Message Forum: Re: very brief movie review

Re: very brief movie review

Posted By: Howard, on host 207.69.140.16
Date: Wednesday, November 19, 2003, at 08:06:17
In Reply To: Re: very brief movie review posted by Beasty on Tuesday, November 18, 2003, at 17:00:28:

> > This is coming from the guy who liked The Golden Child, which is up there with Vampire in Brooklyn for my pick as worst Eddie Murphy flick (and, boy, is that list long).
> >
> > Stephen
>
> You guys just have it all wrong. The only stuff of his really worth watching is the early stuff, to wit:
>
> 48 Hours, Trading Places and Beverly Hills Cop.
>
> After BHC2, it started to go downhill. The only stuff he's done since worth watching, has in fact been voice-overs.
>
>
> Bea"My two penn'orth"sty

He was in 48 hours? I thought that was Nick . . . .
No, never mind. I remember now. Eddie Murphy was the other guy. It was not excactly a memorable movie. It came up about 46 hours short.
Howard

Post a Reply

RinkChat Username:
Password:
Email:		(optional)
Subject:
Message:	> > > This is coming from the guy who liked The Golden Child, which is up there with Vampire in Brooklyn for my pick as worst Eddie Murphy flick (and, boy, is that list long). > > > > > > Stephen > > > > You guys just have it all wrong. The only stuff of his really worth watching is the early stuff, to wit: > > > > 48 Hours, Trading Places and Beverly Hills Cop. > > > > After BHC2, it started to go downhill. The only stuff he's done since worth watching, has in fact been voice-overs. > > > > > > Bea"My two penn'orth"sty > > He was in 48 hours? I thought that was Nick . . . . > No, never mind. I remember now. Eddie Murphy was the other guy. It was not excactly a memorable movie. It came up about 46 hours short. > Howard
Link URL:		(optional)
Link Title:		(optional)

Make sure you read our message forum policy before posting.