|
Grex > Cinema > #68: Grex goes to the movies - The Summer Movies Review Item |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 323 responses total. |
twenex
|
|
response 296 of 323:
| 
Sep 13 17:31 UTC 2004 |
I don't know if "religion" is a basic component of how the Universe works,
but that part of religion that attempts to explain Man's connection to his
wider world is, in my opinion, just that.
|
gregb
|
|
response 297 of 323:
|
Sep 13 17:33 UTC 2004 |
C'mon guys! This is the MOVIES thread. How 'bout creating a
metaphysics thread for this discussion.
|
twenex
|
|
response 298 of 323:
|
Sep 13 17:34 UTC 2004 |
Good idea.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 299 of 323:
|
Sep 13 17:34 UTC 2004 |
There are some who say that Einstein's rejection of much of quantum
mechanics was not driven by scientific skepticism but religious
superstition ("God does not play dice with the universe.") I see no
problem with criticizing others for being irrational and would want
others to do the same to me.
Yes, Newtonian physics is correct for those limited frames of reference
where it is correct. So is phlogiston theory and flat Earth theory.
And a broken clock is right twice a day. So what?
|
twenex
|
|
response 300 of 323:
|
Sep 13 17:42 UTC 2004 |
This discussion has been moved to Item #1041.
Religion plays to emotions. It's arguable that without emotions, much of our
society (it's ills and its boons) would not exist. I have never understood
the presence of religion and mysticism in Vulcan philosophy, as it's
supposedly based entirely on logic (not that it matters, Vulcans being
fictional), but I believe that true harmony can only exist with a balance
between the emotional and the rational.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 301 of 323:
|
Sep 13 17:49 UTC 2004 |
The Special Theory of Relativity follows from Maxwell's equations for
electromagnetic fields if you insist that they apply in the same form in
different inertial coordinates. The intermediate concept was the Lorenz
Contractions. The experimental support for this came from the
Michelson-Morley experiments. I would say that General Relativity is a
Law, if you want to be fussy. However scientists are not hung up with what
they call a theory and what they call a law. After all, the existence of
atoms is called the Atomic Theory. These are just word games of no
significance. Scientists know what the supporting evidence is for their
"generalizations", whether called laws or theories.
The central scientific quandry currently is reconciling General Relativity
and Quantum Theory (which should be called a "law", as it is vastly more
precisely confirmed (to something like 11 significant figures) than
General Relativity or anything else that is called a "law").
In regard to people having memories from past lives...I go along with
Thomas Paine who wrote "Is it more probable that nature should go out of
her course, or that a man should tell a lie?" (from Paine's "Age of
Reason", Part I).
|
twenex
|
|
response 302 of 323:
|
Sep 13 17:56 UTC 2004 |
Past lives neither require that nature "go out of her course", nor that people
who have them are telling lies, if one defines lie as "a statement made with
deliberate intent to deceive". It could be (a) that they are mistaken, or that
(b) the connection to past lives is a normal part of nature. One would expect
nature, by our reasoning, to always "work", but the fact that I am disabled
doesn't prove that I don't exist.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 303 of 323:
|
Sep 13 19:06 UTC 2004 |
Finally saw Harry Potter 3 at the Village Theater in Ann Arbor. Well worth
the $3 and the drive from Plymouth. Now will read the book...
|
richard
|
|
response 304 of 323:
|
Sep 14 02:40 UTC 2004 |
Getting back to movies, I saw Vincent Gallo's "THE BROWN BUNNY" over the
weekend. Vincent Gallo is a very talented young director who lives here
in Brooklyn. He directed the wonderful if quirky "BUFFALO 66" among
others. In this movie, he stars as a professional motorcycle racer
driving across country from New York to California for a race. He is a
lonely introvert haunted by guilt over an old relationship, a guilt which
makes it impossible for him to commit to relatonships in the present. So
he races motorcycles, a metaphor for racing from his past. The movie is a
cross country roadtrip where he is heading home to california and back
into his past, and meeting women along the way, whom he wants to be with
but can't because of his overwhelming guilt over this past relationship.
It leads to where we meet his old girlfriend, Chloe Sevigny, and discover
the reasons and source of his guilt. The key scene in the movie is a
graphic oral sex scene involving Sevigny and Gallo, and while it sounds
er..excessive if you read press reports...the scene is artfully done and
key to understanding Gallo's character and the demons he hides within.
This is a dark movie about how some people are trapped in the past and
can't ever escape it, they can never live in the moment, in the present,
because the past is always there.
"BROWN BUNNY" is a really good movie, not as good as Gallo's earlier effort,
"BUFFALO '66", but Gallo remains one of the best, most cutting edge directors
out there working today IMO. Worth seeing.
|
tod
|
|
response 305 of 323:
|
Sep 14 15:12 UTC 2004 |
re #304
Is that the one with John Doe, Iggy, Tim O'Leary, etc?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 306 of 323:
|
Sep 15 02:23 UTC 2004 |
On Morning Edition today, one of the stories was on film restoration. 'Twas
noted that Star Wars was so popular that so many copies were made from the
negative that the original is now unusable. There is so much dirt and so
many scratches on _every_ frame that restoration is impossible.
|
twenex
|
|
response 307 of 323:
|
Sep 15 09:15 UTC 2004 |
Oy.
|
gregb
|
|
response 308 of 323:
|
Sep 15 14:11 UTC 2004 |
That's bull. From what I've seen on Bravo and other channels, the
original is used only to create a master copy which is used to make
distributed copies. Also, if restoration was impossible, that means the
DVD set coming out would be pretty crappy, and you know that's not gonna
happen.
|
gull
|
|
response 309 of 323:
|
Sep 15 17:33 UTC 2004 |
The DVD set is based on the 1997 release, not on the original one.
I still think Lucas has a good copy stashed away somewhere that he'll
trot out when it's financially convenient.
|
gregb
|
|
response 310 of 323:
|
Sep 16 16:19 UTC 2004 |
I doubt it. He was never really happy with the original outcome, which
is why he kept fiddling with it. To go back and re-release the
original would be like selling a draft version, in his eyes.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 311 of 323:
|
Sep 16 17:04 UTC 2004 |
re #310: Consensus opinion seems to be that when George Lucas's
artistic integrity has to duke it out with conflicting financial
incentives the artistic integrity rarely wins the fight. I believe
if there's enough money involved he'll overcome his perfectionist
streak.
|
richard
|
|
response 312 of 323:
|
Sep 17 03:45 UTC 2004 |
#311...McNally, that is ridiculous. George Lucas is a billionaire or close
to it. Why would he pick financial incentives over artistic integrity when
he doesn't need the money? He'll never be able to spend the money he has now
in his lifetime. His motivations are artistic, these films are his legacy
and he wants both trilogies to fit together so that future generations will
see the films as a WHOLE six film arc. So he tampers with the older films
to make them fit better. It makes artistic sense.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 313 of 323:
|
Sep 17 16:58 UTC 2004 |
George Lucas's ten year delay in making the first trilogy
was totally financial. The wife he divorced would have California
'community property' of the intellectual property.
Jedi mind trick. Palpatine could do it. After all, Anakin's
mom was the hottest *woman* (with a speaking part) in Episode I.
|
tod
|
|
response 314 of 323:
|
Sep 17 17:48 UTC 2004 |
Sporting wood at Star Wars is just *wrong*, Tim! ;)
|
richard
|
|
response 315 of 323:
|
Sep 18 01:28 UTC 2004 |
re #312...Lucas busy during the delay between the two trilogies. He was
producing the Indiana Jones trilogy. Spielberg directed those movies, but
Lucas was the producer in charge of everything and co-scriptwriter. Those
movies also made a ton of money. Funny he didn't stop working altogether
during his divorce isnt it?
|
tpryan
|
|
response 316 of 323:
|
Sep 18 21:23 UTC 2004 |
Anakin's mom was the only woman (with a speaking part) in Episode I.
(There was a child-queen that had a bigger part).
|
richard
|
|
response 317 of 323:
|
Sep 21 03:35 UTC 2004 |
Interesting, I just read a CNN article about the changes Lucas made
for the DVD editions of the first trilogy. It appears that in the
Empire Strikes Back, the Emperor is in fact (trivia question!) played
by a woman wearing an Emperor mask, with the voice being done by actor
Clive Revill. In Return of the Jedi of course, as well as in the
first trilogy, the Emperor is played by actor Ian McDiarmid. So now,
by the miracle of modern technology, McDiarmid now has the part in
Empire Strikes Back.
Lucas has also been tinkering with Jabba the Hut, and we get a new,
improved, and better Jabba.
|
gull
|
|
response 318 of 323:
|
Sep 21 13:27 UTC 2004 |
Sigh. I liked the original three movies in their original form. I
didn't think the gee-whiz special effects were an improvement.
|
anderyn
|
|
response 319 of 323:
|
Sep 21 14:04 UTC 2004 |
Personally, I would have preferred to get the movies as I saw them originally.
Why mess with success?
|
tpryan
|
|
response 320 of 323:
|
Sep 21 16:39 UTC 2004 |
The song that Sny Snootles does in Jabba's Hut is also different,
as is the Ewok Celebration.
|