<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Download Film Junk Podcast for May 28th, 2007</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/</link>
	<description>Blog And Podcast</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:43:11 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sean</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-130171</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2007 12:47:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-130171</guid>
		<description>Henrik, I don&#039;t remember anymore but it may have been me that said the running time supported Jay&#039;s theory that it felt &quot;budget&quot;. If I did say that, it would only be because animated movies in particular have a constant overhead associated with how long they are, and the ending definitely felt rushed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Henrik, I don&#8217;t remember anymore but it may have been me that said the running time supported Jay&#8217;s theory that it felt &#8220;budget&#8221;. If I did say that, it would only be because animated movies in particular have a constant overhead associated with how long they are, and the ending definitely felt rushed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay C.</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-129091</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay C.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2007 03:57:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-129091</guid>
		<description>No, I said that the animation, backgrounds, and overall look made it feel budget.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, I said that the animation, backgrounds, and overall look made it feel budget.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henrik</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-128988</link>
		<dc:creator>Henrik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 23:49:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-128988</guid>
		<description>But you specifically pointed out the fact that it was short as one of the reasons that you didn&#039;t like it. You adressed it and said it weakened the movie by making it feel budget.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But you specifically pointed out the fact that it was short as one of the reasons that you didn&#8217;t like it. You adressed it and said it weakened the movie by making it feel budget.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay C.</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-128987</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay C.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 23:43:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-128987</guid>
		<description>But it doesn&#039;t matter that it was short if I didn&#039;t think the movie itself was all that great. I don&#039;t like something simply because it&#039;s short or hate something simply because it&#039;s long.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But it doesn&#8217;t matter that it was short if I didn&#8217;t think the movie itself was all that great. I don&#8217;t like something simply because it&#8217;s short or hate something simply because it&#8217;s long.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henrik</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-128958</link>
		<dc:creator>Henrik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 21:08:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-128958</guid>
		<description>You said that it felt like it had been cut short, and that added to the argument that it was a very budget movie. Instead of saying it was short and that&#039;s good because it doesn&#039;t need to be long.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You said that it felt like it had been cut short, and that added to the argument that it was a very budget movie. Instead of saying it was short and that&#8217;s good because it doesn&#8217;t need to be long.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay C.</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-128953</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay C.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 20:24:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-128953</guid>
		<description>I said what? That TMNT looked budget? Yes, I did. What does that have to do with the running time or POTC3?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I said what? That TMNT looked budget? Yes, I did. What does that have to do with the running time or POTC3?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henrik</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-128932</link>
		<dc:creator>Henrik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 19:53:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-128932</guid>
		<description>You said it on the podcast though. I was just pointing out the inconsistency.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You said it on the podcast though. I was just pointing out the inconsistency.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay C.</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-128923</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay C.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 19:27:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-128923</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re the one making the comment! I have no idea what the two have to do with eachother.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re the one making the comment! I have no idea what the two have to do with eachother.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henrik</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-128918</link>
		<dc:creator>Henrik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 19:06:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-128918</guid>
		<description>&quot;All filler no killer&quot;? What a horrible typo. I meant to say &quot;All killer no filler&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;All filler no killer&#8221;? What a horrible typo. I meant to say &#8220;All killer no filler&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henrik</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-128917</link>
		<dc:creator>Henrik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 19:04:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-128917</guid>
		<description>You tell me!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You tell me!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay C.</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-128781</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay C.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 13:55:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-128781</guid>
		<description>What does the movie seeming &#039;budget&#039; have to do with the running time?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What does the movie seeming &#8216;budget&#8217; have to do with the running time?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henrik</title>
		<link>http://www.filmjunk.com/2007/05/29/download-film-junk-podcast-for-may-28th-2007/comment-page-1/#comment-128667</link>
		<dc:creator>Henrik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 07:24:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmjunk.com/?p=4642#comment-128667</guid>
		<description>About the TMNT comment... You complain about PotC being bloated and overstaying its welcome. Fair enough, I share your opinion in regards to the first two movies. But TMNT comes along, a movie that I think sits in the same genre as PotC, and is short, to-the-point, some might even say it is &quot;All filler no killer&quot;. But not only do you not give it props for it - which is fine, if you didn&#039;t think it was a good thing about the movie - but you bash it, saying it makes the movie seem &#039;budget&#039;? That doesn&#039;t make sense to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>About the TMNT comment&#8230; You complain about PotC being bloated and overstaying its welcome. Fair enough, I share your opinion in regards to the first two movies. But TMNT comes along, a movie that I think sits in the same genre as PotC, and is short, to-the-point, some might even say it is &#8220;All filler no killer&#8221;. But not only do you not give it props for it &#8211; which is fine, if you didn&#8217;t think it was a good thing about the movie &#8211; but you bash it, saying it makes the movie seem &#8216;budget&#8217;? That doesn&#8217;t make sense to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
