PDA

View Full Version : Charlies Angel 2



Denver
06-27-2003, 05:15 AM
I saw it on there! It's a CAM, but the pic looks good!

accat13
06-27-2003, 05:55 AM
Old news it was out June 26 around 12.30 am ..its an svcd 2 files and the pic is so so should have left it vcd.. the jpeg on vcdquality looks ok

{I}{K}{E}
06-27-2003, 06:54 AM
you can download it of IRC

Ad
06-27-2003, 07:06 AM
god what a bad movie its gonna be too first one was shocking cant believe they made a second good for a perve but thats about it :P

ck-uk
06-27-2003, 09:32 AM
I second what a load of bollucks,any bodies who watch and like these movies must just b brain dead...excludin diaz of cause

LINDOREZ
06-27-2003, 09:38 AM
Yeah the only good bit was diaz dancing around in her underware at the start.

I downloaded the sample to CA 2 and it isn't that great at all. If your going to download it you might as well wait for a centropy. Thats if they can be bothered ripping such a bad movie. :D

{I}{K}{E}
06-27-2003, 11:57 AM
[TMD]Charlies.Angels.2.(loGisTic).Internal.CAM.(1of2).avi
Length:136378368 Bytes, 133182KB
UUHash:=UUmQcWMx1kPHjJC55SgsijGb1WY=

[TMD]Charlies.Angels.2.(loGisTic).Internal.CAM.(2of2).avi
Length:133187584 Bytes, 130066KB
UUHash:=snPBoJ5cFsZ/oMnn0TqGmGjn3gs=

Ad
06-27-2003, 01:50 PM
a shit TMD screener of a shit movie :lol: :lol:

MetroStars
06-28-2003, 02:44 PM
Drew Barrymore's good looks more than make up for this shit movie

oh and is bill murray in this 1

chimp2k2
06-28-2003, 04:24 PM
how cam people even bother downloading and watching CAM's.

they are soooooooo sh*it quality.

that1dude
06-28-2003, 04:26 PM
nope instead of bill murray they get his complete double berny mac. :blink:

MetroStars
06-28-2003, 04:27 PM
how cam people even bother downloading and watching CAM's.

they are soooooooo sh*it quality.


Well their better than nothing

Their can't be DVD rips for evrything

be_man31
06-28-2003, 10:51 PM
thats not the point! first off the cams are ok its the size of the movie that sucks! they should burn the movie at 540x320 instead of the shitty 320x120 or what ever the size is :rolleyes: thats what bugs me! why are they burning it that small and I don't want to hear the "I only have 56k" crap either! theres no excuse! why should the people with high speed suffer? people BURN THE CAM MOVIES AT 540X320 PLEASE! thank you! :D

namzuf9
06-29-2003, 02:01 AM
Originally posted by be_man31@28 June 2003 - 22:51
thats not the point! first off the cams are ok its the size of the movie that sucks! they should burn the movie at 540x320 instead of the shitty 320x120 or what ever the size is :rolleyes: thats what bugs me! why are they burning it that small and I don't want to hear the "I only have 56k" crap either! theres no excuse! why should the people with high speed suffer? people BURN THE CAM MOVIES AT 540X320 PLEASE! thank you! :D
Burn a cam? What do you suggest, petrol, gas, or just good old fashioned parafin?

On a serious note TMD are notorious for doing poor quality rencodes. I'd avoid them where possible. A new one to the scene is DaDuck, and they seem to do some good rencodes (SVCD/VCD to DivX) so keep your eye out for em.