very good.  I've read the books, and certainly they merged all kinds of things together to come up with the storyline, but by no means is it a bad movie.  I can understand that if it really cost $250 million that it's probably not going to be a huge financial hit, but as far as a typical summer movie I was content.

I like that about him/everyone in here. All different points of view makes it fun.

The collective hate for the Bruins and Rangers is our one common bond.

 

Hey, I kinda like the Bruins.  I'll take the Bruins over the Canucks any day.