Kahran Ramsus

I don't even live in the United States.

That and it immediately followed the two worst Potter films which had chased away a large part of the potential audience.

I knew this was going to happen when the draft happened because the problem with RAW is not the roster but the writing. It has been this way with the exception of a handful of weeks here and there ever since they split the writing crews in 2002. The draft only hurt the company because it made Smackdown significantly weaker and did nothing to address the reason why RAW sucks.

That's nothing new.

Now that Briggs is playing, I'm having some doubts as to picking the Packers to win the NFC North.

Cena/HHH II is the biggest match that this company has left right now and should main event Wrestlemania. I'm not even really watching right now (ever since Smackdown got raped in the draft and the Benoit murders) and Cena/HHH would interest me. Orton as champ would not only be a disaster from an in-ring perspective, but out of it as well. Wasn't Orton outed a few months ago for having been on about eight different kinds of steroids for both man and horse?

It has been known for years that Harry was born in 1980.

I'm back as the Steelers.

AFC Colts Patriots Chargers Broncos Steelers Ravens Colts & Patriots are sure things with rather weak divisions sitting behind them. That leaves the North & West to fill out the remaining playoff teams. Chargers have had several coaching changes but there is too much talent on this team not to make the playoffs even if they don't win the division. Denver will be improved if only because Cutler now has some experience and if Plummer took this team to the Conference Championship, I refuse to believe that Cutler can't at least make them a playoff team. Especially since Kansas City has fallen off and Oakland is a non-factor. That leaves three teams in the North for two playoff spots (sorry Browns). I'm going with the Ravens & Steelers as they have fewer holes than the Bengals do, but neither can light up a team on offence like the Bengals either so it could really be any two of the three that make it. NFC Saints Eagles Seahawks Packers Panthers Rams Unlike the AFC, the NFC is a crapshoot where in a bad year all six of these teams could find themselves out of playoff contention. That said, the Saints have arguably the best offence in football right now and certainly in the NFC so I think they get in. The Eagles are the most stable team with the best coaching in a division with several teams in turmoil for various reasons. The 49ers are everybody's sleeper team this year, but Seattle is still the best team in that division or at least they are if Alexander can make through the whole or even most of the season. The Bears have gotten significantly worse in the offseason, face a hold out by one of their top defensive players and the fans are asking for the QB's head. Minnesota has a nice run D, but the worst offence and starting QB in the league. The Lions are jokes. I just can't take them seriously no matter how much it looks like they have improved. History suggests they blow it anyways. That leaves Green Bay by default, which isn't a great team but is at least the only team in the division that is actually getting better. The Panthers seem to disappoint every year, but with David Carr starting by the Canadian Thanksgiving I still think they have more talent than their wildcard opponents. The Rams are here because of talent as well. Matched up against the 49ers, Bucs, Cowboys, etc. I have to go with Bulger, SJax, Holt and company in their second year with Linehan. But really anything could happen in the NFC.

Didn't they already fight in The One?

The last match (or at least important match) that I remember being shocked out the outcome for was John Cena making HHH tap out at Wrestlemania XXII. I figured HHH winning the title there was basically guaranteed.

I agree with this. Even the book Order of the Phoenix was pretty long and bloated. Generally speaking I'm a bigger fan of the books than the films, but a literal translation isn't going to work on screen. There were only two cuts that I didn't really care for, not because of what happened in the book, but because I think it would have made the movie better. Other than that this was the best of the big live action summer films thus far this year.

I don't think WWE was stale at all in 1993. Remember that Monday Night Raw debuted in January. Wrestling fans today take weekly, live televised wrestling for granted. In 1992 I honestly think WWE ran four live shows in total, those being the pay-per-views. Monday Night Raw was a fresh show at the time, and offered a couple great matches like Jannetty/Michaels and Flair/Hennig, as well as the memorable Razor/Kid angle. Agreed. I loved the WWF in 1993. People hate it these days because of some bad decisions in the main event with Hogan & Luger and because they only have easy access to the PPVs and they admittedly weren't that good. The weekly TV shows in 1993 were among the best the company has ever put on. Even if somebody didn't like it, I wouldn't consider it stale as it was the year that the old guard (Hogan, Flair, Dibiase, Savage) was phased out in favour of newer wrestlers.

What if Interbrew never bought out Labatt in 1995 and gotten the Blue Jays (a team they didn't even want) as a result of deal?

Die Hard 2 is my second favourite in the franchise. It is the one where I actually felt that the villain was the biggest threat, especially after he brought down the British plane. Plus Dennis Franz & Bruce Willis screaming at each other for the whole movie was fantastic.

I liked Roberts/Dibiase.

The same thing that's been a problem for years, it is only more of an issue now because most of the wrestlers that kept me watching are buried/dead/homicidal maniacs. The problem is with creative. Storylines are needed, but just like any action film ever made they are there to build up to what people are really there for the big fight between the hero and villain. Far too often these days there are storylines that simply don't lead up to this big blowoff or feature non-wrestlers. I also really hate the fact that it is not presented as a real sport anymore. We all know it is phony, but 24 is equally ridiculous and has no problem within the confines of the show treating it seriously. Wrestling in kayfabe is supposed to be a legitimate sport, yet we get the equivalent of Jack Bauer winking at the camera eveyr 2 minutes. It isn't serious, but the performers need to treat it seriously to mean anything, at least when they are on camera. One of the reasons JBL is becoming the most popular commentator in the company is because he's one of the few people that actual does treat it realistically.

Wow! This is pretty much how I feel completely. Even in the post Russo-era XVIII & XXII are worse than XXIII. It isn't my favourite Mania, but there are clearly several worse ones out there.

They could always have Orton beat HHH...

I agree with pretty much everyone here, with it being a decent summer action flick but not at the level of the other four. My biggest problem was not the PG-13, but the crummy villain. Alan Rickman, William Sadler & Jeremy Irons had a real presence in their respective films and were easily credible foils to Bruce Willis, but I never bought this new guy as being a true challenge. His scheme is ambitious, but the performance is more whiny than threatening. Hell, he can't even standup to McClane's daughter let alone the man himself. He is the weakest part of the movie by far.

But it's quite possible all this happened b/c of the same reason: 'roids. Whether it's 'roid rage/'roid psychosis/'roid induced depression, or a death because of complications from roid use, it's all due to the same thing: long-term 'roid use. What I think would be interesting to find out, ultimately, is if Benoit either had a long psychiatric history vs. dementia/brain damage from repeated concussions (ala NFL players) vs. roids possibly causing this. There is a difference between his body breaking down ala Davey Boy Smith and snapping and killing his family. There is no excuse for what he did.

I'm just completely stunned over this. Had he died from drug abuse or something, at least it would be understandable. But instead he goes out and commits the most dispicable act that humans are capable of. I honestly don't know if I will be able to enjoy wrestling or trust anybody involved in the industry again.

If I'm being objective and not just picking my favourites, I would go with a top ten of: 1. Citizen Kane 2. The Godfather 3. Casablanca 4. Gone with the Wind 5. Lawrence of Arabia 6. Star Wars 7. Singing in the Rain 8. Its A Wonderful Life 9. The Wizard of Oz 10. 2001: A Space Odyssey The best decade for film is the 1960s, followed closely by the 1970s and the 1940s.

Perhaps, but they seemed to be more specifically talking about the first one in that case. In fact, I'm one of the few who agree on the Net. As much as I like ESB, I consider ANH to be the best (and certainly the most self-contained) of the three.

I'm not surprised. It is essentially one film. It would be really difficult to rate them individually. At least with other trilogies like Star Wars each act tells an individual story. Officially, yes. But we all know they really meant the whole thing.