Grex Cinema Conference

Item 36: GREX GOES TO THE MOVIES!!!

Entered by richard on Wed Dec 22 15:41:09 1999:

78 new of 229 responses total.


#152 of 229 by richard on Sat Feb 12 22:55:24 2000:

New DVD recommendation-- "CITY LIGHTS"-- this is the new digitally
remastered dvd version of Charlie Chaplin's 1931 masterpiece.  A print
taken from the best negative known to exsist-- with a new stereo recording
of the original Chaplin score.  Looks and sounds just wonderful.  This is
one of my alltime favorite movies, the story of the Little Tramp's
relationship with a beautiful  blind flower girl, who mistakenly thinks
he's a millionaire.  This is a movie thats both heartbreakingly sad and
hillariously funny at the same time.  And has one of the most famous
final scenes of alltime, where the flower girl has regained her sight and
encounters the Tramp (a homeless vagrant) who made her sight possible, and
doesnt recognize him.  Then holds his hand and suddenly does.  They are
are staring at each other and you are left wondering what they are
thinking.  Priceless!


#153 of 229 by tpryan on Sat Feb 12 23:50:55 2000:

        That is one of three Charlie Chaplin films to come out on DVD,
just earlier this week.


#154 of 229 by danr on Sun Feb 13 03:21:40 2000:

I also enjoyed "The Big Lebowski."


#155 of 229 by janc on Sun Feb 13 06:14:05 2000:

"City Lights" used to strick me as one of the sadest films I'd ever
seen.


#156 of 229 by jep on Mon Feb 14 16:00:19 2000:

We took the kids to "The Tigger Movie" yesterday.  It was John's first 
movie in the theater.  He's 3 1/2.  It kept his attention for the entire 
movie, which I didn't think was possible.  That definitely says 
something about the movie.

I'm not going to say a lot about the movie.  It has the entire Winnie 
the Pooh cast, and is a cute story.  That's all you need to know before 
you go.  John loved it; he wanted to go again today.  David (age 8 1/2) 
also enjoyed it.  Andrea and I liked it, but that's irrelevant; we 
didn't go for us.


#157 of 229 by richard on Mon Feb 14 16:16:59 2000:

The City Lights DVD also has as an extra Chaplin's meticulously detailed
notes he wrote down prior to filming and during filming, showing just
how precisely detailed he was about each scene and each movement.  It
took three years to do city lights, including a stretch of over a year
where he stopped production entirely because he couldnt figure out the
key scene where the blind flower girl mistakes the tramp for a millionaire.
You'd never see any director suspend filming over a year over one
scene these days!


#158 of 229 by mary on Wed Feb 16 22:44:57 2000:

I really enjoyed "Cider House Rules".  It's true to the book
both in story and style - a gentle and quiet character study.
The ensemble cast does a brillant job of keeping it simple.

Jane Alexander has a smallish part.  I really like her and
will see anything she graces.  


#159 of 229 by md on Thu Feb 17 02:42:43 2000:

Roger Vadim, French movie director (And God
Created Woman, Barbarella) died recently at
the age of 70.  He is known to have done it
with Brigitte Bardot, Jane Fonda and Catherine
Deneuve when they were young hotties, so as
much as I would like to say he's gone to his
reward, I think he's already used that up.


#160 of 229 by bdh3 on Thu Feb 17 04:40:37 2000:

yeah.


#161 of 229 by bdh3 on Thu Feb 17 04:41:29 2000:

The only ones he missed were Kate Jackson and Dani Delany


#162 of 229 by omni on Thu Feb 17 08:11:25 2000:

  Let's hear it for the Sundance Channel. They repeated "The Big Liebowski"
so I could record it. It gets funnier with each viewing.


#163 of 229 by remmers on Thu Feb 17 11:21:41 2000:

Ann Arbor cable gets the Sundance Channel?  Didn't know that.


#164 of 229 by omni on Fri Feb 18 02:15:11 2000:

  They do on Digital Next TV from MedioNone. About the same price, but more
channels. We just went over to Digi and it's pretty cool. The only downer is
that I lost my scheduler. 


#165 of 229 by richard on Sun Feb 27 22:28:40 2000:

dvd recommendation-- LONESOME DOVE-- you can have all eight hours of this
epic western miniseries on one disc!  Based on the pulitzer prize winning
Larry McMurtry novel about a cattle drive from Texas to Montana.  The best
thing about this is the wonderful performances, particularly the chemistry
between the leads, Robert DuVall and Tommy Lee Jones.  Some say this is
the best performance of DuVall's career.  well worth having!

Also, the DVD of universal's 1931 horror classic, Dracula (the original
starring Bela Lugosi)  This comes complete with a wonderful new soundtrack
written by Philip Glass and recorded by the Kronos quartet!  Its great
fund to play this and just listen to the music.  Also you get as a bonus
the alternate Spanish version of the movie, which was shot on the same
sets at the same time (spanish version filmed at night, english version
during the day)  The spanish version is regarded by some as even better.
Plus a documentary on the history of Dracula and the Dracula films and
lots of other stuff.





#166 of 229 by mary on Sun Feb 27 23:03:57 2000:

"Pitch Black"  was much better than I expected.  The eclipse sequence
was stunning.  It worked a little too hard to up-end racial and gender
stereotypes, but it was fiction, after all.

"Wonder Boys"  has one clever script.  I'd say it was "Easy Rider"
30 years and an education later.  Recommended.  No cars blow-up
but a hood gets dented.


#167 of 229 by mcnally on Sun Feb 27 23:24:49 2000:

  Snow Falling on Cedars -- (D)

  If this movie had been a Fox special it might easily have been titled
  "When Bad Directors Attack".  Based on David Guterson's popular novel
  about a murder trial involving a Japanese-American fisherman just after
  WWII, "Snow Falling On Cedars" should've been a fairly safe bet --
  adaptation of a bestselling novel, decent cast turning in decent 
  performances, attractive scenery and interesting setting (a small town
  in an island off the coast of Washington State (one of the San Juans?))

  Unfortunately, director Scott Hicks apparently decided to take all of
  these elements of what should have been a modest success and throw them
  into a blender.  The resulting morass of flashbacks, cut-aways, and 
  poorly-edited montages is neither artistic nor appealing, just annoying.
  *Extremely* annoying.  



  -- 


  The World is Not Enough -- (D+)

  I caught two movies at the bargain theater this weekend and this was the
  second.  After "Snow Falling on Cedars" I wasn't looking for anything
  ambitious or involved, so a mindless dose of vehicle chases and explosions,
  taken withouth any great expectations, seemed like a good idea.  Nope!

  The two thousandth feature-length James Bond film, TWinE managed to slide
  in well under even my extremely low expectations for a Bond action film.
  It's hard to criticise a Bond film.. 

    Of course the plot was idiotic and full of holes.

    Of course the characters were ludicrously one-dimensional.

    And of course the physics of the action sequences were simply insulting
    to any moderately thoughtful viewer.

  These aren't flaws to be forgiven in a Bond film, they're apparently actual
  necessary elements of the genre.  You expect them.  You might, in fact,
  be scandalized if they weren't there.

  In that sense, in fact, "The World is Not Enough" might actually be the
  quintessential Bond film.  The plot is *extra* idiotic, the characters
  are especially one-dimensional, and a whole lotta things get 'blowed up
  reeeal good,' often by scantily clad women.

  Unfortunately, though many other Bond films have been enjoyable despite
  these properties, "The World is Not Enough" is just too much.


#168 of 229 by krj on Mon Feb 28 02:45:47 2000:

Yeah, I didn't feel like working up a detailed criticism of it, 
but I really did not like "The World Is Not Enough" very much.
I felt like it was a non-stop assault on my ears.  There just wasn't 
much of a sense of fun to it; in that respect it reminded me of 
Timothy Dalton's second Bond film, "License to Kill," probably the only 
Bond film I'm seen just once.
 
The one part of the film I liked was more screen time for Judi Densch,
who is the new 'M'.
 
Definitely a disappointment after the success of the previous film, 
"Tomorrow Never Dies," with Hong Kong martial arts star Michelle Yeoh.


#169 of 229 by flem on Mon Feb 28 04:35:30 2000:

(Aside:  I was in the movie store the other day and noticed "Grey 
Owl", featuring Pierce Brosnan playing a white frontiersman, complete 
with coonskin cap and fringed buckskin, who gets adopted into an Indian 
tribe.  I very nearly rented it, just to laugh myself silly at seeing 
P.B. in buckskin.  :)


#170 of 229 by mcnally on Mon Feb 28 04:51:04 2000:

  It might've been worth it just to see how the movie would explain how
  he kept himself supplied with styling mousse on the edge of the frontier..


#171 of 229 by gypsi on Mon Feb 28 05:48:38 2000:

<smirks>  Nice one...


#172 of 229 by drew on Tue Feb 29 03:08:41 2000:

I still think the James Bond character is way overdue for shriveling up due
to old age. My god! He's been at it for almost 40 years!


#173 of 229 by remmers on Tue Feb 29 13:28:56 2000:

Trivia puzzle: Name all the actors who have played Bond in the movies.


#174 of 229 by void on Tue Feb 29 14:28:46 2000:

   hmmm...george lazenby, sean connery, roger moore, timothy dalton,
pierce brosnan, and some american whose name i forget but who starred as
james "jimmy" bond in a 1959-ish made-for-tv serious production of
"casino royale."  is that all of them?


#175 of 229 by bruin on Tue Feb 29 14:37:34 2000:

RE #175 I believe that "Jimmy" Bond was played by Woody Allen in "Casino
Royale."  But I could be wrong on that.


#176 of 229 by scott on Tue Feb 29 15:08:50 2000:

"Casino Royale" is a trick refernce, though, since one of the plot lines was
that (to sow confusion) *all* agents would be named James Bond.  So you'd have
to list a lot of actors and even a dog.


#177 of 229 by remmers on Tue Feb 29 16:46:38 2000:

I'm not familiar with a made-for-tv "Casino Royale". The 1967
film version had at least Peter Sellers, David Niven, and Woody
Allen as Bond.


#178 of 229 by krj on Tue Feb 29 18:29:33 2000:

void is correct about the made-for-tv version.  Author Ian Fleming 
sold the dramatic rights to "Casino Royale," his first Bond novel, 
back in the 1950s.  The makers of the 1967 film spoof bought those 
rights and thus had a legal claim to use the "James Bond" name.


#179 of 229 by void on Tue Feb 29 20:45:06 2000:

   right, krj.  i'm not talking about the spoof version of "casino
royale" with peter sellers, david niven, et cetera.  there was a
serious, as in non-comedic, black-and-white production of "casino
royale" made for american tv in about 1959 or so.  most, if not all, the
actors were americans and the characters all referred to bond as
"jimmy."  i'll see if i can find a reference to it somewhere, since krj
and i seem to be the only people who have heard of this version.


#180 of 229 by void on Tue Feb 29 20:49:30 2000:

   hmmm.  this is why i love google:

Casino Royale (1954) 

The screen debut of James Bond, broadcast live on CBS-TV in the U.S. on
October 21, 1954 as part of the "Climax Mystery Theater." Running time
50 minutes.

Starring Barry Nelson as Jimmy Bond, Linda Christian as the Bond girl,
Peter Lorre as the villain, Le Chiffre, with Michael Pate as Clarence
Leiter. 

In a nationality twist, "Jimmy Bond" is a CIA agent, and "Clarence
Leiter" is Bond's British ally. 

(from http://www.mcs.net/~klast/www/cr54.html)


#181 of 229 by gelinas on Wed Mar 1 03:07:09 2000:

Peter Lorre as Le Chiffre. . . . Interesting.

I've not seen the movie, but I can't see Mr. Lorre in the book's role.


#182 of 229 by remmers on Wed Mar 1 15:15:22 2000:

Oh my.  Now that void has entered the details, I can recall seeing
that TV production.  I believe it was the premiere production of
"Climax Mystery Theater".


#183 of 229 by md on Wed Mar 1 21:24:23 2000:

From http://www.eonline.com/

"Leni Riefenstahl, 97, once famed as Hitler's 
favorite filmmaker, survived a plane crash in 
the Sudan with only broken ribs, a German source 
said Wednesday."

I had no idea she was still alive.




#184 of 229 by richard on Wed Mar 1 22:24:39 2000:

leni reifenstahl, not only still alive at 97, but coming out with
her autobiography soon, should be good as she's had some life-- also
movie of her life with her played by Jodie Foster


#185 of 229 by remmers on Wed Mar 1 22:31:22 2000:

I had no idea she was still alive either.  Must be in pretty
good health if she's flying around in planes in the Sudan.


#186 of 229 by md on Fri Mar 10 13:25:13 2000:

Recent rentals:

EYES WIDE SHUT (C) - A beautifully detailed production
but as shallow as a pizza pan.  It can be helpful with a
movie by a Kubrick to imagine that it was directed by
someone else -- say, James Cameron -- and then ask yourself
what your opinion of it would be.  Eyes Wide Shut flunks the
Cameron test dismally.  Even the sumptuous visuals got on
my nerves after a while.  In mean, how many curtains of
white Christmas lights do I have to be shown before I shout,
"I get the idea!"?  And how many times does Nicole Kidman
have to dissolve in naughty-schoolgirl giggles before you
want to put duct tape over her mouth?


#187 of 229 by remmers on Sat Mar 11 01:23:01 2000:

If James Cameron had made "Eyes Wide Shut," I'd have said that he'd made
a major breakthrough in his development as a director and that I didn't
know he had it in him.


#188 of 229 by otaking on Sat Mar 11 05:55:02 2000:

"Eyes Wide Shut" might prove to be the breakthrough film for Leelee Sobiewski,
who I really enjoyed in the "Joan of Arc" TV mini-series.


#189 of 229 by richard on Sat Mar 11 22:19:00 2000:

as steven spielberg said, he used to hate Kubrick's films-- he particularly
disliked The Shining.  But a funny thing happened, he periodically watched
them again, and with each viewing saw different things and different details.
Kubrick made his films with such detail that you simply cant "get it" watching
it once.  Spielberg now says The Shining, which he once hated, is now one of
his absolute favorite movies of all, and that he came to be in awe of
Kubrick's talent.  He says that in time, people will come to realize "Eyes
Wide Shut" for the masterpiece that it is.   


#190 of 229 by aaron on Sun Mar 12 01:01:17 2000:

Any "masterpiece" that must be studied over and over again to be appreciated
is unlikely to ever gain widespread recognition as a "masterpiece," no
matter how adored it may be by those who take the time to study it.


#191 of 229 by flem on Sun Mar 12 01:08:05 2000:

Perhaps.  On the other hand, there are a great many "masterpieces" that never
achieve widespread recognition except among specialists.  


#192 of 229 by aaron on Sun Mar 12 01:14:53 2000:

Any that the typical person cares about? ;)


#193 of 229 by void on Sun Mar 12 01:22:20 2000:

   drift: does anyone else find it disturbing that the census
commercial showing various school rooms and the numbers of students
they were built to hold/currently hold uses the same beethoven
recording which was used in "a clockwork orange" when alex was
undergoing the ludovico treatment and being shown films?


#194 of 229 by other on Sun Mar 12 01:28:06 2000:

disturbing?  i didn't notice, but now that you mention it, i find it very
amusing, actually.


#195 of 229 by jazz on Sun Mar 12 01:28:12 2000:

        I'm a fan of many of Kubricks' films, and I really didn't think that
there was all that much to Eyes Wide Shut, either.  Perhaps someone who did
like it might explain what they liked about it, so that I might benefit from
a deeper appreciation?


#196 of 229 by remmers on Sun Mar 12 12:41:03 2000:

Re resp:190 et seq:  Don't neglect the effect of advocacy.
Not *everybody* has to study a work over and over again.
If a few do, and those few publish their opinions, this
can over time change public perceptions.  Various Hitchcock
films have been elevated to "masterpiece" status in this
way, for example.


#197 of 229 by md on Sun Mar 12 15:41:56 2000:

Some things I liked about EWS:

The exploitation of various societal strata.  Dr Harford
and his wife are first presented as a couple of rich and 
wordly New Yorkers, invited to the best parties, collectors
of art, all-around BPs.  Then, as they are exposed to people
from other social and economic levels, we see a prostitute
more beautiful -- inside and out -- than either of them; 
and, in the end, we get Ziegler's comment to Harford that 
Harford was immediately identified as an outsider at the 
orgy because, "you arrived in a cab, and everyone else came 
in a limo."  

The first and least effective example of this is the oily 
Hungarian who tries to hit on Alice at Ziegler's big party.  
We're meant to think of him as an aristocratic European taking 
advantage of the silly naive American girl we'd been taking 
for an upper-class sophisticate just two minutes ago.  
Unfortunately, not only does Kubrick ruin it by making Kidman 
too drunk for her coy giggles to mean anything, but also the 
Hungarian himself is first cousin to Zoltan Carpathy, that 
figure of fun who "oozes charm from every pore as he oils his 
way around the floor" trying and failing to unmask Eliza 
Doolittle at the Embassy Ball in "My Fair Lady."  It's 
practically the same guy.  But a director like Kubrick can't
possibly have done something like this by accident, so maybe
the message is: *even* a Zoltan Carpathy can knock over a
ditz like Alice.

The last scene between the Harfords has been justly criticized, 
even by the movie's admirers, for some really dreadful writing.  
But the very last word of the movie is right on the money.  The 
way couples trying to be faithful to each other can deal with the 
kinds of temptations the Harfords have been agonizing pointlessly 
over is -- to be faithful to each other.  When Nicole Kidman says 
the word "fuck," you feel like saying, "THANK you!"  For more 
than two hours, it looked like they'd ever figure it out.  The 
fact that Kubrick presented it as if it were some great final 
illumination is symptomatic of the over-all puerility of the movie, 
however.

I like the general idea, if not its execution in EWS, of the
director making ironic little comments, visible only to the
audience.  The NY Post headline "LUCKY TO BE ALIVE" is one obvious 
(too obvious) example.  The various references to Kubrick, his
family, and his other movies scattered throughout EWS is another.  
There is an undeniably so-what quality to all of this, but it 
helped pass the time, at least for me.


#198 of 229 by jazz on Sun Mar 12 15:49:24 2000:

        I'd thought the "LUCKY TO BE ALIVE" headline was a bit corny in that
context;  in a movie that was less realistically shot, it might've worked
quite well.

        It also occured to me that whomever was writing the film had some
seriously confused ideas about the ritual magic and bondage communities, and
sex clubs.  


#199 of 229 by danr on Sun Mar 12 18:46:39 2000:

Sweet and Lowdown
2.5 stars out of 4

Sean Penn is really great in this movie, but about every ten minutes or so the
movie is interrupted by Woody Allen and some other folks supposedly
knowledgeable about Emmet Ray to tell stories. These interruptions really
prevented you from really getting into the movie, imho.  And sometimes when
Woody was on it was almost as if he couldn't bear to make a movie in which he
didn't appear.


#200 of 229 by flem on Sun Mar 12 20:31:33 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.  :)


#201 of 229 by richard on Sun Mar 12 20:57:18 2000:

Remember, Citizen Kane was panned when it first came out-- Orson Welles
didnt even get nominated for best director, best actor, or best picture.
Like fine wine, good films age well with time-- maybe it didnt win any
academy awards, or even get nominated, but Welles' film is now widely
considered the greatest american film ever made.  People just had to
watch it a few times ya know....same thing with Kubrick


#202 of 229 by md on Sun Mar 12 22:34:21 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.


#203 of 229 by otter on Sun Mar 12 23:01:01 2000:

Back to resp:172 for just a sec...
In several real-life agencies, designators and working names are passed 
on as people quit, transfer, die, retire. So, agent 007 is always called 
James Bond, no matter who happens to be doing that job at any given time.
In at least one American agency, teams of people who work together all 
have the same working first name; you have Mike team, Bill team, Tim 
team, etc.
Honest.


#204 of 229 by remmers on Mon Mar 13 00:15:31 2000:

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


#205 of 229 by jep on Mon Mar 13 02:38:10 2000:

We saw "The Tigger Movie" again at the #2/ticket Clinton theater.  It 
kept my wife and I awake, and greatly entertained the kids.  It also 
sold out the Clinton theater on Friday night (216 seats).  By 
obervation, I'd say they had good crowds for the Saturday and Sunday 
night showings as well.


#206 of 229 by katie on Mon Mar 13 02:43:14 2000:

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


#207 of 229 by mcnally on Mon Mar 13 03:37:43 2000:

  Because of its strong anti-substance-abuse message?

  saw "The Beach" at The Harbor, the cheapie theater in Muskegon,
  on Friday.

  it was, ummm, interesting..  Not totally unredeemable, but it Had
  Serious Problems.  I'd give it a C+   After "Trainspotting" I was
  expecting more from director Danny Boyle..


#208 of 229 by mary on Mon Mar 13 11:39:58 2000:

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


#209 of 229 by md on Mon Mar 13 11:58:45 2000:

That we will.

We went and saw THE CIDER HOUSE RULES (B) in an 
effort to catch up on our Oscar nominees.  It's
a very nice movie.  John Irving tends to let his
plots and characters lead him where they will, 
which can make for a pleasingly random ride.  
The movie was shot, I'm told, largely in western
Massachusetts where I grew up.  Michael Cain is
excellent.


#210 of 229 by otaking on Mon Mar 13 16:44:50 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.


#211 of 229 by richard on Mon Mar 13 18:02:49 2000:

robert downey is a great actor, if he can get day leave from his prison
home to do films, why not? *shrug*


#212 of 229 by mcnally on Mon Mar 13 20:42:10 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..


#213 of 229 by rcurl on Mon Mar 13 21:55:08 2000:

Re #210: van Gogh looks grainy too. 


#214 of 229 by albaugh on Mon Mar 13 22:03:28 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! :-)


#215 of 229 by omni on Mon Mar 13 23:00:07 2000:

  It was "The Pines of Rome" by Rhespiegi (sp)


#216 of 229 by richard on Mon Mar 13 23:03:23 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


#217 of 229 by flem on Tue Mar 14 01:01:07 2000:

Oh, what a mental image!  :)


#218 of 229 by gull on Tue Mar 14 01:54:38 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.


#219 of 229 by tpryan on Tue Mar 14 03:40:44 2000:

        Friend in Florida's review of Mission to Mars:  Long and boring.
Tried to be 2001 without the aid of Krubrick or Clarke.


#220 of 229 by mcnally on Tue Mar 14 04:37:25 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..


#221 of 229 by gypsi on Tue Mar 14 05:54:16 2000:

Anney and I watched _Detroit Rock City_ tonight.  We laughed and 
laughed.  I'm not a huge Kiss fan, but it had some *great* classic 
songs all the way through it.  Hell, even "Convoy" made it.  =)  There 
were some priceless scenes and some fairly good humor.  B+


#222 of 229 by bdh3 on Tue Mar 14 08:35:24 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. 


#223 of 229 by drewmike on Tue Mar 14 17:25:48 2000:

Oh, now, Richard. Shatner doesn't drown *himself*. You know that.


#224 of 229 by drew on Tue Mar 14 19:32:12 2000:

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


#225 of 229 by bru on Fri Mar 17 18:24:51 2000:

What he didn't say about "FREE ENTERPRISE"  is that Shatner is attempting to
rap Shakespeares julius Ceasar...

They showed part of it on the Tonight show last night while interviewing
Shatner.  They also discussed his TV commercials where he sings the oldies
for Priceline.com...


#226 of 229 by otaking on Fri Mar 17 22:16:36 2000:

After seeing Shatner on the Tonight show, I really want to see FREE
ENTERPRISE. SHakespeare set to rap was just hilarious.


#227 of 229 by otter on Tue Mar 21 05:18:16 2000:

Ya oughta hear him read _Lucy in the Sky_...


#228 of 229 by aruba on Mon Mar 27 08:20:24 2000:

I can attest that having once heard William Shatner sing Luciy in the Sky
with Diamonds, you will never forget it.


#229 of 229 by otter on Sun Apr 2 12:54:04 2000:

Oh, no no no. This is not singing. It is a dramatic reading of the 
lyrics. I first heard it in 1973; don't know how old it was then. It's 
from an album he did consisting entirely of dramatic readings of popular 
song lyrics. I seem to remember that it also contains "Hey, Mister 
Tambourine Man". <<shudder>>


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: