Secret_Riddle said:also guys my review has been removed but the talk bak is still active thru a direct link not the home page...it looks like harry and moriarity or w/e his name is covered this all up =(
wobbly said:EDITED:
Had commented on Val Verde's review being discreditied. Since found reason to believe if he may have been on the level after all.
Source: http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=23285X3 rocks?!?!?! Sadly in the mind of a misguided fan that wants it to be!
Hey folks, Harry here... Moriarty and I had read this review and felt that there was better than even odds that this was an earnest review from a fan, but it wasn't jiving, sadly, with what we had heard of the quality. SO - in our own excitement over the chance that we MAY be wrong about X3... we printed it. TURNS out that the review was created by some misguided whiney fanboy that just wanted us to shut up with the negativity in regards to the film. Frankly - right now I'm really depressed - because what this review did was give false hope. And it flushed out someone that had seen the film that thought it was a waste and mediocre. What this means is - AICN will have to not run any positive reviews of X3 unless they come from established sources. This is sad. I really want X3 to be good. Now we'll just have to wait and see. It wasn't written by a studio plant - which at least is a sign that the studio doesn't feel the need to plant reviews online yet. But discount the following. Sadly.
Val Verde said:Thanks![]()
Retroman said:Source: http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=23285
Very odd behaviour.I've never seen anything like this really.![]()
![]()
Val Verde said:Can you link to the clip please?
kol_lover said:harry says in that 'going to the theatre to see it and hope for the best'
silver_arrow said:ok, so what basically happened was that jokernick submitted a review to Harry of AICN who in returned posted it on the site.By failing to verify the source, Harry has incurred one error that may damage his credibility as an on-line movie critic. However, the way I see it, Harry's negligence was brought upon his own excitement to disprove his own claim of the film's mediocrity. So I don't think Harry really hated xmen. He is just like some of us here who wished that xmen be the badass flick this fake review had claimed to be. The only difference is that he owned a site visited by many.
wobbly said:Your'e nearly there but there has been stuff going on since. After Joker's prank Harry posted he wouldn't print any positive reviews without verification of the source, clearly indicating negative ones wouldn't be given that same scrutiny, and went on to prove this is by printing a negative one without any verification.
That was also proved a fake and he deleted it...BUT...Unlike Joker's, which is still shown and labelled now as a 'misguided fanboy's prank with the aforementioned 'no positives without confirmation' still in place, no such amendment or change in position regarding negative reviews has been given. He just deleted the second one he got fooled by, like it never existed.
Bottom line, he got owned not once but twice but is too stubborn to admit it. Wether he is still gonna print negative reviews whatever the source remains to be seen.
kol_lover said:harry says in that 'going to the theatre to see it and hope for the best'
can he even go to a theatre, i thought he couldnt walk?