Hmmm, I thought this was LOVE fest...

[Wild Imagination Films]

Cheat, Whore, Kill, and Offend were all well represented. Love, however, was left out in the cold in most of what I watched. So My question is, if the Fest is about Love, then how can a film be considered eligible if the theme isn't met?

[Shawn Philip Nelson]

Lol, Barry was clear, that with this movie being due at Valentines that romantic love was desired, but they would accept other forms. It's clear that people seemed to have wanted to do anything but romantic love.

[Kholi]

My Gal Pal was the exemplary of romantic. If that is accurate, so far I can count, on my hand, qualifying entries.

But, most did involve tangible depictions of a certain type of love.

[Mark Harris]

amores perros

[Zak Forsman]

amores perros

for the cheap seats, that's "LOVE'S A BITCH!!!!"

[Wild Imagination Films]

Yup. Love can be painful. It can tear you apart. Jason's story shows us the pain of losing someone while they die from a wretched illness. My Gal Pal took us back to the 80's when love was still innocent and Brat Pack silliness abounded. Wait a minute, they still make those kind of movies don't they. Dustin showed the sacrifice a man was willing to make to save someone he loved. And others, in their own way, touched on the bittersweet, difficult, awkward ways love touches us all.
My question was about the films with infidelity and (in at least two of them) murder. Why, with so much talent and obvious ability on hand, did people chose these themes?

[Zak Forsman]

My question was about the films with infidelity and (in at least two of them) murder. Why, with so much talent and obvious ability on hand, did people chose these themes?

mmmmm.... is it because they're morally bankrupt?

[Jared Meyer]

It's not pretty or pleasant but it is just as legitimate to explore the negative or contrary forms of love as it is the positive.

Yeah, I just used an obnoxious Robert McKee reference. Booya.

[Wild Imagination Films]

mmmmm.... is it because they're morally bankrupt?

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner.

No, I think it's because, (stick with me here) when this contest was announced, you could hear the collective groan. Then the inevitable Porn v Love questions. How much is too much etc. Then it was all cleared up. The theme is Love and you have to have a camera and viewing starts on Valentines day.
So what happened next was the tendency for people to see how far they can push things before they get caught, yelled at, DQ'd.
So we played hide and go seek with the cameras. But unsatisfied and not really wanting to make a "love story" about romantic love, it became affairs and cheating and eventually murder.
We do tend to behave like little kids. "Can't I stay up just five more minutes?" "Can't I make my love story about a man and a woman who hate each other so much they would rather kill one another than just walk away?"
I guess we were all too cool to make one of those sappy love stories. (Obviously not meant for those of us who made sappy love stories)
If the next fest is action movie fest, I think I'll make mine about inaction. It's kinda like action, but without all the movement. Like love stories without all the love.:thumbsup:

[Wild Imagination Films]

It's not pretty or pleasant but it is just as legitimate to explore the negative or contrary forms of love as it is the positive.

Yeah, I just used an obnoxious Robert McKee reference. Booya.

See, this is what I'm talking about. Why do we have themes, or required elements, if we can then rationalize "exploring the negative or contrary?"
I ask, because I was recently in a film contest in which the winning entry had nothing to do with the genre of film they had been assigned.
If the rule stipulated love, how does hate constitute adherence to the theme. If the rules stipulated a camera must be in one scene, how does a pan past it during the credits count? I'm asking these questions in all sincerity as I must have missed the "theme/ props are optional" memo.

[Zak Forsman]

this is an interesting topic, worthy of discussion. imo, i think the filmmakers looked for conflict, because out of that they knew they would find drama. was it all incredibly original? nope. did some latch onto clichés and obvious devices. a few. but were their characters still motivated by their want or need of love or a lack thereof. i think so. i really do. in every instance. it can't all be wedding cake, right?

[Wild Imagination Films]

This thought opens a very large can of unruly worms. Can a film element be satisfied by the lack of the element? Glad it's 5am Texas time while I'm pondering this question. This way I'm not really awake and therefore not responsible for a real answer.

[Zak Forsman]

Can a film element be satisfied by the lack of the element?

i think so. because the lack of a thing doesn't create a void, it isn't "nothingness". it's filled by an antithesis (or anti-thesis). my feeling is that a thesis about a lack of faith, teaches us about faith. a thesis about a lack of communication teaches about communication. a thesis about the lack of love, teaches us about love. of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be good or effective storytelling.

[Wild Imagination Films]

I really hope the next fest is action film fest.

[Zak Forsman]

I really hope the next fest is action film fest.
i prefer themes over genres for these fests. whatever the theme, you can easily mold it into an action pic.

[Wild Imagination Films]

Zak, go to bed, you're not getting the jokes anymore.
Recap:
Will- Can the lack of an element satisfy the need for an element
Zak- Blah blah blah "yes," blah blah blah "the lack of love points out love" blah blah blah.
Will- I really hope the next fest is Action Fest.

I'm out, gotta shoot in a couple of hours and I haven't slept in a couple of days.

[Zak Forsman]

jokes, huh. http://images.dvdtalk.com/images/smilies/ohbfrank.gif he's a regular groucho marx, this guy.

[stephen_nugent]

For a film to work it should jog certain work-shy neurons. You can't set narrow guidelines according to what only you understand of the theme. Some of the more naive interpretations lost the game early on for me.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Cheat, Whore, Kill, and Offend were all well represented. Love, however, was left out in the cold in most of what I watched. So My question is, if the Fest is about Love, then how can a film be considered eligible if the theme isn't met?

It's not Represent True Love fest.

It's a fest that has to do with love and relationships. No one said that every film had to have TRUE LOVE in the movie to qualify. That's an EXTREMELY narrow interpretation, and narrow interpretations are the opposite of what these fests are about.

It's not about making 50 movies that have the same point of view.

Sometimes one person loves another and gets shafted. We have some of those movies, we have some where the most noble parts of the human spirit are brought to bear. So you could have cheating and whoring and killing by one party while the other blindly adores them.

But again, no one said it had to be real love, true love, pure love, good love, the best in man kind love.


I think most people tried to make movies rich in conflict that had to do with wanting, needing, being blinded by, driven to extremes by, hurt by screwed over by love.

And if you look in the dictionary you will find lots of definitions of non-platonic love that don't have anything to do with Meg Ryan and Tom hanks find at the end of a movie and have a helluva lot to do with


Cheat, Whore, Kill, and Offend ...

1.a profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person. 2.a feeling of warm personal attachment or deep affection, as for a parent, child, or friend. 3.sexual passion or desire. 4.a person toward whom love is felt; beloved person; sweetheart. 5.(used in direct address as a term of endearment, affection, or the like): Would you like to see a movie, love? 6.a love affair; an intensely amorous incident; amour. 7.sexual intercourse; copulation. 8.(initial capital letterhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png) a personification of sexual affection, as Eros or Cupid. 9.affectionate concern for the well-being of others: the love of one's neighbor. 10.strong predilection, enthusiasm, or liking for anything: her love of books. 11.the object or thing so liked: The theater was her great love. 12.the benevolent affection of God for His creatures, or the reverent affection due from them to God. 13.Chiefly Tennis. a score of zero; nothing. 14.a word formerly used in communications to represent the letter L. –verb (used with object) 15.to have love or affection for: All her pupils love her. 16.to have a profoundly tender, passionate affection for (another person). 17.to have a strong liking for; take great pleasure in: to love music. 18.to need or require; benefit greatly from: Plants love sunlight. 19.to embrace and kiss (someone), as a lover. 20.to have sexual intercourse with. –verb (used without object) 21.to have love or affection for another person; be in love. —Verb phrase22.love up, to hug and cuddle: She loves him up every chance she gets. —Idioms23.for love, a.out of affection or liking; for pleasure. b.without compensation; gratuitously: He took care of the poor for love. 24.for the love of, in consideration of; for the sake of: For the love of mercy, stop that noise. 25.in love, infused with or feeling deep affection or passion: a youth always in love. 26.in love with, feeling deep affection or passion for (a person, idea, occupation, etc.); enamored of: in love with the girl next door; in love with one's work. 27.make love, a.to embrace and kiss as lovers. b.to engage in sexual activity.


Should we have called it passion fest?

And what do you think all those people that are cheating and horring and killing are doing it for. Either in response to the lack of romantic love, being hurt by it, or being driven to extremes by it.

Now you can argue that real love doesn't make you do that, to which I would say two things
So what. Again, no one said it had to be noble, pure, good, and grand love fest.
If you want to get specific about it, the Ancient Greeks used three different words for love: Eros, Phiia, Agape.
Eros (erotic) having to do with intense burning sexual desire.
Philia having to do with a fondness of (but less selfish) and intense feeling of loyalty beyond friendship such as for family members, but again more absent of selfish longing.
And Agape drawing on the both Philia and Eros ... an intense attraction and passion for but without the need for reciprocity, in other words not selfish ... not something that would drive you to malicious acts. It seems like you are advocating an All Agape Fest. But since the Festival Planners and coordinators did not specify one vs. the other and since they screened and admitted 50 films as qualifying based on the criteria they set forth ... I'd say every single official entry and even the non comps I've seen so far have to do with the theme of love in some form, or the fallout that can be caused by too much or too little of it.

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

This thought opens a very large can of unruly worms. Can a film element be satisfied by the lack of the element? Glad it's 5am Texas time while I'm pondering this question. This way I'm not really awake and therefore not responsible for a real answer.

It's not even one worm and he's far from unruly because the physical absence of THING X in a film does not mean X is absent as a theme.

If we had GOLD FEST, and some filmmakers made a film about pirates that died trying to get it and failed, or an old prospector that went mad looking for it and never found it. Or a conman who got conned by someone else on the heist and wound up stealing aluminum bars painted gold, or another prospector that went mad and thought he'd found gold and tried trade donkey feces (which he thought was gold) for goods at the general store, those films would still deal with the THEME of GOLD and how it can affect you even though nary a nugget, bar, or coin was present.

[Matthew R. Rodwell]

Great explanation Jack!

After watching all the submissions I must say that everyone did a fantastic job and stuck to the rules of the fest very well (if they didn't the mods would not have accepted the entry)

Love is an emotion that is interpreted differently by different people, it drives them to do things that a normal man or woman would ordinarily never do and sometimes that happens to be dark things.

I saw a lot of "outside the box" thinking in a lot of these films which was a great relief from the played out Hollywood love story.

[pmark23]

Thank God there's only a few "romantic love" stories, or else you may have well called this "boringfest". :)

Personally I'm disappointed that nobody explored zombie love.

[Mark Harris]

Personally I'm disappointed that nobody explored zombie love.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=117595

[Mark Johnson]

My question was about the films with infidelity and (in at least two of them) murder. Why, with so much talent and obvious ability on hand, did people chose these themes?

You have a very narrow mind, in my opinion. In fact, the majority of relationships are characterized by dysfunction at times. The inherent power of "love" is what makes it often so dangerous and why so much abuse occurs. When the theme of this fest was announced I immediately was motivated to explore the darker side of love. I wasn't "like a little kid" trying to thumb my nose at the rules or hoping to push the envelope.

Your comment implies that adding infidelity and murder was improper and possibly a squandering of "talent and obvious ability." I, for one, would rather not sit through a cookie-cutter collection of films. With respect to our film, I think the last scene when the actress voices the words "I Love You" says it all. Love can be used to justify almost any act - however reprehensible. That, to me, is worthy of examination in any study of the concept called "love."

[Jeff Anderson]

Well said Mark. The thing I've enjoyed most about watching the films is to see everyone's interpretation of the love theme. I've watched murders, breakups, reuniting, new beginnings that all had their roots in love. I'd hate to see 50 mushy movies where two people fall in love. If anything this is just a reminder that love comes in many forms and is a very complex emotion, not just some one dimensional flowers and chocolates I love you crap.

[wcs]

Just as a heads-up, some people might feel the need to respond not to your initial question, but to your implied slights:


We do tend to behave like little kids.

You are using the word 'we', but you mean plural 'you' or "Y'all" as we say in the south. This is because you exclude yourself in the next line - where you also include the word 'we' when you mean 'you':


I guess we were all too cool to make one of those sappy love stories. (Obviously not meant for those of us who made sappy love stories)

So, what I'm sure most people read that as was this:

[[You]] (people who didn't stick to romantic love) do tend to behave like little kids.

If you meant anything else, feel free to point out where my interpretation was wrong.

I only respond because you really need to realize that the words you are saying are demeaning. I don't mind demeaning language in princinple. I just want to make sure you realize that what you're saying completely qualifies as this, and this case is not the only example.

[J.R. Hudson]

Cheat, Whore, Kill, and Offend were all well represented. Love, however, was left out in the cold in most of what I watched. So My question is, if the Fest is about Love, then how can a film be considered eligible if the theme isn't met?


Apparently you haven't experienced the entire spectrum of love. :evil:

[Erik Olson]

I thought the slate of films represented the wider definition of Love in a good way.

Think about the many questions left hanging out there at the end of Constance. She seems hung by her own hand - perhaps her true love is lying on the floor of that bar? His antagonist must, on some level, believe that he committed this crime as an act of love for her?

That is the connundrum of Love - in the real world, it defies conventional definition. Candy-coated isn't the only interpretation.

On that note, The Arrangement is in my final three. I thought the florist character was sincere and I fell for her - and for them. If I'm getting emotionally attached to the idea of their being together in less than six minutes, the storyteller has done something right.

Love means many things to many people. True Love is an emotion of perception. That is what these films are about - the viewer is removed from the emotion as objective observers. If the filmmaker draws us in to empathize, sympathize and even relate to the characters, then he has done his job.

e

[MattinSTL]

We shot "I Love... Lamp... I Love Carpet" in only 2 weeks... but I just couldn't get it under 30 minutes.

Now THAT was a story about true, romantic love.

This has been one of my favorite Fests ever... hands down. I agree with most of the responses... especially "boring fest"... I'm glad that instead, we had more of the love-war thinking in the fest.

[Mark Johnson]

With regard to the issue of being narrow-minded, the author of this thread has announced that he will not vote for any film that uses the "f" word. If you don't like our film - fine. But to reserve your approval only to g-rated entries seems counterproductive to what these fests are supposedly about (i.e., film making)

[mcgeedigital]

If the rule stipulated love, how does hate constitute adherence to the theme.

Because they are only one step from each other.


Here, have a fortune cookie.

[J.R. Hudson]

With regard to the issue of being narrow-minded, the author of this thread has announced that he will not vote for any film that uses the "f" word. If you don't like our film - fine. But to reserve your approval only to g-rated entries seems counterproductive to what these fests are supposedly about (i.e., film making)


Ironic this thread started by someone with the moniker WILD IMAGINATION ? Seems a contrast if sticking to the stricktest interpretation of LOVE.

Love is the most amazingly, painful, desirous, manic, emotionally draining, violently racing, longing, desperate expereince one can experience as a human being

It runs the gamut on all emotions and inevitable actions that inevitably surface from the experience.

[Mark Johnson]

Perfectly said, Hudson. In fact, the core event in our film (a foolish man using deceptive e-mails with his lover) is based on a stupid thing I did myself out of desperation born from love. My own life is littered with the smoking carcasses of painful relationships and disastrous love affairs. I wish I could say I've had more roses than thorns. ....

[J.R. Hudson]

My own life is littered with the smoking carcasses of painful relationships and disastrous love affairs. I wish I could say I've had more roses than thorns. ....


Me too.

(sigh)

I love you man !

[HBlack]

I personally have a very hard time enjoying those "sappy love stories", as I'm sure many others do. If anything, I was more disappointed by those who defaulted to a clichéd depiction of finding new love than those who tried to avoid love stories altogether. I can see where you're coming from in that you'd prefer people stayed more true to the theme, and there were many films that did that well while still producing something new and interesting. But on the other hand, I'd rather watch a fest full of movies deviating from the rules to varying degrees than suffer through 50 "boy meets girl, etc etc" movies. Some people have done really great things within the criteria, but others aren't capable of it or simply don't want to do it, and it's better for them to adjust it to their own strengths than force out a mediocre story we've all seen.

[J.R. Hudson]

If one thinks of the clasic tales of romance and the greatest love stories, they are generally filled with the elements in question

Romeo & Juliet, Love Story, A Streetcar Named Desire. Titanic, Braveheart, True Romance, Sense & Sensibility, Atonement, Casablanca, Badlands, An Affair to Remember ...........................

(True Romance I put in because I love it) : /

[Stephen Mick]

Well, for my part, I think having a festival with a bit of both is very valuable. It's all about story. If some of the entries deal with a more traditional take on "love" (regardless of how they execute the idea), that's great, as long as the result is something unique and different than the typical "boy meets girl" message. Conversely, if some entries look at love from a completely different point of view, that doesn't make them any less valuable, as long as love, lack of love, loss of love or rejection of love drive the story forward.

I used to work for a creative director who said, "anyone can make a funny commercial about condoms, but it takes a real talent to make a funny commercial about toothpaste." The lesson being this… Those who take a different look at what "love" means may show us something interesting, compelling and unique. Those who take the familiar and typical "love story" and bring a new and interesting vision to it are equally powerful, if not more so because they both understand what makes the "familiar" love story work, and choose to reinterpret what's possible in that story format.

There's a place for all sorts of "love stories" in modern cinema. Like many have said, "Cloverfield" is a love story, as are "Atonement" and "There's Something About Mary." They all just attack the love elements from very different angles.

From a criticism standpoint, and I'm not calling HBlack out here by any means, even if the more traditional "love stories" aren't someone's cup of tea, as filmmakers we should all be able to judge them objectively on the merits of story, execution and performance (or lack thereof).

--SM

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

...Your comment implies that adding infidelity and murder was improper and possibly a squandering of "talent and obvious ability." ...

Never read Shakespeare I guess.

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

(True Romance I put in because I love it) : /

One of my all time favourites. Use to own it on LD a long time ago...
Now on DVD of course.

[Ted Arabian]

Okay, I have tried quite a few times, since I first saw this thread, to formulate some eloquent way to express my opinion and frustration at these initial comments in this thread. However, I am no Mark Johnson or Jack Daniel Stanley who can seemingly expound effortlessly. So, I will instead just speak plainly and directly to Wild Imagination Films, (WIF from here on out).

I am just stunned by the topic of this thread. If I had to watch 50 films of "When Harry met Sally," I'd be bored to tears.

In every film that I have seen, the very limited guideline has been met... the story revolved around love. And I applaud both those who took aim directly at a sweet and charming tale, as well as those who told less glossy story.

My film? (Since it was targeted both here as well as in my thread by WIF...) Yes, you are right... my film does not have anything to do with a guy bringing a box of chocolates to his true love. Nor does it serenade the beauty and joy of falling in love. I thought that I would try to bring something original to the table while basing it on the theme.

In no way did I ever contemplate, as you stated, a way to push the rules to see how much I could get away with. That has never been my style and I take great offense at the comment.

As for the lack of featuring the use of a camera in my film... you are right. I did not feature it. The rules state that a camera has to be included in one scene. I did that.

From my understanding, the assignment of a prop in these film festivals is to keep people from raking through their archives and presenting them as "new." It is not a 48 hour film fest where you have to base your film around it.

Personally, I struggled with a way to get a camera in my film. I designed a fantasy set and a camera on it was just wrong. So I went to great lengths to get that beautiful antique camera and pose it on my fantasy set. And to make it clear, I shot it as an insert and eventually used it under my credits.

I really don't what has gotten under your skin, WIF. The purposes of these dvxuser.com film fests is to inspire us to get off our duffs and make films. If you are doing it for the prizes, then I think that you are in the wrong place.

As for me, I never even looked at the prize list because that was not important to me. Obviously, I would be honored to present a film that placed in the top 3 and happy to receive the reward. But I wanted to be a part of the festival and to continue to grow as a filmmaker. That was most important to me. (I did eventually look at the prizes when I was told... "um, you should really try to win a prize.... the list is pretty incredible!" And yes, after seeing the list, I was hopeful that my film may be recognized among my peers.)

I really don't like posting a comment like I have here but your comments have really bothered me. I was offended at the comments you made in my "Love" thread and then again at your comments here.

WIF, you are entitled to your feelings and free to express them but I think that you should consider what impact they may have before you start referring to us a spoiled children and neglectful filmmakers.

[n8ture]

That's funny Ted, I was thinking about having 50 films all in the vein of "You've Got Mail" :)

Long gone are the Henry Ford days of you can have it any color as long as it's black.

You should embrace the fact that we have forums like this that encourage diversity in filmmaking. I find it quite exciting to see how fifty people take a common theme and put their own spin on it. That's what makes us unique as filmmakers. we're not all from the same mold.

Instead of watching fifty bubble gum, maple syrup films about love, I went on an emotional thrill ride. Thank goodness that these fests are open to interpretation because I for one, don't want to see fifty cookie cutter films, nor would I want to make one.

One of these days I'll do another DVXUser fest, I hope that the theme is as open to interpretation as this one has.

[Ted Arabian]

That's funny Ted, I was thinking about having 50 films all in the vein of "You've Got Mail" :)
"You've Got Mail" was in one of my drafts! Then there was "Sleepless in Seattle." Harry/Sally won out!

Kevin, I do hope to see you in a fest again!

[Barry_Green]

Okay, look -- no film in this fest is going to be disqualified. We've had a bad trend in past fests of people trying to get films disqualified, for whatever reason -- maybe they truly think such-and-such film doesn't meet the requirements, or maybe they selfishly think that they'd have a better chance of winning if so-and-so's film wasn't included, or whatever.

We put a stop to that. We have a pre-screening committee who verifies that each and every film accepted into the competition DOES meet the theme and guidelines.

I don't expect that this is where this conversation was headed, but I do want to point out for anyone who's wanting to relive the bad old days, that it isn't gonna happen. Every film that's approved is approved and does meet the theme, in the eyes of those who designed the theme and created the rules. Any film that doesn't qualify is either accepted as a non-compete, or just not offered as part of DVXFest.

So -- with that said, rest assured that every film you watched does, indeed, meet the festival committee's guidelines and does comply with what the fest organizers established as the theme.

[Bernie Hipos]

nice barry, thanks for clarifying that. I think and I believe that all of the films here met all the requirements needed for this fest. Let's just enjoy and be happy that this event is very successful.

[Wild Imagination Films]

I would like to offer an apology to all of those filmmakers I have inadvertently offended. Ted, Mark, Jack, Zak, Michael, Dustin, I am personally sorry if I was overly critical or improper in my posts on your threads.
Perhaps I do have a "closed" mind and shouldn't use the name Wild Imagination Films. They do seem a bit at odds. Perhaps I should open myself to a wider interpretation of theme and idea.
This thread was never intended to create the ire it evidently has. Again, I apologize.
I would like to clarify one direct and grossly incorrect comment. I never entered this festival for the prizes. I already have all the toys I need and require no more. I entered this fest to see if I could make a film 6 minutes long, different from all the rest, based on love with a camera woven into the story line in some way. Evidently I was able to meet the criteria to gain entry so in this I was successful. On story and other points, not so much.
In closing, the statements I made were the opinion of me, William James Gibson. They are not, never have been and should not be thought of as representing the collected group of people who worked on Winter. They are my own and perhaps the greatest disservice I have done is not to have made this perfectly clear from the beginning.
I truly hope my thoughts and opinions have not sullied this fest for anyone. Please accept my sincere apology if they have. I withdraw all comments and though this will not serve to undo what I have said, perhaps it will help in some small way.
-William James Gibson

[Sprocketboy]

Bonnie and Clyde is a wonderful love story.

[Beat Takeshi]

I posted about this in someones thread. I think I said there is a lot of cheating going on in this fest and something else about how I guess thats how people view love nowadays or something like that.

[FilmBoy77]

dramafest 2008 baby :)

[Ted Arabian]

Thanks Will, I appreciate and accept your apology statement.

Best,

Ted

[cinealma]

Hey, wasn't it my job to start a thread like this for each DVXFest? :grin::evil:

[ugafan]

I posted about this in someones thread. I think I said there is a lot of cheating going on in this fest

lol. i don't think anyone is trying to "cheat" their way to victory. all of these films were deemed worthy by those running the fest so they deserve to be here. end of story.

[Charlie Anderson]

ForumFest :)

[J.R. Hudson]

lol. i don't think anyone is trying to "cheat" their way to victory. all of these films were deemed worthy by those running the fest so they deserve to be here. end of story.

I think he meant 'cheating in love' ! :engel017:

[bosindy]

yea, I'm pretty sure Aram (beat) meant infidelity in the film stories.

[Arrik]

No, I'm sure Aram meant cheating like some entrants were using cheat codes: up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, b, a, b, a....

Friggin' cheaters!

[Luis Caffesse]

up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, b, a, b, a....

That one gives you an automatic 50 votes.
:thumbsup:



http://blogs.columbiatribune.com/gameover/Contra.jpg

[Arrik]

Exactly, I'm plugging in Game Genie to my P2 slot for the next fest...... Infinite Macgregor. Better watch out, Luis!

[Jack Daniel Stanley]

Infinite Macgregor would equal infinite DQ :)

[Mark Johnson]

Infinite Macgregor would equal infinite DQ :)

:grin: ROFL

[Kholi]

Exactly, I'm plugging in Game Genie to my P2 slot for the next fest...... Infinite Macgregor. Better watch out, Luis!

LMFAO. Now THIS is a quote.

[Charlie Anderson]

EmailFest? A character gets an email that changes his or her life for the better/worse