Is this based on Paul Feig's ( Freaks & Geeks creator) book " Superstud: Or How I Became a 24 Year Old Virgin " ?

The Office is comming back in September.

The poster is hilarious. The trailer...not so much. Glad to hear so many positive reviews of the film as the trailer really disappointed me.

1. Feig is the co-creator of F&G (IIRC, the two met on the set of Heavyweights).
2. Feig has nothing to do with The 40 Year Old Virgin so the answer to that is no.
3. The film is based on an act that Carell used to do.

The fact that the TV Trailer has a decent shot of thong is enough for me to see this.

Anways, I missed 3 sneak previews to this, but I heard good things about it. and the ending is suppose to be REALLY funny

I'm there. It's looks pretty good to me.

They showed the trailer when I went to see Wedding Crashers.

Can't wait to see it.

I love Steve Carell and think that he can go VERY far if he picks the right projects. I'll be there to see this one on opening night. I loved the trailer for it that I saw before Wedding Crashers.

Ending is out of left field, it's beyond funny. I thought they would change it after the first test screening, but sure enough it was there in the other test screening.

It has plenty of pointless nudity. Which works well in the film.

I saw the film last week, and I respectfully disagree with you here. VIRGIN commits the same crimes as CRASHERS - it stops the flow of comedy to further a plot that doesn't have much weight. There's nothing kinetic about the last 1/4 of the picture.

Once the film stops dead.

And two hours for CRASHERS and VIRGIN? These filmmakers need a stronger editor. Hilarious films, but it's too much.

anyone care to put in spoiler tags the ending?

Bullshit. When what you mentioned occurs, there's only 20 minutes left of the movie. That scene is pretty much the film's "climax." And from what Scott Weinberg told me, the film now runs around 110 minutes with closing credits. When I saw it a few weeks ago, the film ran a little bit over 120 minutes with no closing credits attached.

Virgin has much stronger editing than Crashers and it also helps the flick in it's favor that it actually has some comedy in it.

Bullshit? Um, no.

The film is still two hours, regardless what your boyfriend says. The "climax" is


If you hate the film so much, why 2 stars then? You've gone out of your way to let everybody know it stinks.

Matt IMed me and asked what I thought if the movie and how long it was. I responded with "Seemed a little long for a sex comedy. About 110 minutes I'd say."

So maybe I'm wrong and it is over 120. Big whoop. Get off your high horse, Shelton. Your rudeness is well known and it's getting a little tiresome.

And Matt's not my boyfriend. He dumped me for Ryan Gosling. Thanks for bringing up painful memories.

Scott, there isn't any need to make comments like this. Frankly, I'm getting tired of having to deal with the your posts. The next time I have to post in a thread about one of your comments, you will be suspended.

Mmmm, Ryan Gosling.

[With my luck, my girlfriend will google my name again and find this post.]

So Chmiel is allowed to call my personal opinion "bullshit" at the start of all this, even though I was nice about my reply.

And Weinberg is allowed to spew "Get off your high horse, Shelton. Your rudeness is well known and it's getting a little tiresome." Another personal attack.

But my small comment about the nature of their relationship is given a threat of expulsion.

Good moderatin' there, buddy.

And I'm allowed to sit back and *yawn*.

KEEP BUSTIN'!

any comedy in my mind is and will be better than the piss-poor Wedding Crashers

Stop hating on wedding crashers..... it was freaking hilarious

What the hell are you doing in this thread Raven? I don't see any pictures of Veronica in here.

Chill out, dude. By the way, suspension is not spelled e x p u l s i o n.

Actually, yes he is. Maybe you don't actually realize it, but there isn't any rule at DVDTalk that says anyone must agree with the opinion of anyone else. He can dislike and disagree with your opinion as much as he wants. I would agree that he could have been nicer about it, but I don't see any violation of forum rules.


Given that you had just attacked him, his response becomes somewhat understandable... though he too was out of line. He should have reported your post instead of replying to it. Of course, to the best of my knowledge, he doesn't have any history of problems either. If his posts start becoming a regular problem, then he'll get the same type of warning that you did.

BTW, if you have a problem with the forum moderation, feel free to contact Geoff. I highly suspect that he will see things closer to how I do than to how you do though.