GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

SERENITY great cinema? Compared to what?

POSTED BY: HOWARD
UPDATED: Thursday, November 3, 2005 15:41
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 20544
PAGE 2 of 3

Monday, October 31, 2005 4:50 PM

UNSARDONIC


Quote:

Originally posted by Howard:
Same with all Paltrow esque movie culture
one is meant to buy it as "deep" and "really
thoughtful" but of course it is a big NOT!



Hey!! I LIKE Gwinnie in her movies, man! Have you SEEN "Mrs. Parker & the Vicious Circle"? ...flat out one of the greatest movies of all time!! She got, I believe it was, her first post-adolescent role (after "Hook") in that movie, along with some girl named Heather Graham that no one had every heard of before... Freakin' ReMARKable that movie was... so I happen to think she deSERVed that Oscar® for "Shakespeare..."

Hey, but who cares what-I-think...

Some years ago, when the internet was but a gleam in DARPA's eye, there was a network called PAN (the "Performing Artists' Network"), on which I had an interchange with none other than Barry Manilow. He was looking up movie scripts to produce, as I recall and, BTW... I had one.

I told him he just wouldn't like it 'cause... y'know... 'it didn't involve the 'Copa'... and he sent me a very strong email which I think I can still quote verbatim, as it has stuck with me so completely well:

"Never - NEVER - badmouth anyone in the Industry as, you'll never know if that very, one, person is the one you're going to count on to save your (professional) life some day."

I have taken that advice to heart...

HOHOHO

Deep-Or-Not-Gwinnie-Rocks "or your friends will think you're a stupid, inbred stack of meat"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 4:59 PM

DIETCOKE


Just curious, Howard. Did you only see Serenity once?

NY/NJ Browncoats: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/firefly_nyc

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 4:59 PM

UNSARDONIC


Quote:

"All you people up there, in city hall,
Your f***ing it up for the people that's in the streets"
Tim Tim Timmy!



TIM TIM TIMMY!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ooh! Ooh! Ooh!, 'Oldhag,' you CAN'T be THAT 'old' if you think 'TimTimTimmy' rocks

On the other hand, I'm 54 and I think Freakin' System-of-a-Down RROOOOOOLLLLSSSS!!!!!!!

....just sayin'...

y'don't have to b'lieve me...

HOHOHO

um, 'Tim-TIm-Timmy,' "or your friends will think you're a stupid, inbred stack of meat"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 5:08 PM

OLDHAG


Heh, I'm actually only 20. My nickname at work, is Timmy or Tim Tim Timmy cuz my name is Timothy. funny how that works. And Old Hag is my GamerTag on Xbox. I didn't know what else to call myself on here so I just chose that. See, there's a method to my madness!

I'm glad that you like System of a Down. I think that even though their really popular that their still really damn good. Be sure to get there other half of there album coming out Nov. 22. Also the same time the X-box 360 is coming out, which i already have reserved and payed for( not that i'm bragging or anything) what the hell, i'm bragging and happy about it. I can't wait till it comes out!!!

"This is a song for the people in the streets,
not the people in city hall!" <---quote from Tenacious D
Tim Tim Timmy!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 5:09 PM

QUEENOFTHENORTH


Quote:

Originally posted by liminalosity:
I can hardly wait to see Narnia
for a little brain candy!
oh goody oh

Limi

Shiny Trees! Yavanna made Shiny Trees!



I can't wait to see Narnia either! I think it's gonna be so great! Oh, and OldHag, glad to see you've learned a lesson or two :). The important thing is you always change your mind.

I give to you the Seeker of Serenity, the Valkyrie Warrior, the Gourmet Cook and the Truth Scoper.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 5:36 PM

RIVER6213


Is there a name for what Howard's suffering from?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 5:43 PM

QUEENOFTHENORTH


I think it's called prentensiosity. Or something like that.

I give to you the Seeker of Serenity, the Valkyrie Warrior, the Gourmet Cook and the Truth Scoper.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 5:49 PM

SEVENPERCENT


Quote:

Originally posted by Howard:
BUT...

if you has said...

Anything staring Gweneth Paltrow for your
cinema

and

Clinton for your politics

that would be not just stupid

but truly sinister.




Well, call the devil and sign me up for The Sinister Satan Army. I particularly (as a lit person) liked Shakespeare in Love, and I voted for Clinton at least once.

For those of you that aren't used to it, though, welcome to the wonderful world that is Howard. He's just this much fun on the RWED board, too. It takes special skills to piss off Citizen and Auraptor in the same thread, but he managed. On several occasions.

------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 6:03 PM

UNSARDONIC


Quote:

Originally posted by SevenPercent:
Quote:

...It takes special skills to piss off Citizen and Auraptor in the same thread, but he managed. On several occasions.



...butbutbuttabuttabutt...

..he pee'd me off, too


...oh yeah: he pissed me off (I forgot):

the blighter

HOHOHO

I'm having 'mood swings ...of a sort...' because "my friends think I'm a stupid, inbred stack of meat"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 9:17 PM

HOWARD




Dear SevenPercent

I am only too happy to oblige!!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 9:22 PM

HOWARD



Actually I never liked CITIZEN KANE
I much prefer THE TRIAL and so did
Mr Welles.

For years I felt alone in saying that
THE TRIAL is a better Welles film
than KANE. Until a wonderful LASERDISC
of THE TRIAL was released and in the
liner notes Welles is quoted in an]
interview as saying that for me THE
TRIAL is better.

The problem with the likes of THE TERMINATOR
is that giving your money for that crap just
encourages the studios.


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 31, 2005 10:51 PM

MISSKITTEN


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by Unsardonic:
Okay...

I'll start:

Here's one: speaking as a film maker (writer/producer), I THINK 'SERENITY' IS ONE OF THE BEST MOVIES EVER MADE.

Now, who'll 'second' me on this commotion?

Qualification: 'Best movies ever made' meaning a cross section to include musicals, drama, science-fiction, and comedy.....
Then DAMN RIGHT Serenity's one of the BEST movies EVER MADE!!!!!

You are seconded!

Chrisisall!



I know I'm supposed to say "third", but it sounds so silly :P Anyway count me in ;) It's straight through amazing, I can't wait to see it again. I've been to other movies maybe a second time to show it to a friend, but this one keeps dragging me back, cause I simply can't get enough of it!



*~*~*

"Joss, if you kill him now I'll stuff a compression coil up your ass sideways!"
~ Kaylee, "Serenity in 2000 words or less"

Kaylee's the perfect woman!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 2:01 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST


Unsardonic wrote:

Quote:

Here's one: speaking as a film maker (writer/producer), I THINK 'SERENITY' IS ONE OF THE BEST MOVIES EVER MADE.

And, By GAWD, I can go on for MONTHS about the bajillion reasons why. I agree with all the lists on this thread - many are movies that I consider "perfect - very many...

Now, who'll 'second' me on this commotion?

As to the lists: I notice none of you mentioned Piero Pasolini and I ...welll... if ya wanna intense cinema experience, just check out 'Salo' some time... this movie is soo Friggin' Intense, most people simply can't make it through a half hour, well... any amount of it. It stunned me so much that I was able to watch the entire thing, well... it was like, kinda, a trainwreck... or Meatloaf or Wendy O. & the Plasmatics in concert: you can't avert your eyes; you must look... because it's truly unbelievable. So after it finished, I watched it all over again, just 'cause I couldn't believe I'd seen it all the way through once.



Hey Unsardonic how you doing? I don't think we've conversed before. I have a few dozen things I'd like to talk to you about. All friendly no worries.

I've seen Salo and I wanted to discuss it with you because I didn't think it such a tour de force.

You see, we were encouraged to see it in our own time while I was at college, all those years ago and personally I found it redundant.

I say this not coz I was shocked, I'm not the shockable kinda fellow, no just that for me 'shocking' cinema is a one trick pony. I also find that it is so easy to render a viewer shocked, that it falls into the catagory of 'easy' cinema and really ultimately little is achieved.

Now I don't mean to sound so flippant, clearly it was a well thought out piece of work, but aside from the elements of shock what else have you? Also wouldn't it have been a greater achievement, from Passolini's point of view if he had utilised the camera in a more subtle way to evocke the horror within the narrative? What he has done is really perverse the medium, so much so that, he creates to much attention to 'set-up' and scenes. Making the entire work a series of 'sketches' almost of violence... In other words you can see it coming, to the point of well:

"We're going to witness a shocking act"

Ooops

"Here is the shocking act!"

and

"That was the shocking act, how shocking eh?"

I generally regard films that purposefully attempt to shock as lazy cinema. Cronenberg does this for the main, to my mind, some of Godards stuff too, (not a fan of his stuff really) and the intellectualizing of its' [the film's] subject matter does not make it an intelligent piece of work.

Secondly: I see you're a write and producer.....
hmmmm wanna collaborate on something? I'm a cartoonist.

And I second what you said about SERENITY. It is a cracking film.

Cheers
The
Somnambulist

www.cirqus.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 8:34 AM

LIMINALOSITY


Quote:

Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
Here's one: speaking as a film maker (writer/producer), I THINK 'SERENITY' IS ONE OF THE BEST MOVIES EVER MADE.



Yes, me too. I think it beats a few things on the lists above as well.

Shiny Trees! Yavanna made Shiny Trees!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 9:00 AM

QUEENOFTHENORTH


Quote:

Originally posted by liminalosity:
Quote:

Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
Here's one: speaking as a film maker (writer/producer), I THINK 'SERENITY' IS ONE OF THE BEST MOVIES EVER MADE.



Yes, me too. I think it beats a few things on the lists above as well.

Shiny Trees! Yavanna made Shiny Trees!



Yeah, I'm gonna have to . . . um, fifth? that. Whatever. It's an awesome movie. Note: I also totally liked Terminator. But that apparently makes me a person of lesser intelligence.

I give to you the Seeker of Serenity, the Valkyrie Warrior, the Gourmet Cook and the Truth Scoper.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 9:12 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I didn't want to start a new thread but have y'all seen this review of Serenity?

www.worldsgreatestcritic.com/serenity.html#title

---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 9:15 AM

STORYMARK


I have to join up with the camp that thinks SERENITY is a great movie, a new sci-fi classic.

I also consider THE TERMINATOR to be a modern sci-fi classic.

As far as all these lists go, I've not seen all the films listed by any means. But I have seen several. I liked some, didn't like others.

I also believe in a division between "films" and "movies". And I believe that just because a film/movie is in a foreign language, it is not automatically of higher quality. As the saying goes, 90% of everything is crap. Including foreign films. Artsy pretentiouse crap is still crap.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 9:34 AM

ROLAND


Quote:

Originally posted by Howard:



The problem with the likes of THE TERMINATOR
is that giving your money for that crap just
encourages the studios.




Boy, he just keeps insulting people, doesn't he. Terminator 2 is my favorite movie ever. I hope people keep giving money to my favorite movies so they make more like them. Most people I know like to go to movies to be entertained. My favorite movies are ones that entertain me. Most intellectual movies do not entertain me. Thank God Howard is in the minority or all they would make would be intellectual movies and a lot of us wouldn't have any movies to watch anymore.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 10:13 AM

RIVER6213


Serenity is a very good movie, but it isnt one of the greatest movies ever; I enjoyed it very much and it brought me into the Firefly 'verse, for which I am glad.

Terminator and Terminator 2 were very good movies, especially Terminator II. I can't understand why anyone would think it wasnt very good.

enuff said

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 10:25 AM

IDRAWART


hey howard, you missed a few- here are a couple of MY favorites as long as this is a thread for our own personal favorite movie lists.
And Serenity rocks and is at the top of mine...because of the characters, plain and simple.

Foul play
medicine man
dear frankie
iron giant
educating rita (chick flick)

ps. please remember that Joss had 39 mil to work with and did it in Los Angeles area and kept it with in budget by being efficient with time, knowing a good story has great strength when it comes to movies.
just my 2 cents!




I live the sky when it's just after sunset, that deep velvet blue.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 10:45 AM

INSANITYLATER


Quote:

Originally posted by RiveR6213:


Terminator and Terminator 2 were very good movies, especially Terminator II. I can't understand why anyone would think it wasnt very good.

enuff said



Effects wise, T2 was a milestone, as far as plot, I have serious issues with it. If they really did destroy the items that led to the delevopment of Skynet then the very next scene after the T101 sinks into the molten metal should have been Sarah Connor waiting on tables at the same moment the original Terminator movie started. The timeline should have corrected itself and the events of both movies should have just been nullified. I generally have issues with time travel movies like Back to the Future. When the Delorean hit 88 MPH it traveled in time not space so it appeared in the field where the mall was eventually to be built.. wrong. It would have popped into deep space and it would have taken 30 years for the Earth to get to where the Delorean and its frozen occupant would be waiting. To arrive in the same spot as you left but in a different time you would need to plot the movement of the Earth and the movement of the Solar System, Galaxy and Universe to have a correct exit point. But then someone told me I think too much.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Serenity NOW!!! ... Insanity later."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 10:57 AM

HOWARD




TO ALL:

Even if you think T2 is a milestone ( a
milstone of what? Making a bad actor into
a megastar? ) I would just like to thank
everyone for building up 70 replies to this
thread. It may have started off with nasty
replies but it has developed into a healthy
discussion thread.

Most appreciated.

H.


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 11:00 AM

HOWARD




TO ALL:

Even if you think T2 is a milestone ( a
milstone of what? Making a bad actor into
a megastar? ) I would just like to thank
everyone for building up 70 replies to this
thread. It may have started off with nasty
replies but it has developed into a healthy
discussion thread.

Most appreciated.

H.


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 11:29 AM

HOWARD



No one is saying that T1/T2 were not well
made.

You seem to have a problem making a distinction
between the quality of production and the
values, mentality etc the content projects.

For me THE TERMINATOR culture is a very
reactionary reinforcement of the worst kind
of values promoted by corporate media and
corporate society.

It is part of a video-game culture which by
definition is NO culture at all.

The films of James Cameron are precisely the
kind of stalwarts that are used to block any
kind of enlightened cinema from the mainstream
and the paradox is that the more money a movie
of that type has got behind it the more the
corporate mass media gives it massive free
publicity. To studios who can well afford their
own PR. While indie and medium budget films
with more thoughtful and challenging content
and very small PR budgets receive no such
generosity from the corporate mass media.
Both the promoted and the promoters share the
same narrow and intolerant corporate capitalist
agenda within a media complex that makes sure
the populace knows next to nothing about the
truth concerning United States foreign and
corporate policy. TERMINATOR movies are a
mechanism used as WMD...WEAPONS OF MASS
DISTRACTION to keep people's minds filled with
childlike fantasies. To ensure those same minds
know next to nothing about the massive
suffering endured by humanity as a result of
one's own government and private sector crimes
abroad. As well as the well hidden suffering
at home. Such as was revealed when Hurricane
Katrina blew the lid off a brutal society
with under-caste Third World poverty at the
core of the leading First World nation. No
more denials or self-delusions were possible
when the true nature of American society was
on display before the eyes of the whole world
thanks to Katrina who in paradox aided the
cause of justice and truth. By blowing away
the lies enforced by a corporate media that
prefers to dish out free publicity to action
movies rather than do its job and report as
real journalists. In one court-case FOX NEWS
won a case when they were accused quite
accurately of censoring news at the behest of
their sponsors (relating to poisons found in
milk Americans feed their children every day)
they won the case only because in the State
of Florida it turns out there is NO law against
a television news organisation telling lies in
its news coverage. FOX won because it is legal
for them to lie according to Florida Law. In
a Kafkaesque twist the whistle-blowing
journalists were then prosecuted under Florida
Law for breach of contract. They refused to lie
in the story they were writing when FOX bosses
told them to...this was a breach of contract.

It is a case of a reactionary reverse Robin
Hood ism...stealing from the poor to promote
the rich back to the poor.

Instead of watching crap like TERMINATOR
buy a copy of THE CORPORATION the above account
and many other issues are covered in the body
of the documentary and then in even more
depth in supplementary 2nd disc. A masterpiece
DVD.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 12:40 PM

STORYMARK


Now your statring to sound like a conspiracy nut.

Now, I won't argue that most big hollywoord movies are crap. And I agree that a lot of them serve to degrade our culture. And they often serve as a distraction from the real world.

But sometimes that's not a bad thing. It's called escapism. Most movies are meant to entertain. Some succeed, others don't.

And while the corporations undoubtedly profit from these movies, and are happy to capitalize on the distractions they provide, I think you're take on it is a little too conspiracy-oriented.

First of all, people like to see those movies. People vote with their wallets, and if they wanted every movie to be a deep, thought provoking sociological study, those films would be more successfull. Sure, they don't get the massive promotions that action movies do, but if they did, do you honestly think that THE CORPORATION would have been a blockbuster if it had been advertised more? The film business is a business. Period. What makes money, gets made.

If Hollywood were to stop making movies like THE TERMINATOR et al tomorrow, do you really think we'd see a huge boom in attendance for "enlightened cinema"? Maybe. But I think we'd see the film industry go out of business real quick.

Secondly, do you think James Cameron makes the movies he does because it serves a corporate agenda? Or because those are the stories he likes to tell? Particularly in the case of the first TERMINATOR, he fought to get the money to make that movie, because it was the movie he wanted to make. And there are always going to be talented, creative people who want to tell fun stories, that hopefully people will enjoy, and not be out to change the world.

I understand your picking out Cameron, because his films have been highly successfull, and have a big profile. But the fact is, in terms of big-budget action/adventure flicks, Cameron's movies tend to carry more social commentary than most of his peer's work. This includes both TERMINATOR movies, as well as THE ABYSS and his series DARK ANGEL (of which I am not a fan, for the sake of clarity).

Would things be better if more people were trying to change the world? Sure. Does that mean that those who just wish to entertain and be entertained should be derided. I say no.

I write sci-fi, and I make films. None of them was designed to cast a light on corporate corruption, or the evils of the world, at least not yet (I have some ideas....). None of them have been as good as Jim Cameron's, or Joss' work. I make them because I love to do it. I do it because those types of stories entertain me, and my greatest hope is that they'll bring a bit of fleeting happiness to someone else. And I sure as hell don't do it to advance any corporate agenda.

And I'm gonna keep doin' it.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 1:41 PM

BOBSTER


As a really serious movie lover who liked "Die Hard" and both of the first two "Terminator" films but who is also an avowed ultra-non-supporter of G.W.B. (which has no relevence, realy, but I thought I'd throw that in), I do think that's often a false distinction between "entertainment" and "art."

I've always held that any sufficiently accomplished work of art is entertaining in that it involves you, either intellectually, emotionally or both. And, on occasion, works that are designed to be "just entertaining" achieve a kind of grace that turns them into something that is very much like a work of art. Movies like "Singin' in the Rain" or "Stagecoach" are both potboilers who's makers would have laughed had you mentioned the word "art" to them, but they are also acknowlged master.

It seems to me that Joss is a kind of throwback to filmmakers of that era -- but one who's actually read some film theory (he named a character on "Buffy" after the renowned cineaste Robin Wood, for chrissakes!), so it's a bit complicated.

"Serenity" is designed mainly to entertain, but to also have a certain number of levels to it for those of us who care to look. I think it's a very good movie, probably better than "Terminator 2" at least, and possibly "Die Hard" (which is a very clever little movie when you examine it closely, btw).

Is it a "great" movie in the same way the "Citizen Kane" or "Weekend" or "The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp" or "Rear Window" or "The Gold Rush" is "great"? (btw, I found "The Trial" a crashing bore, and I LOVE Kafka!). Maybe not. Maybe so. Maybe in 20 years people will think so, more likely not quite.

In any case, I think trying to impress people with a long list of movies that you feel superior for liking is the cheapest trick out there.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 1:45 PM

BOBSTER


As a really serious movie lover who liked "Die Hard" and both of the first two "Terminator" films but who is also an avowed ultra-non-supporter of G.W.B. (which has no relevence, realy, but I thought I'd throw that in), I do think that's often a false distinction between "entertainment" and "art."

I've always held that any sufficiently accomplished work of art is entertaining in that it involves you, either intellectually, emotionally or both. And, on occasion, works that are designed to be "just entertaining" achieve a kind of grace that turns them into something that is very much like a work of art. Movies like "Singin' in the Rain" or "Stagecoach" are both potboilers who's makers would have laughed had you mentioned the word "art" to them, but they are also acknowlged masterpieces.

It seems to me that Joss is a kind of throwback to filmmakers of that era -- but one who's actually read some film theory (he named a character on "Buffy" after the renowned cineaste Robin Wood, for chrissakes!), so it's a bit complicated.

"Serenity" is designed mainly to entertain, but to also have a certain number of levels to it for those of us who care to look. I think it's a very good movie, probably better than "Terminator 2" at least, and possibly "Die Hard" (which is a very clever little movie when you examine it closely, btw).

Is it a "great" movie in the same way the "Citizen Kane" or "Weekend" or "The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp" or "Rear Window" or "The Gold Rush" is "great"? (btw, I found "The Trial" a crashing bore, and I LOVE Kafka!). Maybe not. Maybe so. Maybe in 20 years people will think so, more likely not quite.

Which brings me to another distinction, "favorite" versus "greatest" -- it's a subjective thing, but I think we all know the difference. "Serenity" is possibly not the "greatest" film made this year...but (short of something really mindblowing to me coming out this year) it's quite probably my favorite of this year because I have a deep emotional attachment to the characters and story that goes beyond the movie itself. Can't be helped.

In any case, I think trying to impress people with a long list of movies that you feel superior for liking is the cheapest trick out there.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 1:57 PM

QUEENOFTHENORTH


I think I've actually gone blind from reading Howard's latest rant. *waves hand in front of eyes* Well, maybe not. But, jeez man, GET A LIFE! Being an angry snob does not make you better than others, nor will it convince anybody else that you are. Also, I like Terminator and I'm not American, so I don't think your paranoid corporate America argument even applies. So, take a deep breath, get off your pedestal and try not to suck, okay?

I give to you the Seeker of Serenity, the Valkyrie Warrior, the Gourmet Cook and the Truth Scoper.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 2:04 PM

JAYTEE


After reading Howard's list the only movie I want to see now besides Serenity for the 5th time is "Howard's End"

Jaytee

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 2:06 PM

RIVER6213


They just want to argue. Nothing they say can ever make me not like the Terminator series, so they can waste bandspace all they want

I threw up on your bed...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 2:10 PM

DREAMTROVE


Does Serenity deserve to be on that list? Sure it does. We have of course all seen a good number of those films. Some of them were truly excellent. But most aren't in Serenity's Genre.

Also, the fanbase was pushing to have Serenity up around #125, not #4, so it's competition would be return of the jedi, not run lola run.

Objectively, Serenity is great cinema, even outside of the context of firefly.

You think we think so because we're fans?

Don't be absurd.

We are fans because we think so.

If Jeunet made a film about space cowboys that was witty and fun, we'd probably nominate it as well. Actually, I recall Joss calling him a two bit hack at some point. I don't really agree, I like Jeunet, but I also understand Joss' point. The long thought provoking ideas of Joss are subtley more profound, which Jean Pierre failed to grasp, which was a point of contention when they worked on a film together.

Isn't it curious though, that many of the people who made those films that you put on that list consider Joss to be a cinematic genius. In fact some of them might actually be responsible for his high ratings on IMDb :)

Also, it's ironic how self appointed film critics always uphold Magnolia as a beacon of originality.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 2:10 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
I have to join up with the camp that thinks SERENITY is a great movie, a new sci-fi classic.

I also consider THE TERMINATOR to be a modern sci-fi classic.

As the saying goes, 90% of everything is crap. Including foreign films. Artsy pretentiouse crap is still crap.


THANK YOU!!!!
*Applauds the voice of reason*
True Browncoats understand.

Chrisisall, right there with ya

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 2:21 PM

GIXXER


This really is a remarkably civilised site.

You'd think that, with it being about science fiction and populated with rabid geeky fanboys and girls (myself included) you'd get a much higher pillock count. Not so.

The message to Howard is, variously:

Go home and watch your films;

Leave me and the rest of the planet to watch ours;

Trust me, there are a lot of people* out there who would enjoy Freaky Friday much more than staring glumly at a Tarkovsky film. (Mind you, I can't fault his little glass ornaments and all the good stuff he did for Liberace.)

Please do not presume you have a monopoly on good taste. (Or, if you must, don't diss a classic like Terminator, of all the films in all the bars in all the world. You're not doing yourself any favours.)

G

*OK, maybe it's just me...




"The man who comes to take care of my piranhas told me that if I left West Ham he would kill all my fish."

Paolo Di Canio

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 2:26 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by InsanityLater:
When the Delorean hit 88 MPH it traveled in time not space so it appeared in the field where the mall was eventually to be built.. wrong. It would have popped into deep space and it would have taken 30 years for the Earth to get to where the Delorean and its frozen occupant would be waiting. To arrive in the same spot as you left but in a different time you would need to plot the movement of the Earth and the movement of the Solar System, Galaxy and Universe to have a correct exit point.

The Doc took that all into account, that part was child's play for him! Getting the uranium, now THAT was hard.

And I've already gone through the (valid) points you made about Terminator 1 & 2 on another, albeit old, thread in Other Science Fiction Series, it's sort of like 'fuzzy' timelines. Time streams tend to try to remain constant, and destroying the arm and chip only forced Skynet to develope itself in another way, preserving most of the events, just altering moments. The exact John we know would not be born, but 'a' John would take his place! And none of us would ever know the difference.
(Didja buy it? I think it does make a perverted kind of sense...)
See, the John Conner we saw in T2 was not actually the 'same' john we saw in the original. But close enough to complete the events that lead into the war with the machines...:)

Chrisisall, fanboy without end

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 3:21 PM

FLAMERESISTENT


Hey, I liked Magnolia well enough!

But really, this thread, Trollism 101, or did the guy just want a little cinema talk but was too inept to broach the subject in a more elegant fashion?

The cynical trollish pushing of the buttons sure to rile up folks, or a lonely soul in need of cinematic fellowship?

A few movies I thought were enjoyable:

2001
A Lion in Winter
Funny Bones
Terminator I
A Knight's Tale (best overall goofy fun movie with a nod to Chaucer)
Much Ado About Nothing
Elizabeth

I enjoyed Serenity a great deal, enjoyed the story and the performances, and the Operative's Shakespearian-flavored tragedy shadings.

But I still think Jubal Early was my favorite villain.

Does that seem right to you?



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 3:22 PM

LIMINALOSITY


Quote:

Originally posted by Bobster:
And, on occasion, works that are designed to be "just entertaining" achieve a kind of grace that turns them into something that is very much like a work of art.

Is it a "great" movie in the same way the "Citizen Kane" or "Weekend" or "The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp" or "Rear Window" or "The Gold Rush" is "great"? Maybe not. Maybe so. Maybe in 20 years people will think so, more likely not quite.



Hey! Bingo!
I find Serenity a great movie in exactitively the same breath as "Rear Window". Huge touchdown points from me for coming up with that title, though you may not share the sentiment.

Howard! Dude!
"stealing from the poor to promote the rich back to the poor" was in the very news I heard today that WallMart is lobbying to raise the minimum wage, which will have the affect of making it harder for local businesses to make a go of it, but will hardly touch the WM(D). If you didn't make so loud with the finger pointing and namecalling, you might better convey your actual point.

Shiny Trees! Yavanna made Shiny Trees!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 4:43 PM

ZIPPLY


Howard's original post was not about which movies to see, but rather which movies to own ("...that well deserve your purchase on DVD"). I have two very different lists for those two different purposes.

So I confess, my list of Must-Owns includes stuff like Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Young Frankenstein, Animal House, and Planet of the Apes.

Sometimes aerosol cheese'll satisfy you in ways that no wholesome and nutritious meal ever could.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 4:54 PM

KNIBBLET


So who is this Howard guy and why am I seeing nothing but negativity from him?

Perhaps when something new and semi-shiny comes out (think pet rock only with a sound track) he'll move along to another obsession.

For me, I'm sticking with the same obsession. Joss Whedon is my Master now.

http://fireflytalk.libsyn.com/
mmmmm.... delicious firefly talk

http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/MN-Firefly/

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 5:15 PM

UNSARDONIC


Quote:

Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
...I say this not coz I was shocked, I'm not the shockable kinda fellow, no just that for me 'shocking' cinema is a one trick pony. I also find that it is so easy to render a viewer shocked, that it falls into the catagory of 'easy' cinema and really ultimately little is achieved.

Hi there, ya sleepwalker

Well, it took me a bit to get back to you due to the work schedule. Lessee... Sir Henry (Rawlinson) would have said, "I've just spent the last 10 hours buried up the backsides of the filth hounds of Hades!" ...so, trying to get past my nitrogen narcosis & readjust to regular atmospheric pressure...

s'anyway... you make a bunch of excellent points about 'Salo.' And I agree with many of them and, also, I agree with you in that I'm also not that particularly 'shockable.' I think had I taken some Evangelical Christian aquaintance of mine, well...THEY might well have been shocked. However, I have to tell you, I can't remember what my shockability was back around, I'm thinking, 1972, when I first saw it. If you can imagine the zeitgeist back then, even I might have been quite appalled in '72... I don't think I was but... I WAS shocked.

Now, I don't believe Pasolini shot it specifically for the point of "shocking" people. I believe he was making a political satire that was aimed at various political figures/events in Italian politics around the late 1960's or so... trying to imply that, if you were a member of such-&-such political party (Pasolini was a Communist, himself) then you were just beginning to dip your toes into the pond wherein, after a couple of good dips, you'd be incapable of avoiding ...raping & killing your own children, for example... I believe he was trying to make allegorical finger-pointing statements at whoever he despised. ....and trying to translate those kinds of ideas (whatever he was trying to say) into our CURrent sensibilities is about as seamless as trying to get the humor in a Python gag from 1969 that is specific to local-town-council-politics in some village in England back THEN... doesn't translate so well to the general populace.

So I don't really think Pasolini shot it to be secifically 'shocking' as you've interpreted; I believe he was extremely angry about political points of view that he disagreed with & was saying, "See! See how you bastards are?! THIS... is how you are!" He was being accusatory. ...ummm... my opinion... could be wrong.

Now to conclude my "Salo-ivations", a few years ago, I had a lovely conversation with a fellow who's a film composer & it was about art we both respected &, I dunno how we both arrived at this but, the conversation was about Prokofiev & Pasolini. He had just about the same take on "Salo" that I did but, he had a very interesting additional point. He pointed out that what it succeeds in doing is to "resensitize" the viewer to screen violence. His point was (& this was around 8 years ago), that all us movie-lovers are now so innured to screen violence that it falls off us like water off a duck's back. And he thought that this was a sad state of affairs... take your own perspective, for example: you can't even be affected by the awful horror depicted within "Salo" as, I'm guessing, you've already seen a whole lotta screen violence (not a criticism, BTW).

He & I had both been so strongly affected by it that, well... it just plain made us think hard about people who might behave this way or, well... it can't be denied that, throughout history, various human beings (even whole nations) have, in fact, behaved that way... and worse, even MUCH worse so... whether or not it worked on you, it certainly worked on me: I believe there is some cultural value in "resentizing" the average filmgoer to the (often) horrible events they see depicted on screen FOR THEIR AMUSEMENT. I mean, for what it's worth...

QUOTE Secondly: I see you're a write and producer.....
hmmmm wanna collaborate on something? I'm a cartoonist.

And I second what you said about SERENITY. It is a cracking film.


Well, the most completely precise answer to this is:
"Yes... and no..."

To explain myself: "Yes" because sure, absolutely, 'd love to, based on the presumption that we at least have Serenity'verse in common - & I like a whole lotta comics. Besides... if there's one job-skill required of a producer, it's collaboration, eh? I mean, the whole of the Industry is one, giant collaboration or... that movie didn't get made...

...and "No" because, well... I'm not a producer by choice or, because I went out & had enough skill in the Art to get hired by some company (well... I did... but, besides the point). I'm a producer out of necessity: it's the only way I could see to get my original creative output (& that of my production partner) shot & released while, simultaneously, retaining some modicum of freakin' control over it. THERE'S the rub... "creative control"....

So I don't work for some big studio or such, wherein my daily routine is somewhat predictable and maybe there'd be some downtime, OH no-ooo... nothing that normal... We have a dinkly, li'l, indie movie production house whose only purpose is creating these original works of cinematic art. There's several dozen of them already and only one has been completely shot - and immediately shelved (as inferior, by our own outrageously exacting standards).

My typical workweek is 80, 90, 100 hours... EVERY week... for the last two years. I've had exactly two days off in that time: one was Christmas last year - & even then, we had to have a morning buiness meeting before we wrapped for the afternoon; the other was because my immune system gave out and whatever bug I had laid me down too sick to move. ...just sayin'... there is no more complex, detail oriented, knowledge-intensive work one can take on than independent feature film production. None... not one, I gurantee... it'd be easier to be the President... at least he has an adequate staff and budget... and he can manage to find time for his family so, it's a good thing I don't have one... whew... sorry... was I ranting? ...hmmm...

Now... I'll tell you something else that, perhaps, people don't think about: Have you ever heard the phraselet, "Unsolicited Material?" Many producers - not all, but many... cannot accept (even categorically refuse to accept) "Unsolicitied Material." That means, something they didn't specifically ask a writer for or, I should say, have their agent ask the writer's agent for - in other words, some spec work a writer is approaching them with.

In the case of my company, it has a blanket policy saying that we won't do it; it's just simpler that way. I mean, first off, there's already enough distractions from our prime focus that, well... unsolicited projects would simply serve to diffuse that focus even further but, moreover... well, you might read in the paper that such-n-such producer/production company has just been sued because their highly-successful film that just grossed $250-megabucks domestic theatrical had ripped off ideas that, so-n-so prospective screenwriter submitted to that producer/company in a spec script he'd sent them ...15-ish years before... and if you're Amblin Entertainment or Lucasfilm & people send you, fully, 2,000 scripts a week, all you do is stack 'em up against the wall because there, for SURE, is nobody around there that has time to sort through any of it, much less read it... much LESS, "rip it off" for one of their OWN projects.

Anyway, we're for sure, not Steven Spielberg or George Lucas and, if we ever got hit by such a lawsuit, it'd sink us, pure and simple... therefore the company preempts that and says, "No accepting unsolicited material, period."

Now, that doesn't mean, I wouldn't want to see your stuff but, it DOES mean that the easiest way for me to see it is, if it's in print somewhere & I can go out & buy a copy which, I'd love to do.

Do you have any other work you like to compare it to that I might have an idea what it's like. I mean, I like a lot of comics, but not necessary all... some just don't grab me, eh? Or do you refer to any particular influences?

Sorry to go on so lonbg, so...

...if you made it his far, then you couldn't possible "be a stupid, inbred stack of meat"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 5:28 PM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...


Quote:

Originally posted by Howard:
... I would just like to thank
everyone for building up 70 replies to this
thread...
Most appreciated.

H.



Congratulations, you just got a firsthand example of how much of the American TV hit-factory works. A bit... er... ironic.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.net

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 5:34 PM

UNSARDONIC


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:

I also believe in a division between "films" and "movies". And I believe that just because a film/movie is in a foreign language, it is not automatically of higher quality. As the saying goes, 90% of everything is crap. Including foreign films. Artsy pretentiouse crap is still crap.




Ah-HAH!! There's a particularly excellent description of this 'divide' that most non-filmmaking folks never think of, I suspect. It's from Dov S-S Simens, a unique, some might say, ummm... "renegade"... independent film-production instructor, in his indispensable book "From Real to Deal." He says, every movie was a "film" once - that's how they all start, as: "Films. They don't become "movies" until they sell that first ticket to a member of the movie-going public. Once that "Film" is in a theater and has begun to sell tickets, it becomes - irrevocably and for all time - a "movie."

HOHOHO

...works for me...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 9:33 PM

FERREX


First, and I can't believe it hasn't been said before this, Howard, your mouth is talking. You might want to look to that.

Second, I consider Serenity to be one of the best movies ever made. Why? Well, the characters. The ship. The 'verse and all the shiny gos se in it. The ruttin' reavers. No ruttin' aliens. Believability. All the things that the 'great' sci-fi movies lacked. You can believe in Serenity. You don't need 400 poorly written books to make the 'verse come alive, ala Star Wars and Star Trek. The 'verse just is and that makes it all shiny.

Ballyhoo the BDM all you want. I encourage it. You can go hang out with Niska. You remember how smart he was right? It's where you belong. A Browncoat doesn't lay down arms. Those gorram feds at FOX and the purple bellies at Universal said they were gonna stroll through Serenity Valley and we made them choke on those words.

Now, for all you Bendises out there, 'Nice covering fire.'

Jayne, your mouth is talking. You might want to look to that.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 10:10 PM

3HEADEDMONKEY


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by InsanityLater:
Hey.. why not do the whole thing in Mandarin

I wanna see a version all in Greedo's language!!!

Mal: " Oooh la schulpa!"
Operative: "Yah, kappa tool tuk!"

Them's fightin' words!

Chrisisall, interpreter



actually, Greedo says "oola goota, solo?" which translates to "going somewhere, solo?"
and the launguage is rodian.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 1, 2005 11:49 PM

HOWARD


To those who worship at the alter of
THE TERMINATOR and never had any qualms
giving your movie to a studio for an
Arnie slaighter flick:

see:

http://www.slate.com/id/2086742/

The only flaw in this article is at the end
when the author presumes that the election
in California would be run on lines that
could be recognised as a legitimate electorial
process representative of the broad populace.
No such event took place.

Arnold Schwarzenegger became Gov of California
the same way Bush became President. Via the
total corruption of electorial procedure and
massive corporate corruption which included
by the way his friends at ENRON faking an
energy shortage to cause chaos under the
previous administration.

In addition to Arnold Schwarzenegger's history
of befriending and campaigning for a well
known Nazi one should not forgwet Arnold
Schwarzenegger's support for the
Reagan/Bush regime. At a time when the Reagan
gang had US armed,trained and financed Neo-
Nazi death squads rampaging through Central
America who accounted for the hideous murder
incorporating rape and mutilation of an
estimated 300,000 men, women and children.
The same administration who armed and aided
the racist National Socialist tyranny of
White Minority rule in South Africa.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 2, 2005 12:03 AM

HOWARD




I do found it amusing that when I write
in depth about anything citing specific
cases that can be researched and so forth
certain persons condascend by calling it
"a rant".

I cannot help but imagine that if I was
to write a glowing praise of Arnold
Schwarzenegger no such word would be applied
by such reactionary minded surfs.


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 2, 2005 6:12 AM

STORYMARK


Your all over the place with this topic, Howard.

Just because some of us liked THE TERMINATOR doesn't mean we're Schwarzeneggar/Bush supporters. Some undoubtedly are, but don't lump us all together.

For one, I pratically loath Bush. I do not live in California, so the gubenatorial race didn't effect me, but I assure you if I did live in CA, I would not have voted for ol' Arnie. Hell, I'm not particularly a fan of his, it's just that someone brought up a movie that he happened to be in, which most people here consider to be a very good movie.

And people are calling your posts rants because you...RANT. Having sources doesn't change the fact that it's a rant. You started this thread with an aggressive, superior attitude, and have continued that position in each subsequent post.

And having sources does not automatically legitimize your argument. In today's internet age, anyone can find backing for ANY position if they look hard enough.

Besides, some of us here don't really disagree with you.
Lots of crap films out there: Agreed.
People should watch more high-minded films: Agreed.
Corporate America Bad, Grrrr: Agreed.
Everone who doesn't watch "enlightened cinema like Howard" is a mouth-breathing simpleton: Well, that's where you loose most of us.

And come on, it's not like all the films on your list are enlightened. I believe you listed "RUN LOLA RUN" (Though I prefer the original title: LOLA RENDT - See, I can be pretentiouse too).

Now, I love that movie, and have seen it a lot. But it's a textbook case of style over substance. It was a movie with 30 minutes of story, with a gimmick that had already been done in a Bill Murray movie, and an episode of Star Trek.

I think it's pretty easy to make the case that the movie about the cyborg from the future had more social commentary and subtext than the movie about a girl running across town to bail her boyfriend out of a botched drug deal.

So, in other words...get over yourself.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 2, 2005 7:01 AM

HOWARD


STORYMARK:

EXCUSE ME!!!!!!!

For not conforming to your narrow
thread dictatorship!

EXCUSE ME!!!!!!!

For expanding topics and responding
to remarks made by others.

EXCUSE ME!!!!!!!

For having the inclination to share
culture and knowledge.

EXCUSE ME!!!

For rocking the comfortable delusion
of your childish playpen world view.

Now this is a rant, a justified one,
but one I admit. One you provoked!

I firmly reject the notion that my
paragraphs on FOX / Terminator etc
were a rant. They were perfectly calm
and accurate sentences pertaining to
information and facts draw from the
public domain to provoke a meaningful
discourse.

You and your chums of course could never be
accused of ranting. That is only for others
right?

Your definition of "ranting" = someone who
disagrees with you.

Last but not least:

Since when did a "rant" become a criminal
offense?


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 2, 2005 7:23 AM

GEEKMAFIA


Howard

people here want you to "share
culture and knowledge" but doing it in such a confrontational and pretentious manner will just get people angry... as it has





011101000110100001100101001000000111001101101001
011001110110111001100001011011000000110100001010

Liu koushui de biaozi he houzi de ben erzi.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 2, 2005 7:28 AM

LADYSHELLEY


Quote:

Originally posted by Howard:


The films of James Cameron are precisely the
kind of stalwarts that are used to block any
kind of enlightened cinema from the mainstream
and the paradox is that the more money a movie
of that type has got behind it the more the
corporate mass media gives it massive free
publicity. To studios who can well afford their
own PR. While indie and medium budget films
with more thoughtful and challenging content
and very small PR budgets receive no such
generosity from the corporate mass media.



So is your issue more with the large studio system or the quality of the films? Steven Spielburg made a lot of fun movies (Indiana Jones) and also great film (Schinlder's List).

While Cameron is responsible for some great action movies, he's also responsible for inventing new deep-sea cameras to investigate wrecks like Titanic.

I can agree that the studio's push out a lot of garbage; but the public doesn't swallow it whole if the box office for this year is any indication. Another thing to note is unless you live in New York or Los Angeles, the chances of seeing smaller films is nil; the small theaters that would show such fare are an endangerd species even in good sized cities like Denver, and the large cineplexes can't make enough money to stay open with them.

When I go to the movies, I want to be entertained, I want to forget for two hours the real world and all of the problems it contains. I don't need to see a cancer patient die, I've been there, I don't need to see the ravages of war, I've seen them. I want the happy ending, real life doesn't have one.



Lady Shelley
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.redhawke.org

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 2, 2005 7:37 AM

STORYMARK


It's okay, Howard.

You are excused.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL