|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 348 responses total. |
other
|
|
response 34 of 348:
| 
Jul 3 05:44 UTC 1999 |
re resp:32
* The railroad car was equipped with a "telegraph" that I thought would have
had to be a radio tranceiver. How do you connect to wires from a moving
train?
The train is not attached to the wires, it travels *on* them.
|
jazz
|
|
response 35 of 348:
|
Jul 3 11:26 UTC 1999 |
Since a number of folks here seem to have picked up Pullman's _Zero
Effect_, it's worth asking - have any of you seen _The End of Violence_?
|
remmers
|
|
response 36 of 348:
|
Jul 3 11:29 UTC 1999 |
Yes, saw _The End of Violence_ and liked it a lot.
|
hhsrat
|
|
response 37 of 348:
|
Jul 4 02:29 UTC 1999 |
anyone seen South Park yet?
|
senna
|
|
response 38 of 348:
|
Jul 4 05:35 UTC 1999 |
After much mucking about, I finally witnessed both Pulp Fiction and
Lawrence of Arabia. Here we go.
Pulp Fiction was a lot of fun. It neither panders to the senses nor
denies them entirely. The dialogue is vivid, the characters are
splendidly developed, and the stories are the sorts of things that don't
pop up every day. The nonlinear presentation is really the icing on the
cake, elevating this beyond any other movie. The acting's nice, too :)
Lawrence of Arabia was viewed with two prominent issues in mind. 1) It
is meant to be viewed in a movie palace. I couldn't agree more.
Someone warn me when the Michigan plays it. 2) It is a "classic," and
thus carries way too many expectations on it. "Classic" movies tend to
follow entirely different rhythms from today's modern film. The
differences are so great that comparing two films (the two I watched,
for instance) is like comparing two completely different languages.
Lawrence of Arabia essentially followed this pattern, and I was prepared
for a long classic. The first half in particular was terrific. It
trickled off at the end, leaving me somewhat unsatisfied, but it is
still a magnificent work of art. C'mon Michigan.
|
drewmike
|
|
response 39 of 348:
|
Jul 4 05:57 UTC 1999 |
HHS: Twice, byotch!
|
katie
|
|
response 40 of 348:
|
Jul 4 06:07 UTC 1999 |
An Ideal Husband is absolutely wonderful. I am going to see it again.
|
mooncat
|
|
response 41 of 348:
|
Jul 4 21:06 UTC 1999 |
Saw "WildWild West" this weekend and I really enjoyed it. That was
the general consensus of the seven other people I went with. Personally,
I loved all the puns and even though it was cheesy- I enjoyed it.
|
ryan
|
|
response 42 of 348:
|
Jul 6 20:11 UTC 1999 |
This response has been erased.
|
jep
|
|
response 43 of 348:
|
Jul 6 21:33 UTC 1999 |
I saw "Wild, Wild West" and liked it a lot.
As others here have said, it was cheesy. It really was. But cheese can
be very badly done, or very well done, and this one was some pretty good
cheese.
First of all, Will Smith is a very good actor. I don't know why I think
so, except that I can imagine some of the scenes he's done, but with
someone else filling in, say, Donald Sutherland. Will Smith is better
than Donald Sutherland.
Second, it was more or less true to my long ago, childhood memories of
the TV show. (Which also was cheesy.)
There's a lot to dislike in this movie. There are many unclever racial
and handicapper jokes, and bland sex jokes (and bland sexism). The plot
is nothing to get excited about. I was not awed by the special
effects, or stunned by the scenery. The original "Wild, Wild West"
theme music, which was good, appears only once. Will Smith's rap song
doesn't appear at all until the screen credits. (Okay, I hate rap, and
don't understand it, so this part didn't bother me much.)
But I laughed out loud several times while watching. (Racial humor is
not always funny, but when it's aimed at, and done with the
participation of, one of the most successful entertainers around, then I
might well find it funny.)
And the unsavory jokes went right over my 8 year old's head, nonetheless
he liked the movie for what he saw in it.
On a scale of 4, I'd give it about a 2.5, I think.
|
richard
|
|
response 44 of 348:
|
Jul 6 21:47 UTC 1999 |
Roger Ebert gave Wild Wild West thumbs way down-- says Will Smith and
Kevin Kline have zero chemistry and script is poorly written. My
problem with the movie is that it takes place in post-civil war 1860's
Will Smith shouldnt be playing the Robert Conrad role because in the\
1860's blacks had just been freed from slavery and were not yet accepted
as any other members of society. A black man could not have been a spy
working for the government in 1866. It is historically inaccurate.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 45 of 348:
|
Jul 6 22:20 UTC 1999 |
Duh!
|
janc
|
|
response 46 of 348:
|
Jul 6 22:25 UTC 1999 |
A historically accurate remake of "Wild Wild West" would be like low-fat
lard.
|
jiffer
|
|
response 47 of 348:
|
Jul 6 23:02 UTC 1999 |
ITs CHEESE! Richard, do you not know about Cheese Movies? If so, we can
educate you on them. It is up there with comedies.
|
katie
|
|
response 48 of 348:
|
Jul 7 05:17 UTC 1999 |
I saw American Pie. It was more entertaining than I expected, maybe becasue
..or even because...the audience was having such a good time with it. Kind
of a poor-man's There's Something About Mary.
|
senna
|
|
response 49 of 348:
|
Jul 7 05:22 UTC 1999 |
Would it make you feel better if it was a white person staring down the
80-foot mechanical tarantula instead of a black person?
|
mooncat
|
|
response 50 of 348:
|
Jul 7 13:05 UTC 1999 |
Come on Richard! We're talking about a movie that has 80 foot mechanical
tarantula... like THAT's historically accurate. <rolls her eyes>
And what's the fun in merely spouting the opinion of someone else
if you've never seen the movie..
Heh, I recommend "Manhatan" to you, Richard, pay attention to the Eric
Stoltz character and his discussion on Jane Austen...
|
lowclass
|
|
response 51 of 348:
|
Jul 7 14:01 UTC 1999 |
Actaully RIchard, SOme blacks did espionage for the Union during
the civil war. Is it so hard to believe they might have done so after?
|
drewmike
|
|
response 52 of 348:
|
Jul 7 15:33 UTC 1999 |
Re 48: My friends in LA kept calling it "There's Something About Pastry".
|
md
|
|
response 53 of 348:
|
Jul 7 18:36 UTC 1999 |
SOUTH PARK: BIGGER, LONGER & UNCUT (A) - You've heard
it's offensive and you're wondering how offensive? At one point,
an adult tells one of the kids that the way to make a woman fall in
love with you is to "find the clitoris." Unable to get useful information
about the clitoris from anyone, the kids go on line and search for
"clitoris." They breeze past a message about turning back if you're
under age 18, and find themselves viewing a German web site
featuring coprophagia. Then the kids notice that the woman shouting
"Ess mein scheisse!" is the mother of one of them, Mrs. Cartman.
Cartman later asks his mother, "You wouldn't appear in a scheisse
video, would you?" Finally, a gigantic clitoris appears to one of the
kids in a vision, and warns him about earth's impending doom.
Another theme that runs throuigh the movie is that Saddam Hussein,
who died after being eaten by a pack of wild boars, has gone to hell
and is now Satan's gay lover. The two of them are seen bitching at
each other like a stereotypical pair of queens.
The movie is an old-fashioned musical. When Satan finally tells
Saddam it's over, Saddam sings his big number, "I Can Change."
Highly recommended.
|
mary
|
|
response 54 of 348:
|
Jul 7 20:49 UTC 1999 |
Hey, I was all pumped to see "The Red Violin" tonight but
you make this sound so enticing.
|
gull
|
|
response 55 of 348:
|
Jul 7 21:08 UTC 1999 |
I saw South Park last night. I laughed really hard, though I was sort of
embarassed at myself for finding it so funny...
|
jiffer
|
|
response 56 of 348:
|
Jul 7 21:22 UTC 1999 |
AHHH! I forgot about The Red Violin!!!!!!
|
jep
|
|
response 57 of 348:
|
Jul 8 01:10 UTC 1999 |
I had to look up 'coprophagia'. (Among dogs, it's the problem of them
eating their own feces. http://www.erinet.com/ghost/coprophagia.htm_
|
jep
|
|
response 58 of 348:
|
Jul 8 01:10 UTC 1999 |
)
|
