Gail Shaw wrote:
> "Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
> news:483b85fe$1@news.povray.org...
>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> IJ and making sense? ;-)  I agree, lots of "WTF?" but in the end, it
>>> actually managed to maintain the feel of the earlier films.
>> I agree. It was exceedingly Indiana Jones in the action sequences.
>> Everything else was just weird.
> 
> I dunno. I really liked it and the story made (mostly) sense to me
> 
>> I just came back from it. (I mean, email me directly with spoilers.)
>>
>> I mean, when they took it out of the box, it made sense at that point.
>> Explain to me how it could have wound up where it was after they took it
>> out of the box.
> 
> It didn't. It was another. The one in the box was a later arrival. Whereas
> the original was where it was found for hundreds of years
> 
> 
Dammit. Now I'm going to have to see the movie just to see wtf you're
all talking about

John

-- 
I will be brief but not nearly so brief as Salvador Dali, who gave the
world's shortest speech. He said, "I will be so brief I am already
finished," then he sat down.

Post a reply to this message