response 95 of 327:

Jan 6 03:07 UTC 2003

The Internet Movie Database has entries for both "Allan Smithee" and
"Alan Smithe".  Two-L Smithee seems to have been cinematographer on a
couple German films.  One-L Smithee's biography starts like this:

Born in 1967, the same year he directed his first picture, Death of a
Gunfighter (released 1969). Restricted by Directors Guild of America
rules to certain "genres" of film, i.e., those on which the other
directors have functioned, but from which they wish to be disassociated.
Gained strong reviews for his initial film: "Sharply directed by Allen
Smithee [who] has an adroit facility for scanning faces and extracting
sharp background detail", (New York Times); "Smithee's direction keeps
the action taut and he draws convincing portrayals from [the] supporting
cast", (Variety). His oeuvre extends over a wide range of topics and
styles, usually with only one unifying factor between projects: the
refusal of other directors to put their name to the work.

More informatively, but less humorously:

The Directors Guild contract generally does not permit a director to
remove her/his name from films. The Directors Guild has been striving
for decades to establish the director as the "author" of a film, and
part of getting the credit for the successes is taking the blame for the
failures. The only exceptions they make are cases in which a film was
clearly taken away from a director and recut heavily against her/his
wishes in ways that completely altered the film. Directors are required
to appeal to the Guild in such cases. If the appeal is successful, their
name is replaced by Alan Smithee. That is the only permissible pseudonym
for a director. So if you notice a film directed by Alan Smithee, it is
certain it is not what its director intended, and likely that it is not
any good.

I'm starting to pay more attention to directors in my old age.  This was
partly inspired by the fact that one day I noticed that several of my
all time favorite films were all directed by the same person ("Romancing
the Stone", "Back to the Future", "Contact") as were a number of other
films that were certainly worth watching ("Who Framed Roger Rabbit",
"Forrest Gump", "Castaway").  Here it turns out I'm a fan of I guy I
never heard of.  His next film is apparantly going to be "The Polar
Express".

response 97 of 327:

Jan 6 08:34 UTC 2003

Read an article about "Catch me if you Can"   In the movie, Spielberg more
or less portrays Abagnale's acts as him being in denial about his parents
divorce, thinking that if he made something of himself, and got his dad's
money and prestige back, maybe his mom and dad wouldn't divorce.  This is pure
Spielberg, as he has admitted that a lot of his movies-- particularly E.T.
but also Close Encounters and A.I. and others, deal with the divorce theme,
because his own parents divorce was particularly painful to him.

But Abagnale in the article denies his parents divorce had anything to do with
his acts.  "Hell, I just did it to get girls, thats all"  It is pure hollywood
to take the lead character's actions and somehow try to make them seem more
noble.  Case in point was the movie of Grisham's "The Firm"  If you read the
book, you know that it ends with the main character having stolen the
money from the crooks and living the rest of his life on the run on the high
seas.  But in the movie "The Firm", they completely changed the ending. 
They created a scene where Tom Cruise's character actually goes and negotiates
with the bad guys for his freedom.  And it ends with he and his wife leaving
in their old car to go back up north and be idealistic again.  It is typical
hollywood to take the ending of a perfectly good book and ruin it simply
because they want the lead character to come across as more wholesome.

response 99 of 327:

Jan 6 22:37 UTC 2003

Both movie and book endings for "The Firm" totally sucked.  I think this is
a frequent Grisham theme--books that are fine until about 75% of the way
through, and then cease to be good for anything but the recycle bin.

response 101 of 327:

Jan 7 18:01 UTC 2003

Finally saw "The Two Towers".  Loved it.  Hate people bitching and grousing
about it because it seems as if they miss out on just how much vision and
scope Peter Jackson has.  Good lord - he made all three of them back to back
- look at the continuity!  It's really amazing.  And yes - I have read the
first two books.  Sure - stuff gets left out - some leeway is given - but it's
like that in many adaptations.  

Plus, and ladies, I'm expecting some concurrence here - he gave us Orlando
Bloom in long blonde hair.  Let's be honest, people - elves are HOT.  So,
thank you Peter Jackson - for a great ride, a lot of fun, and making me want
to go to New Zealand.  :)

Ok - on rental:

"The Sweetest Thing" - laughed my ass off.  I really do love Cameron Diaz.

"Reign of Fire" - not bad, not bad.  Decent story, decent effects.  And it
has Christian Bale.  I love Christian Bale.

"A Walk to Remember" - look people - you want to bitch about a bad book to
film translation, I highly recommend this.  Though I surprisingly did like
the actors.

response 103 of 327:

Jan 7 19:02 UTC 2003

I can agree with no reservation.  And the horse trick, dear gods that 
was just beautiful...

response 105 of 327:

Jan 8 08:15 UTC 2003

He's pretty beaten up throughout a good portion of the movie. :p

I think I need to go see it again.  It's a great ride.

response 107 of 327:

Jan 8 14:20 UTC 2003

Saw "Gangs of New York" last night.  I posted more on m-net about what I
thought (great but a bit long), but bottom line really felt that it's Daniel
Day-Lewis's film.  He's amazing.  I wish he'd make more movies.  It also
brought up (for me) who I consider to be the most amazing actors of our time.
I came up with Edward Norton, Sean Penn and Daniel Day-Lewis, but I'm curious
as to other people's opinions.

response 109 of 327:

Jan 8 14:23 UTC 2003

I can take my son to see the Star Trek movie for $2.50.  Is it worth 
his time to take him?  Also, is it violent?  (He's had streaks of 
pretty violent behavior after playing video games, and I'm trying to 
avoid promoting more of that.)

response 111 of 327:

Jan 8 15:15 UTC 2003

Don't go see "Signs".  I paid $0.50 to see it and I still felt ripped 
off. 

Hmmmm....LOTR this weekend, anyone?

response 117 of 327:

Jan 9 00:22 UTC 2003

Well, yes, I know the mathematics weren't faulty. That's not my point. I've
had to work with some eccentric mathematicians over the years, and I'm not
sure I want to see a recreation of yet another. :-) (Not to say anything bad
about my current co-workers, mind you. It's just that one of the most
eccentric of my past coworkers died very suddenly last Friday, which has
brought his more colorful moments vividly to mind. And he was probably a lot
more colorful to work with than Russell Crow's character (though I am basing
that on the book and not on the real man, or anything).)