I thought it'd be fun to start a thread for movie reviews based solely on pipes content.
For example, last night I watched Sherlock Holmes from 2009 with Robert Downey Jr. in the title role. It deserves high praise for ample pipe content. Not only were there multiple pipes, they were generally correct to the period, and one pipe was even pivotal to the plot. I will take one pipe off because Sherlock refers to his pipe as a clay at one point, which is true to the books, but the pipe clearly looks to me to be a briar. Rating - Very Good: 4 out of 5 pipes. (I thought the movie itself was pretty crappy but that's not the point is it.)
Shawshank Redemption. Rating - Horrible: 0 out of 5 pipes! :lol:
For example, last night I watched Sherlock Holmes from 2009 with Robert Downey Jr. in the title role. It deserves high praise for ample pipe content. Not only were there multiple pipes, they were generally correct to the period, and one pipe was even pivotal to the plot. I will take one pipe off because Sherlock refers to his pipe as a clay at one point, which is true to the books, but the pipe clearly looks to me to be a briar. Rating - Very Good: 4 out of 5 pipes. (I thought the movie itself was pretty crappy but that's not the point is it.)
Shawshank Redemption. Rating - Horrible: 0 out of 5 pipes! :lol: