|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 229 responses total. |
senna
|
|
response 125 of 229:
| 
Feb 3 01:49 UTC 2000 |
Hunt for Red October is non-fictional? Wow.
|
goose
|
|
response 126 of 229:
|
Feb 3 06:03 UTC 2000 |
I liked the movie...but the book, WOW, I read the book not long after it came
out, and *could not* put it down until I had fininshed it. None of his other
books came close, but I did enjoy Red Storm Rising, and even Patriot Games.
I never aw the movie adaptation of that since it got pretty poor reviews.
right now I'm reading SSN which is another fictional sub account based on a
game that Clancy had a part in. It's okay, but no HFRO. I also like his
non-fiction books like Submarine, Carrier, Fighter Wing, etc.
Sorry for so little movie content...
|
omni
|
|
response 127 of 229:
|
Feb 3 20:30 UTC 2000 |
I disagree with beady.
Run Silent, Run Deep was a very good flick as was Grey Lady Down. GLD wasn't
about warfare, but it did show that the Navy could rescue a sub. Charlton
Heston and Ronny Cox were great.
Nova recently did a piece on the Glomar Explorer, a ship built by the CIA
to steal a russion sub that had sunk. Sort of a real life Red October. The
sub broke up, and we didn't learn anything about the russkies from that,
except how to waste a lot of money on a ship that is now rusting somewhere
in some Navy shipyard.
On a different topic, I saw Anatomy of a Murder last night and man, what
a flick. Jimmy Stewart was fabulous, as was the rest of the cast. This was
based on a real case that happened in the UP. The guy who wrote the novel was
an ex-judge. All I can say is that I need to see more Otto Preminger movies,
and I need to tape this one next time it comes around.
|
swa
|
|
response 128 of 229:
|
Feb 4 01:22 UTC 2000 |
I meant to mention this earlier, and don't know if it's even showing
anywhere anymore, but "Anna and the King" was very cool.
I've long been an admirer of Jodie Foster, and my boyfriend has long been
an admirer of Chow-Yun Fat, so when we heard that they were planning to
make a movie together and that it would be a lavish historical piece to
boot... well. We'd been looking forward to it for some time, and were
afraid that after the hype and whatnot it wouldn't live up to our
expectations. But it did. :) Good acting all around, wonderful costumes
and sets and other visual elements that really made me feel like I was in
1860's Siam. More than that, the movie dealt with racial, cultural, and
gender conflicts with more subtlety than most Hollywood fare these days.
It managed to stay away from the old racist approach to these matters
-- white Christians converting the heathens -- while *also* staying away
from the other extreme, the sort of PC story where the Westerner learns
that everything she has ever learned in her culture is wrong and the East
is the only place of wisdom and compassion. Seeing a nonpartisan middle
ground where both English and Siamese culture are seen to have their good
points, and both are seen to have their bad points, was a very refreshing
surprise.
Yeah, the movie is a little full of itself at times. It's attempting to
be a Great Sweeping Epic, incorporating two love stories, a tale of
political intrigue, a coming-of-age story, the aforementioned
cross-cultural dialogue, etc., etc. all into one 2.5-hour movie. And
there were a few overly grandiose moments, but on the whole the film has
earned the right to them. It did a better job than most of weaving
various subplots and themes together, and actually seemed to be succeeding
in its quest towards epicness. (Yes, I know that's not a word. I'm
tired.)
I'm not a scholar of Thai history, and I'm sure that there were various
omissions and fictionalizations throughout (though less, certainly, than
in the musical version). But I left the movie fascinated and wanting to
learn more. A good sign, I think.
|
senna
|
|
response 129 of 229:
|
Feb 4 07:04 UTC 2000 |
I recall seeing something about the Glomar Explorer, might have been the Nova
you saw, a year ago or so. I agree, very fascinating (and expensive) stuff.
Didn't one of Clancy's novels mention it?
|
omni
|
|
response 130 of 229:
|
Feb 4 08:31 UTC 2000 |
I dunno; even though I have most of Clancy's novels in my library, I have
not got to them yet. Maybe I should start one.
|
flem
|
|
response 131 of 229:
|
Feb 4 15:54 UTC 2000 |
I saw _Boys Don't Cry_ last night. I was far more impressed than I
expected to be. I knew most of the plot going in, and expected to have
to sit through a lot of uncomfortable moments as the script and actors
tried to wrestle with very subtle issues. In that sense, I was
disappointed. :) The script was excellent, and between that and the
acting, the plot occurred in a very natural way. The movie had much of
the flavor of a classic tragedy, to me.
|
goose
|
|
response 132 of 229:
|
Feb 4 21:38 UTC 2000 |
The glomar Explorer was a fron for the CIA to recover a "lost" soviet boomer
(nuke carrying sub). The cover story was that wacko...I mean eccentric
billionaire Howard Hughes was using this ship to search for oil...I also have
anohter sub book that is a barely fictionalized account of anohter attempt
to recover this "lost" sub. I wish I could remember the title right now...
|
gull
|
|
response 133 of 229:
|
Feb 5 04:49 UTC 2000 |
Re #127: How did the movie of _Run Silent, Run Deep_ compare to the book?
I've read the book, and loved it. The sequel, _Dust on the Sea_, is also
good, though considerably darker.
|
omni
|
|
response 134 of 229:
|
Feb 5 06:39 UTC 2000 |
I didn't read Run Silent, Run Deep, I just saw the movie. Sorry, Dave.
|
bdh3
|
|
response 135 of 229:
|
Feb 5 09:32 UTC 2000 |
re#132: The 'cover story' was that Hughes was trying to mine manganese
nodules not oil. The story is well covered in _Blind Man's Bluff_, a
really good read, not a movie.
|
goose
|
|
response 136 of 229:
|
Feb 5 14:53 UTC 2000 |
Ahh...then the Hitlory channel got it all wrong...
|
gull
|
|
response 137 of 229:
|
Feb 5 15:07 UTC 2000 |
Nova got it right, though. (Or was it TLC? Forget which.)
|
bdh3
|
|
response 138 of 229:
|
Feb 6 05:43 UTC 2000 |
re#136: If they said it was oil they did indeed.
|
krj
|
|
response 139 of 229:
|
Feb 6 15:16 UTC 2000 |
International Channel is showing a few movies with Hong Kong
action star Chow Yun Fat. See http://www.i-channel.com and look
at the "Chinese New Year" link. I know there are a few Chow Yun Fat
fans on Grex.
|
md
|
|
response 140 of 229:
|
Feb 6 20:03 UTC 2000 |
SCREAM 3 (B-) - Not as funny or scary or clever or
even as subtle, if you can use that word, as 1 & 2.
It was fun seeing Sydney, Gail, Dewey and the gang
again, however, and I suspect 3 will have a
respectable box office for that reason alone. For
a movie/TV fan, it provides lots of wry little
moments, which is most of the fun with these movies.
The Carrie Fisher cameo was an especially nice touch.
EYE OF THE BEHOLDER (F) - A colossal waste of time.
Silly, pointless, meandering story, motivation-free
characters. the kind of movie that makes the popcorn
taste bad.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 141 of 229:
|
Feb 6 21:35 UTC 2000 |
Don't pull any punches, md, tell us how you *really* feel..
|
md
|
|
response 142 of 229:
|
Feb 7 12:39 UTC 2000 |
According to http://www.variety.com/ Scream 3
has had a big opening weekend, partly due to
the 6,000 or so screens Miramax showed it on
(the largest number since Wild Wild West opened
last summer).
"Third installment in the string of horror pics
released under the Dimension Films genre banner
reaped an estimated $35.2 million for the biggest
opening in Miramax history. The prior best, of course,
was 'Scream 2,' which totaled $32.9 in December 1997.
"Pic set more than Miramax marks. It's the biggest
three-day bow by any distrib during the first four
months of the year, not counting the $35.9 million
that 'Star Wars' grossed when re-released in January
1997. If the projections are accurate, the weekend
would rank No. 28 on the all-time list.
"Feedback was strong, if not overwhelming, according
to exit polls still being compiled. Between 80% and
90% of auds in exit polls checked one of the top two
boxes and a slightly lower percentage said they^Rd
recommend the pic to a friend. . .
"'Scream 3' in fact occupied a different B.O. realm,
crushing runner-up 'The Hurricane' by more than $30
million, one of the widest margins in history. It also
outgrossed the Nos. 2 through 10 pics combined."
(Sorry about the Varietyspeak.)
|
hematite
|
|
response 143 of 229:
|
Feb 7 23:53 UTC 2000 |
Jay and Silent Bob make an appearance in it! (Or so my roommate tells
me.)
|
omni
|
|
response 144 of 229:
|
Feb 8 08:43 UTC 2000 |
This afternoon I stumbled across a little film called "Larceny, Inc" with
Edward G. Robinson and Anthony Quinn. I won't spoil it by saying what theplot
is, but I suggest you go rent this if you want a good laugh.
EGR didn't do many comedies, but he did this one to perfection. I have not
come across any movie of his that was a dog. 4 stars.
|
md
|
|
response 145 of 229:
|
Feb 11 15:41 UTC 2000 |
Jim Varney, of the various "Ernest" movies
and the "Hey, Verne" TV commercials, has died
of lung cancer at the age of 50. He was also
the voice of Slinkydog in Toy Story 2.
|
bdh3
|
|
response 146 of 229:
|
Feb 12 07:07 UTC 2000 |
Was that a movie?
Saw the flick _The Big Liebowski_ (or something like that). I believe
its from the same folk as _Fargo_ and pretty darn funny although not up
to the same standard. The 'cowboy' schtick/cameo from the well known
Louis Lamour film adaptations (and owner of the film rights) is another
odd touch along with the car from the TV series _Starsky&Hutch_ (trashed
and burned). Lots of funny stuff and bit parts by 'big' (small b)
names.
|
remmers
|
|
response 147 of 229:
|
Feb 12 12:56 UTC 2000 |
"The Big Lebowski" is a stitch. Yes, it's from the Coen
brothers, of "Fargo" fame. (Also "Blood Simple", "Raising
Arizona", and "The Hudsucker Proxy".)
|
goose
|
|
response 148 of 229:
|
Feb 12 16:01 UTC 2000 |
Don't forget Millers Crossing....
|
md
|
|
response 149 of 229:
|
Feb 12 17:09 UTC 2000 |
Too late.
|
