Comments | garamsythe: uh.

garamsythe

uh.

Feb 04, 2010 22:31

( Read more... )

Comments 8

souperbassi26 February 5 2010, 06:40:07 UTC

Oh thank god, I was beginning to think I was the only one against this idea! But it's just IMDB, it's not always right, right? RIGHT?

garamsythe February 5 2010, 07:03:51 UTC

RIGHT!

i think.

souperbassi26 February 5 2010, 07:21:26 UTC

Haha. At least I hope we're right...Ugh, I just don't wanna accept Pitt as Moriarty...

geekfreak03 February 5 2010, 06:47:06 UTC

IT'S OKAY IT'S OKAY SHHH SHHHH CALM DOWN CALM DOWN IMDB SAYS THINGS ARE TRUE WHEN THEY'RE REALLY RUMORS SO SHHHH

garamsythe February 5 2010, 07:03:29 UTC

okay mom ._.

I knew it probably wasn't true but IMDB scares me sometimes.

geekfreak03 February 5 2010, 07:26:14 UTC

: )
NOW LET'S GET YOU SOME COOKIES!

hook_and_line February 5 2010, 07:11:36 UTC

IMDB's full of shit. They told me Javier Bardem was all in the Nine cast and got me excited for that shitty movie, only to be like WHOA SORRY a couple months later.

This is the most recent example, but it's happened a crapload more times. I swear, the only info I'd trust on that site is the cast they list AFTER the films already out.

I just really, really want them to be wrong on this one 0.0 fuuuuuuucccckkkkkk. No no no, down with the Pitt! I'm so on the Hugh Laurie bandwagon.

garamsythe February 6 2010, 05:20:03 UTC

Well, it's good to know this isn't the first time it's happened. :P

Go ahead and be shitty all the time, IMDB.