You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   50-74   75-99   100-124   125-149   143-167   168-192   193-217 
 218-242   243-267   268-278        
 
Author Message
25 new of 278 responses total.
krokus
response 168 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 28 22:49 UTC 2004

so who else is looking forward to seeing the latest Earth snuff film?
gelinas
response 169 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 29 04:39 UTC 2004

(I don't remember Mr. Smiley in "The Spy Who Came in from the Cold."
I guess I need to read more of Mr. Le Carre's work.  I'd also like to read
all of the James Bond series.  I made progress, back in '73, I think it
was, but I guess I missed a few.  And I know that I wasn't reading them
in order.)
richard
response 170 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 29 20:27 UTC 2004

THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW--  This is a good popcorn story.  A good old
fashioned disaster movie.  There is a massive ice melt in the north pole,
due to global warming, and it causes huge climate changes.  Tornados
devasate Los Angeles.  Softball sized hail tears up Tokyo.  It even starts
snowing in New Delhi.  Eventually what happens is the mother of all winter
storms comes roaring down from Canada prepared to return much of the
United States to the ice age.  New York City is flooded by tidal waves,
and then frozen over by -150 degree temperatures.

Dennis Quaid is our hero, we always have one in disaster movies, the
Paleoplanetologist who tries to warn everyone of whats going to happen.
Once the storm hits he takes off on snowskis from D.C. to go up to NYC to
rescue his son (Jake Gyllenhall) who is stranded with his friends at the
main branch of the New York Public Library.  There, since the city is
frozen over, they are forced to start burning all the books in the library
to keep the fire going.  There is even a russian ship that gets washed in
from the seas during the tidal waves and ends up frozen on fifth avenue
outside the library.  

Obviously the story and plot are preposterous.  If it was really -150
degrees, Quaid would not make it to New York, he would freeze solid along
the way.  But the special effects are awesome and there are good bits of
humor in this film-- such as when the U.S. is being destroyed by the
storm, the president decides to order everyone south of the mason dixon
line evacuated to Mexico.  Mexico closes its borders and we see U.S.
citizens trying to break INTO Mexico, desperately trying to swim across
the rio grande.  

Like I said, "Day After Tomorrow" is a good popcorn movie.  A good "bad"
movie.  Probably destined to become a cult favorite
twenex
response 171 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 29 20:31 UTC 2004

Sounds like a movie made by someone tryning ot make a point, not necessarily
about Global Warming, either.
rcurl
response 172 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 29 22:00 UTC 2004

Then, what? I haven't seen it, but adverts for it look like just another
disaster movie, almost none of which have any point(s)? The reviews
make it sound awful, except for the special effects. Might be worth seeing
for those, or if you can boo and hiss.
twenex
response 173 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 29 23:38 UTC 2004

Re: #172:  From #170: " Mexico closes its borders and we see U.S.
 citizens trying to break INTO Mexico, desperately trying to swim across
 the rio grande."

Maybe that nothign lasts forever?
richard
response 174 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 01:57 UTC 2004

#172...the movie (day after tomorrow) is bad but it is humorous and enjoyable
nonetheless.  Lots of in jokes, like the vice president being this gung ho
military guy who is a dead ringer for Dick Cheney, and the President being
a buffoon who seems to take his orders from the Vice President.  Eight guys
are telling the President to declare a state of emergency and start evacuating
people, and the President turns to the Vice President, "uh what should we do?"

Also the Vice President later giving the big post-storm speech, promising
never to ignore the weather again, on the Weather Channel...
jiffer
response 175 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 02:56 UTC 2004

I go like how NPR made huge fun out of The Day After Tomorrow.  
krokus
response 176 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 03:30 UTC 2004

I enjoyed the movie, yes it was preposterous, but so many movies are.
(This is an exceptionally high ratio in the disaster movies.)  But it
an entertaining movie, with incredible effects.  I stayed to watch the
credits for something, and was amazed at the number of effects houses
that were working on this.  (ILM and Digital Domain, just to name the
two big ones.)

I saw this at Showcase lastnight, and would like to know who the
Richard Cranium was that decided to throw a concession tray in the
theater.  It hit someone in the back of the head, then a girl's foot.
(I did see someone jump up towards the general direction it came from,
so if it was the parent of a tray-throwing kid, I get the general
impression that the kids got what was due.)
twenex
response 177 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 12:33 UTC 2004

Heh. I didn't know "Richard Cranium" had made it across the Atlantic. Of
coursxe, it's always possible that it came Eastwards, not Westwards.
otter
response 178 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 13:30 UTC 2004

Re: James Bond
007 is not a person, it's a job. 
The "00"s are positions within MI-5, each with its own cover name and 
set of duties. When one dies or retires, another assumes that job. This 
makes it logical for us to see a Bond mature for a while, then become a 
different (usually younger) person entirely.
It's much the same with the "alpha" positions, (ie: M and Q) except 
that those don't use names, presumably because they have no public 
contact and don't need one.
twenex
response 179 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 14:10 UTC 2004

"007" is not a person, but "James Bond" is. Whilst it's logical to look for
a replacement for "007", or even "otter" or "twenex" should that become
necessary or desirable, it *isn't* logical to look for a clone of Bond or of
Jeffrey Rollin or of Spock to succeed Spock. Unless, of course, we perfect
cloning *and* human cloning is legalized.
bru
response 180 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 16:03 UTC 2004

But the name "James Bond" can be a code name.  He is a 00 agent.  00 agents
have a license to kill.  Perhaps teh name goes with the job as well.  All 007
agents are thus referd to as JAmes Bond.  When they retire, they go back to
their real names, and another 007 takes over the job and the name of 007,
James Bond.
twenex
response 181 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 16:07 UTC 2004

Why have two code names? Why not just accept that James Bond is one
(fictional) person portrayed by several different actors?
realugly
response 182 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 16:27 UTC 2004

This response has been erased.

jiffer
response 183 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 17:51 UTC 2004

Because you haven't seen Casino Royale.  There are many "007"s
drew
response 184 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 30 20:10 UTC 2004

Six are going to a heavenly spot / and one is going to a place where it's
terribly hot
otter
response 185 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 31 16:30 UTC 2004

resp:180 Precisely, bru. When you (whoever you are) assume the 007 
position, you also assume the name James Bond. Makes perfect sense.
resp:184 Why not? Because that brings actors into it, which sort of 
spoils the suspension of disbelief for me. ymmv.
tpryan
response 186 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 31 18:21 UTC 2004

        Oh my God, They killed 005!  You bastards!
drew
response 187 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 31 19:41 UTC 2004

In support of the assumed name theory: Last night I saw _Tomorrow Never Dies_;
in it, 007 uses the name "James Bond" *as* his cover name. The newspaper mugul
has a background check run on the Bond name, and gets back "Banker, squeaky
clean". (From which the henchman concludes "government agent" on the theory
of "too good to be true".)
scott
response 188 of 278: Mark Unseen   May 31 20:29 UTC 2004

Banker??  Whatever happened to "Universal Exports"?
albaugh
response 189 of 278: Mark Unseen   Jun 1 15:50 UTC 2004

I was definitely LMAO watching Shrek 2.  It's not just for kids.  In fact,
perhaps it's not even *for* kids!  :-)
gull
response 190 of 278: Mark Unseen   Jun 1 19:48 UTC 2004

I plan on seeing "Day After Tomorrow".  It's a big summer disaster movie.  I
don't go to those because I want scientific accuracy or a thought-provoking
plot.  I go because I want to see lots of stuff getting destroyed. ;>
mary
response 191 of 278: Mark Unseen   Jun 1 23:17 UTC 2004

Yeah, I like to see the world being destroyed as well as the next 
guy, but "Day After..." was a one-trick pony.  The characters were 
boringly underdeveloped, the science was insultingly stupid, but the 
biggest flaw of all is the lack of humor.  I mean, dead serious.  
Big mistake. BIG MISTAKE.

Skip this one.  Rent "Men is Black". 
klg
response 192 of 278: Mark Unseen   Jun 2 00:26 UTC 2004

Where??
 0-24   25-49   50-74   75-99   100-124   125-149   143-167   168-192   193-217 
 218-242   243-267   268-278        
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss