Not that anyone but me will ever see this, but "Shrek" was great all-around, music and all, and I'm sure history will vindicate me in that "Shrek 2" was a steaming piece of shit. Hey, 'take the money and run' indeed.

Anyway, testing, testing... anyone who spams me is going to get a knuckle sandwich.

i swear there is a hitchhikers movie. i remember it accutely, because my brother wouldn't let me watch it until i was done reading the book. when i did see it i was severely let down.

i also stand by van helsing being purposefully silly. and i thought the effects in it were pretty decent; way beyond what i expected, anyways.

of course the songs in shrek 2 were abysmal. the ones in shrek 1 were as well. shrek 2 gets a lot of praise from me because it was such a huge danger of being a piece of consumerist crap, but was actually very entertaining, and continued the story very well.

i think more than defending cimenatic 2004, i just don't look forward to some of the 2005 releases. of course, the simple fact of Serenity, our beloved BDM, is enough to put any year into the history books. other than that and willy wonka, i'm not aching for 2005.

Every now and then a years comes along with really excellent movies that you will remember for a long time. 1994 had The Shawshank Redemption, Fargo, Pulp Fiction, Forrest Gump ... I always argue that "Harry Potter" isn't even one of those kinds of movies, but I always, ALWAYS get shouted down. So whatever.

"Van Helsing" was pretty bad, and not up to w/d Stephen Sommers usual standards. Of course, neither was "The Mummy Returns," but whatever. There's a difference between PURPOSEFULLY silly (Indiana Jones... great, but I think we can all admit, not realistic), and just bad writing. "Chronicles of Riddick" was about twice as good as Ven Helsing, because the special effects were a teeny bit more in the background... but not much.

KBVol2: Good, as I said in my original post.

SpiderMan2: I'm withholding judgement. It should be mentioned, though, that I felt the first one was really, really awful. A Macy Gray cameo? Give me a break, guys.

Shrek 2 was as good as it could have been without being as funny as the first one. The songs were SHITE, and you know it. Admit it, ADMIT IT!!!!

As for F9/11, and The Village.... you got me there. I can't wait on those two. But good movies are in the minority for 2004... unlike 2005, it seems.

Oh, and to the Hitchhikers comment from Teela..... they've never done a movie, but there WAS the radio series, record album, novel, BBC television series, computer game, stage show, comic book, and towel. This will be the first Film, so... let's keep our fingers crossed.

d)Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy

They're doing another one?

Being a long time star wars geek, even I'm not all that excited about Ep. 3

oops, spider-man 2 should be in the "yet to come" category. so silly today my head is!

i have to disagree and say that this year (and especially summer) has been pretty awesome as far as movies go.

shrek 2
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
spider-man 2
kill bill vol. 2
super size me
van helsing (did no one realise it was supposed to be bad?)

yet to come:
the village
fahrenheit 9/11

and there are plenty of movies that i haven't seen yet. i hear chronicles of riddick is gloriously bad like van helsing.

but even without all others, 2004 is a titanic cinematic success with Harry Potter. truly excelent. i can't wait for the Goblet of Fire, which is conspicuously missing from your 2005 list... ;P