Re: T3: Timeline Problems - SPOILERS

In article <ronaldinho_m-B6D024.19154314072003@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ron
<ronaldinho_m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> In article <9eh6hvoe00ljpjkbkks25st5np8nutph07@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>  Curt <curt_james@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
> > Ron <ronaldinho_m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > Jay Browning <moviewriter@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> the guy had been shot, he was in pain and dying. For all we know,
that
> > >> would have been the next thing he said if he had had a chance. It's
> > >> another classic action cliche, don't let the dying guy have the
chance
> > >> to say everything he needs to say so the hero has only half the
info.
> > >
> > >That's an aweful lot of justification for what amounts to something
that 
> > >we simply didn't see. 
> > 
> > Or choose not to see. If it's so awful, how would YOU have written it?
> 
>  Let me guess.
> 
>  You're joining this discussion from alt.fan.schwarzenegger, huh?

and how does that make his question invalid? 

I would ask the same thing. If you think it was such ****, then how
would you write it (since you apparently know how it should have been
done). 

And let's keep in mind the current discussion about LXG and being 'on
the nose'