response 200 of 229:

Mar 12 20:31 UTC 2000

I have a fond place in my heart for Sweet and Lowdown, not because I 
enjoyed the movie so much (though I did rather like it), but because 
after walking out, I had such an urge to go listen to some jazz music 
that I went to the Bird of Paradise for the first time.  I'm rather 
quickly becoming a regular there.  :)

response 202 of 229:

Mar 12 22:34 UTC 2000

When Citizen Kane first came out, Borges predicted
that it would be recognized as a masterpiece, but 
that not many people would want to actually sit 
through it again.  A nice disinction.  Maybe EWS
will turn out that way, too.

response 204 of 229:

Mar 13 00:15 UTC 2000

Hm, Borges blew it.  I've seen "Citizen Kane" a few times, anyway.
Would like to see EWS again too...

response 206 of 229:

Mar 13 02:43 UTC 2000

I thoroughly enjoyed "Wonder Boys" last night.  Am wondering, tho, why
Robert Downey, Jr was allowed to leave prison to make it.

response 208 of 229:

Mar 13 11:39 UTC 2000

"Mission to Mars" is a Tom Hanks movie without Tom Hanks.
Take the kids.

response 210 of 229:

Mar 13 16:44 UTC 2000

I saw FANTASIA 2000 on Saturday. It's a great movie that I highly recommend.
The mix of art and classical music was superb. In particular, I loved the
animation with the whales (unfortunately, I can't remember the music that
accompanied it), Rhapsody in Blue, and The Firebird. The latter in particulr
was beautiful.

Watching "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" showed the vast difference between
61-year-old 35mm film and new IMAX 15/70mm film. The old film looked grainy
in comparison to the rest of the film. Despite that, I still loved watchin
it on a big screen.

If you see it at the IMAX theater at Greenfield Village, be sure to stick
around for the tour of the projection booth after the show. It's a neat behind
the scenes look.

response 212 of 229:

Mar 13 20:42 UTC 2000

  The question wasn't "why would RD jr leave prison to do a film?"
  but "why would he be *allowed* to leave to do a film?"

  Although I like his work, it still pisses me off to see the justice
  system bend over backwards to accomodate the rich and famous.  If he
  were a bricklayer or an office worker who was in prison as a repeat
  drug offender would he recieve the same treatment?  I doubt it, even
  if his family's livelihood depended on it..

response 214 of 229:

Mar 13 22:03 UTC 2000

Saw "Stuart Little" last night with the family at Plymouth's Penn Theatre.
Nice little family flick, everything comes out OK in the end (oops, was that
a spoiler? ;-) and no animals were harmed in the making of the film (unless
you consider cats falling into the river and dragging themselves out
bedraggled to be punishment instead of fit punishment! :-)

response 216 of 229:

Mar 13 23:03 UTC 2000

"FREE ENTERPRISE"-- found this movie on the video store shelf-- it may
have been straight to video because I'd never heard of it before. 
Its about two Trekkies (star trek fans) who live star trek obssessed lives.
Their hero is William Shatner (captain kirk) and he appears to them
in apparitions giving them advice.  Then one day they actually *meet*
Shatner in real life (Shatner playing himself), and are disillusioned
to find out Shatner is really a shallow egomaniacal actor.  Shatner is
recovering from a recent divorce and drowning himself in alchoholism.  And
instead of doing Trek projects and Trek conventions, Shatner is trying to
do a one-man, musical (!) version of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar in which
he plays all the parts.  Naturally, the two Trekkies are completely
disgusted, but come to realize Shatner is just an actor and that they cant
lead their lives based on a tv series done 30 years ago.  The ending to
this is really bizarre as it shows Shatner actually doing his musical
Julius Caesar (this scene defies description)  All in all a funny movie,
and Shatner is to be commended for portraying himself so accurately

response 218 of 229:

Mar 14 01:54 UTC 2000

Re #210:  The only thing that bugged me about the whales is that the CG
whales and the hand-drawn eyes made a really spooky and wrong-looking
combination.

response 220 of 229:

Mar 14 04:37 UTC 2000

  My sister, my brother, and I went to see "The Cider House Rules" tonight.

  Basically, I liked it but think that it's a pretty sad year for movies
  when this is a strong contender for a "best picture" Oscar..  It was a
  decent movie and no doubt a better-than-average novel adaptation, but a
  year and a half from now I suspect I'll barely remember it..

response 222 of 229:

Mar 14 08:35 UTC 2000

_Mission To Mars_ - Nice special effects except for the martian.  Poor
science. 1) a martian rover 'bot roaming over sun baked mud is a nice
scene, but there hasn't been rain on mars for awhile.  2) If you have
three humans on one end of a rope with another human on the other end
that is spooling out some speed and apply tension on it you will
accomplish two things, you will reduce the speed of the one human on the
other end, and you will bring the three humans at the other closer to
the one human.  Its called 'inertia'. 3) If you are going to film a
weightless dance sequence, consider there are three dimensions.

All in all, a nice flick, but one better seen at the cheaper matinee
price I think.  Also, quite a sendup to Kubrick's 2001 but not as well
done.

Other minor quibbles (warning: potential spoilers):




1)If you are going to have depressurization of a 'shirtsleeve'
environment, everybody gets pressurized first thing, even if you have to
get a spare helmet.  2) an orbital insertion 'burn' means the main
engines point towards the current direction of flight, not aft.  You
don't speed up to enter an orbit if you are at risk of skipping past
(because you are going too fast).  3) A 'temporary' structure at mars
surface suitable for human 'shirtsleeve' environment is going to be
rather rigid, not a tent billowing in wind gusts.  4)  You are not going
to recognize 'human' DNA -vs- a pig -vs- an e-coli bacterium -vs- an
'alien' on an atomic level (MM's) as audio even broadcast over FM on a
laptop screen. 5) Presumably an advanced enough science to ensure the
function of a device for millenia would be able to prevent it being
burried by dust.  6) A holigraphic image that holds hands - gimme a
break.

1a) Quite a few continuity gaffs.  2a)  Major star appears only in
flashback or 'video' - one has to wonder what the original screenplay or
even film was like.

Enough said.  About on par with the best of original TV Star Trek and
current spin offs, but hardly that great for a full length feature.
See it on the cheap showings or wait for the video. 

response 224 of 229:

Mar 14 19:32 UTC 2000

Re #222:
    I've been saying your minor quibble #2 about space movies and TV shows
for years.