Revision as of 10:23, 17 September 2012 editMagioladitis (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers908,576 editsm clean up using AWB (8413)← Previous edit |
Revision as of 12:42, 5 December 2013 edit undoChrisGualtieri (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers457,369 editsm Article Class assessment using AWBNext edit → |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{WikiProject Novels|class=Stub |
|
{{WikiProject Novels|class=start |
|
|importance=Mid |
|
|importance=Mid |
|
|incomp-infobox=yes |
|
|incomp-infobox=yes |
|
|needs-infobox-cover=yes}} |
|
|needs-infobox-cover=yes}} |
|
{{WikiProject Christianity|class=Stub|importance=}} |
|
{{WikiProject Christianity|class=start|importance=}} |
|
==3D== |
|
==3D== |
|
I don't think the advertisement "the entertainment you can see without glasses" was suggesting it was a 3D movie, but rather was suggesting that here was a movie that didn't need a gimmick to entertain you. Much like if a movie came out today and said "the movie that dazzles without CGI" we wouldn't think that they somehow created magical artificial images without CGI. Perhaps someone could research this? -K |
|
I don't think the advertisement "the entertainment you can see without glasses" was suggesting it was a 3D movie, but rather was suggesting that here was a movie that didn't need a gimmick to entertain you. Much like if a movie came out today and said "the movie that dazzles without CGI" we wouldn't think that they somehow created magical artificial images without CGI. Perhaps someone could research this? -K |
I don't think the advertisement "the entertainment you can see without glasses" was suggesting it was a 3D movie, but rather was suggesting that here was a movie that didn't need a gimmick to entertain you. Much like if a movie came out today and said "the movie that dazzles without CGI" we wouldn't think that they somehow created magical artificial images without CGI. Perhaps someone could research this? -K
I changed the anti-religious phrase to the word controversial; I think that may or may not be biased a little bit. 209.50.9.22 18:09, 11 March 2006 (UTC)