RED EYE : am i a bad person?

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Goro, Dec 23, 2005.

  1. Goro

    Goro Guest

    I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.

    -goro-
    Goro, Dec 23, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Goro

    Ralph Grossi Guest

    "Goro" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    > was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    > myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    > any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    > pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    > I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    > succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
    >
    > -goro-


    Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
    >
    Ralph Grossi, Dec 23, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 18:38:33 GMT, "Ralph Grossi"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"Goro" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    >> was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    >> myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    >> any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    >> pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    >> I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    >> succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
    >>
    >> -goro-

    >
    >Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
    >>

    >


    What spoilers?

    That Cillian Murphy's the bad guy? There's nothing in this that wasn't
    in the theatrical trailer or the reviews months ago.

    John Harkness
    John Harkness, Dec 23, 2005
    #3
  4. Goro

    Goro Guest

    Ralph Grossi wrote:
    > "Goro" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    > > was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    > > myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    > > any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    > > pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    > > I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    > > succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
    > >
    > > -goro-

    >
    > Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
    > >


    WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
    beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
    some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
    of this.

    -goro-
    Goro, Dec 23, 2005
    #4
  5. Goro

    kaboom Guest

    On 23 Dec 2005 09:39:53 -0800, "Goro" <> wrote:

    No, I like you just fine, goro. However, if you said that you just
    loved "Eye of the Beholder" then I'd have to reevaluate our online
    acquaintanceship :)

    kaboomie
    kaboom, Dec 23, 2005
    #5
  6. Goro

    moviePig Guest

    Goro wrote:

    > Ralph Grossi wrote:
    >
    >>"Goro" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>
    >>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    >>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    >>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    >>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    >>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    >>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    >>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
    >>>
    >>>-goro-

    >>
    >>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
    >>

    >
    > WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
    > beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
    > some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
    > of this.


    I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
    usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...

    What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
    villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
    first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
    the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
    sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
    an early far-reaching surprise.

    (In answer to your subject-header... yes, anyone who ever wants to see
    Brian Cox killed is a very bad person...)

    --

    /---------------------------\
    | YOUR taste at work... |
    | |
    | http://www.moviepig.com |
    \---------------------------/
    moviePig, Dec 23, 2005
    #6
  7. moviePig wrote:
    > Goro wrote:
    >
    > > Ralph Grossi wrote:
    > >
    > >>"Goro" <> wrote in message
    > >>news:...
    > >>
    > >>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    > >>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    > >>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    > >>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    > >>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    > >>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    > >>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
    > >>>
    > >>>-goro-
    > >>
    > >>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
    > >>

    > >
    > > WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
    > > beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
    > > some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
    > > of this.

    >
    > I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
    > usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...
    >
    > What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
    > villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
    > first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
    > the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
    > sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
    > an early far-reaching surprise.
    >

    It's a thriller. It has to have a bad guy and there's no other
    candidate than Cillian Murphy so I don't see how under any stretch
    revealing him as the bad guy could be considered a spoiler violation.
    It was a good trailer. It starts out like the trailer to yet another
    dreary romantic chick flick (Wth Rachel McAdams taking the Brittany
    Murphy part) and then gets tense. I went from, oh man, I'll never ever
    ever see this, no, not even on cable, to, oh wow, maybe this is going
    to be halfway decent (and it was--and while the ending sucks, I think
    Craven cannily turns the film into comedy after the plane lands so it
    doesn't matter.)
    Nick Macpherson, Dec 23, 2005
    #7
  8. Goro

    moviePig Guest

    Nick Macpherson wrote:
    > moviePig wrote:
    >
    >>Goro wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Ralph Grossi wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"Goro" <> wrote in message
    >>>>news:...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    >>>>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    >>>>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    >>>>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    >>>>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    >>>>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    >>>>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>-goro-
    >>>>
    >>>>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
    >>>beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
    >>>some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
    >>>of this.

    >>
    >>I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
    >>usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...
    >>
    >>What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
    >>villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
    >>first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
    >>the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
    >>sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
    >>an early far-reaching surprise.

    >
    > It's a thriller. It has to have a bad guy and there's no other
    > candidate than Cillian Murphy so I don't see how under any stretch
    > revealing him as the bad guy could be considered a spoiler violation.
    > It was a good trailer. It starts out like the trailer to yet another
    > dreary romantic chick flick (Wth Rachel McAdams taking the Brittany
    > Murphy part) and then gets tense. I went from, oh man, I'll never ever
    > ever see this, no, not even on cable, to, oh wow, maybe this is going
    > to be halfway decent (and it was--and while the ending sucks, I think
    > Craven cannily turns the film into comedy after the plane lands so it
    > doesn't matter.)


    I can defer on the relative quality of trailers, since I almost never
    watch them. (Still claiming, though, that in a ideal world Craven wants
    us to see Cillian first as sympathetic, however briefly.) And I suppose
    a "good trailer" might indeed be one that gets you to watch a good movie
    you wouldn't've. From my rigid perspective, though, I can recall right
    now only two exemplary trailers: One was CLOSE ENCOUNTERS's, which was
    merely a slow dolly along a dark highway, towards an eerie glow just
    over the next rise. The other was PSYCHO's, consisting of Hitchcock
    himself doing a droll stroll through the newly cleaned room at the Bates
    Motel. All questions, no answers. (Well, almost... PSYCHO starts out
    as a white-collar crime drama...)

    --

    /---------------------------\
    | YOUR taste at work... |
    | |
    | http://www.moviepig.com |
    \---------------------------/
    moviePig, Dec 23, 2005
    #8
  9. Goro

    Goro Guest

    moviePig wrote:
    > Goro wrote:
    >
    > > Ralph Grossi wrote:
    > >
    > >>"Goro" <> wrote in message
    > >>news:...
    > >>
    > >>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    > >>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    > >>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    > >>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    > >>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    > >>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    > >>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
    > >>>
    > >>>-goro-
    > >>
    > >>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
    > >>

    > >
    > > WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
    > > beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
    > > some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
    > > of this.

    >
    > I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
    > usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...
    >
    > What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
    > villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
    > first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
    > the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
    > sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
    > an early far-reaching surprise.


    I'm not sure there's any way to make a reasonable trailer for this
    movie that doesn't give away who the baddie is. I suppose there could
    be a teaser-type trailer that shows Cillian and Rachel together and
    then shows some of the amped up thriller moments, trying to keep
    protagonoists hidden, but i'm not sure that would work well.

    One thing i was HOPING would be part of the 3rd act was that Cillian
    Murphy was a good guy trying to kill a Bad Guy. I was hoping that the
    Senator would be some corrupt, treasonous guy or something and that
    Cillian Murphy was some sort of riteous freedom fighter or something
    like that.

    > (In answer to your subject-header... yes, anyone who ever wants to see
    > Brian Cox killed is a very bad person...)


    Even in L.I.E.?

    -goro-
    Goro, Dec 23, 2005
    #9
  10. Goro

    moviePig Guest

    Goro wrote:

    > moviePig wrote:
    >
    >>Goro wrote:
    >>
    >>>Ralph Grossi wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"Goro" <> wrote in message
    >>>>news:...
    >>>>
    >>>>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    >>>>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    >>>>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    >>>>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    >>>>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    >>>>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    >>>>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>-goro-
    >>>>
    >>>>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
    >>>beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
    >>>some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
    >>>of this.

    >>
    >>I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
    >>usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...
    >>
    >>What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
    >>villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
    >>first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
    >>the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
    >>sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
    >>an early far-reaching surprise.

    >
    >
    > I'm not sure there's any way to make a reasonable trailer for this
    > movie that doesn't give away who the baddie is. I suppose there could
    > be a teaser-type trailer that shows Cillian and Rachel together and
    > then shows some of the amped up thriller moments, trying to keep
    > protagonoists hidden, but i'm not sure that would work well.
    >
    > One thing i was HOPING would be part of the 3rd act was that Cillian
    > Murphy was a good guy trying to kill a Bad Guy. I was hoping that the
    > Senator would be some corrupt, treasonous guy or something and that
    > Cillian Murphy was some sort of riteous freedom fighter or something
    > like that.


    I don't think Craven does twists. (Hell, he even gave Cillian's game
    away by casting Cillian...)


    >>(In answer to your subject-header... yes, anyone who ever wants to see
    >>Brian Cox killed is a very bad person...)

    >
    > Even in L.I.E.?


    Especially L.I.E. His character was "deep down" good, don'tcha know...
    (More seriously, that was a truly memorable performance/character,
    imo. One of those movies that I wish I'd known more people I could
    safely recommend it to.)

    --

    /---------------------------\
    | YOUR taste at work... |
    | |
    | http://www.moviepig.com |
    \---------------------------/
    moviePig, Dec 24, 2005
    #10
  11. Goro

    deering24 Guest

    moviePig wrote:
    >
    > What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
    > villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
    > first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
    > the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
    > sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
    > an early far-reaching surprise.


    But the misdirection is terrific, because for a good part of the
    trailer, you think the movie is going to be your typical unbearable
    "meet cute" romantic comedy. What was misleading was how it ended on a
    close-up of Murphy's eye--which, given the title, made me think it was a
    vampire movie or something.

    C.
    **
    deering24, Dec 24, 2005
    #11
  12. On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 19:29:00 -0500, moviePig <>
    wrote:

    >
    >Goro wrote:
    >
    >> moviePig wrote:
    >>
    >>>Goro wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Ralph Grossi wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"Goro" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>news:...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    >>>>>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    >>>>>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    >>>>>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    >>>>>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    >>>>>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    >>>>>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>-goro-
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
    >>>>beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
    >>>>some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
    >>>>of this.
    >>>
    >>>I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
    >>>usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...
    >>>
    >>>What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
    >>>villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
    >>>first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
    >>>the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
    >>>sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
    >>>an early far-reaching surprise.

    >>
    >>
    >> I'm not sure there's any way to make a reasonable trailer for this
    >> movie that doesn't give away who the baddie is. I suppose there could
    >> be a teaser-type trailer that shows Cillian and Rachel together and
    >> then shows some of the amped up thriller moments, trying to keep
    >> protagonoists hidden, but i'm not sure that would work well.
    >>
    >> One thing i was HOPING would be part of the 3rd act was that Cillian
    >> Murphy was a good guy trying to kill a Bad Guy. I was hoping that the
    >> Senator would be some corrupt, treasonous guy or something and that
    >> Cillian Murphy was some sort of riteous freedom fighter or something
    >> like that.

    >
    >I don't think Craven does twists. (Hell, he even gave Cillian's game
    >away by casting Cillian...)



    Obviously, you've never seen Disco Pigs...

    John Harkness
    John Harkness, Dec 24, 2005
    #12
  13. Goro

    deering24 Guest

    John Harkness wrote:

    > Obviously, you've never seen Disco Pigs...


    Okay, give it up...

    C.
    **
    (Nobody drops a title like that in conversation without wanting to
    relate its backstory...g!)
    deering24, Dec 24, 2005
    #13
  14. On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 06:13:20 GMT, deering24 <>
    wrote:

    >
    >
    >John Harkness wrote:
    >
    >> Obviously, you've never seen Disco Pigs...

    >
    >Okay, give it up...
    >
    >C.


    Irish picture Murphy made befire 28 Days Later --weird coming of age
    movie, strange and not bad.

    put it in your queue at netflix, if they have it. I rented it because
    I couldn't resist the title.

    John Harkness
    John Harkness, Dec 24, 2005
    #14
  15. Goro

    trotsky Guest

    John Harkness wrote:
    > On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 18:38:33 GMT, "Ralph Grossi"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>"Goro" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>
    >>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
    >>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
    >>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
    >>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
    >>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
    >>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
    >>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
    >>>
    >>>-goro-

    >>
    >>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
    >>

    >
    > What spoilers?
    >
    > That Cillian Murphy's the bad guy? There's nothing in this that wasn't
    > in the theatrical trailer or the reviews months ago.



    Wait, Cillian Murphy's in it? Shouldn't you put "spoiler" in the header?
    trotsky, Dec 24, 2005
    #15
  16. Goro

    trotsky Guest

    moviePig wrote:

    > I don't think Craven does twists. (Hell, he even gave Cillian's game
    > away by casting Cillian...)



    The question, as ever, is what is it that Craven does do?
    trotsky, Dec 24, 2005
    #16
  17. Goro

    moviePig Guest

    John Harkness wrote:

    > On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 06:13:20 GMT, deering24 <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>
    >>John Harkness wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Obviously, you've never seen Disco Pigs...

    >>
    >>Okay, give it up...
    >>
    >>C.

    >
    >
    > Irish picture Murphy made befire 28 Days Later --weird coming of age
    > movie, strange and not bad.
    >
    > put it in your queue at netflix, if they have it. I rented it because
    > I couldn't resist the title.


    And, at 90 minutes, it's within my wtf range... so, wtf...

    --

    /---------------------------\
    | YOUR taste at work... |
    | |
    | http://www.moviepig.com |
    \---------------------------/
    moviePig, Dec 24, 2005
    #17
  18. Goro

    Sammy Guest

    In article <T4arf.644899$x96.504582@attbi_s72>,
    trotsky <> wrote:

    > moviePig wrote:
    >
    > > I don't think Craven does twists. (Hell, he even gave Cillian's game
    > > away by casting Cillian...)

    >
    >
    > The question, as ever, is what is it that Craven does do?


    I think he sells speaker wire. Isn't he one of your associates?
    Sammy, Dec 27, 2005
    #18
  19. Goro

    trotsky Guest

    Sammy wrote:

    > In article <T4arf.644899$x96.504582@attbi_s72>,
    > trotsky <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>moviePig wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>I don't think Craven does twists. (Hell, he even gave Cillian's game
    >>>away by casting Cillian...)

    >>
    >>
    >>The question, as ever, is what is it that Craven does do?

    >
    >
    > I think he sells speaker wire. Isn't he one of your associates?



    Sammy, when did you first notice your head was actually shaped like a penis?
    trotsky, Dec 28, 2005
    #19
  20. Goro

    Sammy Guest

    In article <WHnsf.680000$xm3.29985@attbi_s21>,
    trotsky <> wrote:

    > Sammy wrote:
    >
    > > In article <T4arf.644899$x96.504582@attbi_s72>,
    > > trotsky <> wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>moviePig wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>I don't think Craven does twists. (Hell, he even gave Cillian's game
    > >>>away by casting Cillian...)
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>The question, as ever, is what is it that Craven does do?

    > >
    > >
    > > I think he sells speaker wire. Isn't he one of your associates?

    >
    >
    > Sammy, when did you first notice your head was actually shaped like a penis?


    How in the world would you even know what a penis is shaped like? You
    certainly don't have one. And I'm sure that really disappointed your
    mommy who wanted to have something to play with on those cold Chicago
    nights.
    Sammy, Dec 28, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mark

    Re: red-eye removal

    Mark, Jun 25, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,523
  2. Replies:
    12
    Views:
    2,934
    Michael Alan Chary
    Feb 23, 2005
  3. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    488
  4. Paige Miller

    How to Fix Really Bad "Red Eye"

    Paige Miller, Jan 16, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,219
    MarkĀ²
    Jan 16, 2006
  5. John

    Bad media, bad files or bad Nero?

    John, Dec 31, 2007, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    23
    Views:
    1,216
    Keith
    Jan 8, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page