Bullets 'n' Babes

Because the question was so dumb, and the answer so obvious, that neither me nor Mark could believe you were actually asking it.

I wasn't.

- http://www.joblo.com/movie-posters/the-expendables-2-04

This poster's gonna leave so many guys unsure of their sexuality.

That cover is hot!

Li looks like a girl though. When is Stallone gonna make Rambo 5!

bradavon wrote:Li looks like a girl though.

That's Jet Li?! Fucking hell.

That girl is Yu Nan



Fucking hell with you guys

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAA (breath deep) HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Like I said he looks like a girl .

I didn't think it looked like him either but what threw me, his name's on the poster and his face isn't but some nobody's is (in the context of the movie!). It's just pretty dumb to include her face and not his. WTF are they doing including a girl on the poster too? It totally goes against the point of the film.

Who's man enough to admit they also thought it could be Li, based on the fact Li's name is at the top but that girl's face is on the poster?

So no on else thinks that face in the poster looks a bit like Li? No one. I don't believe you.

bradavon wrote:Li looks like a girl though.

Just saw this through FB:

Expendables 2 PG-13?!!!!

http://twitchfilm.com/news/2012/01/expe ... norris.php
Boooooo

The original film was a hard 'R' so I can imagine fans being very disappointed by the unexpected drop to PG-13. Don't they remember the negative reaction to Die Hard 4? I respect Chuck's decision, but he appears to have forgotten about 75% of his R-rated back catalogue - The Hitman or Invasion USA, anyone? Chuck even drops the f-bomb in the former (that's when he's not committing acts of gross brutality). Ultimately I don't care as long as the resultant film is good - the original proved that tons of violence and swearing doesn't a great action film make. Also you can have loads of strong violence in a PG-13 as long as it isn't overtly bloody (see Bond and Bourne for popular examples). On the plus side the low rating means we won't have to endure awful CGI bloodsplatter.

Could be though that the PG-13 is just so they can release an Unrated Harder Cut on DVD/BD
Expendables 1 was cut on DVD (15) but uncut (rated 18) on BD.

grim_tales wrote:Could be though that the PG-13 is just so they can release an Unrated Harder Cut on DVD/BD

Those only tend to mean the odd swear word or the tiniest bit of violence added back in though.

Some people are VERY upset:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RK34scHt8o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQXp1Vz6 ... re=related

Markgway wrote:I respect Chuck's decision, but he appears to have forgotten about 75% of his R-rated back catalogue - The Hitman or Invasion USA, anyone?

What's there to respect? Hypocrisy? And Stallone should just have told Norris to fuck off, and make the movie without him, and I don't think many would miss him. Anyway - while I was planning to watch this shitsucker in the cinema, I'll just use the torrents now. I already learned my lesson by going to see Die Hard 4...

Well, Norris didn't force the filmmakers to cast him; they choose to. He gave his conditions and they accepted. If Stallone was so upset about the loss of profanity he could've said 'no'. Bigger box office is the real reason for the PG-13. Whether I go see this or not will have nothing to do with the rating. Bear in mind both versions of Die Hard 4 were '15' in the UK.

and more: http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=33783

oh, and in case someone missed the old news, the pg-13 was cancelled. It's now R.

First full trailer - looks good

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news ... ailer.html

"I now pronounce you.. MAN AND KNIFE!"
"My shoe is bigger than this car!"

'I'M BACK AYYAARGHHAARRRRGHHHHHHH'

grim_tales wrote:First full trailer - looks good

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news ... ailer.html

"My shoe is bigger than this car!"

I loled at that too.

Looks more polished than the first one, which to be fair was pretty shabby.