What a great film. Wouldn't it be cool if we all could use 100% of our brains?
>>69631685
thanks again for recommending this /tv/
another golden winner suggested by /tv/!
>>69631685
>complaining about a film no one remembers to prove your intelligence (i.e. ability to remember a widely-known factoid)
go back to r eddit
>>69631685
never gonna happen senpai
... people are too tarded
>>69631685
>implying that our body generated excess brain at our creation, which is just sitting there doing nothing because it's """""""inactive"""""""
>>69631980
*my sides*
>>69631980
>>69631760
you saw through an obviously bullshit movie premise, you must be a brain surgeon
>Unlock the other 90% of my brain
>Immediately go into a seizure
>>69632066
>using sarcasm to make other anons look stupid instead of respecting their opinions and accepting that not everyone thinks the same way you do
da fuk?
i'd use 100% of scarlett's body if you understand the implicit meaning of this statement
>>69632334
I think I do. What would you do with her spleen?
>>69631685
>Wouldn't it be cool if we all could use 100% of our brains?
>Falling for the "We only use 10% of our brain" meme.
You are exactly the type of retard this movie was made for.
>>69632043
>>69632127
>*my sides*
>da fuk?
>9gag tier memes
please refrain from polluting this board
>it's good because it's making fun of Scientology!
2007 called. They don't want you back
>>69632388
>implying their is something not intelligent about clean jokes
... /pol/ user dectected
>>69631685
Is it a fun flick to watch when bored/drunk?
>>69632365
i would eat it, in the hopes of somehow benefiting from the jewish succubus magic contained within
>>69632518
*there
haha
whoops
my bad
>>69632518
jokes on you, I never browse /pol/
also, check these
>>69632662
haha
you got me
>notices anons numbers
omg... it even has a watermark
i wish my computer could use 100% of its computer
>>69631685
nope, not a "great movie". Sorry. just another average, one. and the "100%" brain question.
Do you think you can bait someone with that?
Actually, you can't think, that's why we have this thread.
