ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/movies/archive/movies.200010

Internet Message Format | 2000-10-31 | 293KB

From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Gary Sinise ...
Date: 01 Oct 2000 15:21:24 -0400

At 12.50 PM 28/09/2000 EDT, Marc Desbiens wrote:
>
>Not sure if two of his last films are even worth seeing though ... awful
>reviews and comments about :
>
>- Reindeer games - 2000   and
>- Mission to Mars - 2000
>
>What do you think ??

What I have been telling everyone:

Reindeer Games is very cliched and very Hollywood.  Not to spoil it, but
the ending has been done to death, and how many times are they going to do
this??  I liked it, have seen much worse movies, but it was also not a
great movie.  I would not watch it again, and I have a difficult time
recommending it, especially to people who have some taste in movies.

Mission to Mars reminded me of a cross between The Mummy and 2001.  As I
seem to be one of the few that didn't much like The Mummy, I was not overly
impressed with the movie.  Also, the orbital mechanics of the Mars landing
were so fictionalised and wrong, it was terrible.  Now I have seen other
movies where the impossible has happened (just about any Bond movie), and
had no trouble suspending my disbelief, but I just couldn't do that here.
I would recommend it before Reindeer Games, but I would ask you first if
you enjoyed Science Fiction.

Regards,

--Mel


--Mel Eperthener
president, Gowanna Multi-media Pty     http://www.webz.com/gowanna
mailto:[e-mail]                  mailto:[e-mail]

419 Butler Street
PO Box 95184
Pittsburgh, PA 15223-0184
[phone]                                    [phone]
1-888-45-GOWANNA -- TOLL FREE     (1-888-454-6926)
____________________________________________
"Wow! So that is what all that extra space on the movie screen is
 for!" reaction to  "Gladiator"
______________________________________________


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Pampered movie stars ...
Date: 02 Oct 2000 02:19:51 EDT





**** Adding comments to yours, Connie !


  Oh yeah, I know this is just awful, and we end up paying higher prices
etc.


****** Yes, true .. but I think the prices to go see a movie are still
fairly reasonable these days considering the huge budgets and everything ...
I still encourage people to go see small budget films anyway ... I often
find them better than the big budget ones myself !  Not afraid to take
"risks" because they don't have to please everybody to make money unlike
those huge Hollywood films ... they're not gonna take a whole lot of chances
to do something "different" if they have an investment of
100 M$ in a movie ..


But what I hate is when a rich actor who makes more in one month, then I may
in my whole lifetime asks us to give to charity and acts like 20 dollars
(example) a month is nothing, etc, When they probably give nothing to the
charity and probably are getting paid for the commercial.


***** Yes, reminds me of that commercial with all the retired sports
athletes like Oksana Baiul and all the ex football players like Barry
sanders talking about investment ... gimme a break .. they all have 5-10-50
million dollars in the bank ... how much more do they need ??  They
shouldn't do commercials like that ... so phony and ludicrous ... even our
own Jacques Villeneuve, the Formula one driver is making a phony car
commercial ... the guy is making like 30 M$ a year, yeah I bet he was
impressed when he drove that 20,000$ Volkswagen car.


But I still need my movies, they are wonderful and I perticularly love great
comedies that can make me laugh and smile and enjoy an evening.


***** Good point !!  Don't forget the "classics" either ! I just watched "A
fish called Wanda" again a few days ago and was certainly entertained.


So what to do, I wish the stars where paid more reasonably, this whole star
thing got out of hand and esculated, and they should not be making this kind
of money, if you think about it is is truly ridiculous.


***** Yeah, a lot of areas are out of control so this means higher price for
the tickets and products ... commercials and ads everywhere .. on the field,
on the scoreboard ... phew ...


Thanks for translating this to the group Marc, it was interesting to read,
also whom is the actor that has to have m & m's and a certain color had to
be removed from each and every bag??? Connie


***** Hehe !! Yeah, I remember reading something about that ... but wasn't
it a rock band ?? The Rolling Stones perhaps ??   Have a fine day !   Marc
;o)


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Pampered movie stars ...
Date: 02 Oct 2000 07:43:45 EDT

In a message dated 10/01/2000 11:22:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< Good point !!  Don't forget the "classics" either ! I just watched "A
 fish called Wanda" again a few days ago and was certainly entertained. >>

Yes, one of my favorite comedies.  John Cleese and Jamie Lee Curtis were top
notch.  Very funny movie.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Pampered movie stars ...
Date: 03 Oct 2000 01:49:00 -0400

At 02.19 AM 02/10/2000 EDT, Marc Desbiens wrote:
>***** Yes, reminds me of that commercial with all the retired sports
>athletes like Oksana Baiul and all the ex football players like Barry
>sanders talking about investment ... gimme a break .. they all have 5-10-50
>million dollars in the bank ...

I can NOT believe that I am about to defend millionaire athletes.  First of
all, I can't begrudge them their money, because the billionaire owners are
stupid enough to pay them.  Second, their careers are short.  But with this
commercial, the idea was the humour of young retirees (the skater knitting,
the basketball players playing shuffelboard), and trying to say to the
public that admires and adores them (hey, that't the public's fault) that
if said company can manage their money (and they do need help, look at all
the athletes and entertainers that end up broke because they can't manage
money.  I don't care if you make a million a year, if you spend a million
and one dollars, you are going to find yourself in trouble), think what
they can do with your nestegg.

>
>***** Good point !!  Don't forget the "classics" either ! I just watched "A
>fish called Wanda" again a few days ago and was certainly entertained.

Got your beat.  Got Cocoanuts at home, and I think Duck Soup on deck.:-)

>***** Hehe !! Yeah, I remember reading something about that ... but wasn't
>it a rock band ?? The Rolling Stones perhaps ??

IIRC, it was Aerosmith.  Don't know if that was post-drug days, or back
when they were putting all their money up their noses.  (Perfect example,
they almost went bankrupt in the early 80s)

Regards,

--Mel


--Mel Eperthener
president, Gowanna Multi-media Pty     http://www.webz.com/gowanna
mailto:[e-mail]                  mailto:[e-mail]

419 Butler Street
PO Box 95184
Pittsburgh, PA 15223-0184
[phone]                                    [phone]
1-888-45-GOWANNA -- TOLL FREE     (1-888-454-6926)
____________________________________________
"Wow! So that is what all that extra space on the movie screen is
 for!" reaction to  "Gladiator"
______________________________________________


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "ILLSLEY, KENNETH    " <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 03 Oct 2000 17:56:34 -0600

What is the Best movie out there!

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "ILLSLEY, KENNETH    " <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 20:15:42 -0400
Date: 03 Oct 2000 18:16:46 -0600

By the way, my favorite movie happens to be Forest Gump. "Life is like a box
of chocolates, you never know what your going to get."

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 03 Oct 2000 23:16:48 EDT

In a message dated 10/03/2000 4:57:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< What is the Best movie out there! >>

Some of my personal favorites as of now are Forrest Gump, Good Will Hunting,
and The Sixth Sense.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "zachary rivera" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 03 Oct 2000 21:23:17 MDT

I have heard that new movie the "Titans" which is about some football team
is suppose to be really good.  I am not into that kind of movie I would say
"Duece Biglow Male Giglow" is a good movie if you are into cheap comedy?


>From: "ILLSLEY, KENNETH    " <[e-mail]>
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>To: "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
>Subject: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
>Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 17:56:34 -0600
>
>What is the Best movie out there!
>
>[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "zachary rivera" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 03 Oct 2000 21:25:26 MDT

Good Will Hunting was good have you seen the movie "Rounders"  with Matt
Damon?  Now that is a good movie if you like suspense and action

-Zach-


>From: [e-mail]
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
>Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 23:16:48 EDT
>
>In a message dated 10/03/2000 4:57:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>[e-mail] writes:
>
><< What is the Best movie out there! >>
>
>Some of my personal favorites as of now are Forrest Gump, Good Will
>Hunting,
>and The Sixth Sense.
>-Eric-
>
>[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 04 Oct 2000 10:42:00 +0100

either "O Brother Where Art Thou?" or "Billy Elliot"

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    ILLSLEY, KENNETH     [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    04 October 2000 00:57
> To:    '[e-mail]'
> Subject:    [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
>
> What is the Best movie out there!
>
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 04 Oct 2000 10:42:00 +0100

either "O Brother Where Art Thou?" or "Billy Elliot"

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    ILLSLEY, KENNETH     [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    04 October 2000 00:57
> To:    '[e-mail]'
> Subject:    [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
>
> What is the Best movie out there!
>
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Movie Times, Psycho and the good ol' days !
Date: 04 Oct 2000 22:33:55 EDT



***** Did you know that in the good ol' days ... in the 50's and 60's ..
apparently (I wasn't there !) people were showing up at the movie theaters
without thinking about the times the movies started often. They were just
going to the movies whenever they felt like it, not worrying too much about
the "details" like when the movie was beginning  ...

I saw some comments about Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho (1960)and how Mr.
Hitchcock was telling in the ads that people should definately show up on
time for that one (I recall in a documentary about Hitch seeing an ad where
he was pointing to his watch and there was a message that basically said
that !) ... suggesting it would be good to arrive on time and not later when
the movie is nearly  half over ... he was also to keep the ending a secret
of course, that was the first "SPOILER ALERT"  hehe  !

It was just expected to go in and sit there whenever you felt like it in
those days !!  Also a lot of people were unhappy that Janet Leigh was killed
so they were walking out, thinking ... "Oh why sit through the rest of the
film, the "star" is gone" ... rather intriguing !

At least in those days there were no cell phones and people making fun of
the possessed girl in the Exorcist for example, laughing out loud, getting
into fights,
etc. ...

Marc ;o)


But that would still encompass two showings.  Another reason I object to
this
idea is that I'm a strong advocate of film as an art form.  As such, I
believe
in seeing films as the director intended...and in most cases the director
didn't intend for the audience to watch the second half first.  I'm still
baffled that anybody could enjoy a film after showing up at the midway
point.
I get irritated if I miss the opening credits.

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
Date: 05 Oct 2000 08:59:00 -0600


> I saw some comments about Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho (1960)and how Mr.
> Hitchcock was telling in the ads that people should definitely show up on
> time for that one (I recall in a documentary about Hitch seeing an ad where
> he was pointing to his watch and there was a message that basically said
> that !)... suggesting it would be good to arrive on time and not later when
> the movie is nearly  half over ... he was also to keep the ending a secret
> of course, that was the first "SPOILER ALERT"  hehe  !

Actually, it was much more than a suggestion.  The slogan for the film was
"Nobody will be admitted after the feature has begun" (something like that).
The studio made a big deal about it and even hired Pinkerton guards at some
theaters to enforce the policy.  It was all a marketing gimmick, of course.
Also note that it was hardly the first film with a twist that could be spoiled.

> It was just expected to go in and sit there whenever you felt like it in
> those days !!

I still say that's nuts.

> Also a lot of people were unhappy that Janet Leigh was killed
> so they were walking out, thinking ... "Oh why sit through the rest of the
> film, the "star" is gone" ... rather intriguing !

Based on everything I've read and everyone I've talked too, this simply didn't
happen.  For one thing, it was obvious from the opening credits that Leigh
wasn't the star (she's listed last: "And Janet Leigh as Marian Crane").  Note
that Leigh was not exactly a huge name either.  Certainly, people were
surprised, but they weren't walking out en masse.  If that were true the film
would never have become such a runaway hit.

> At least in those days there were no cell phones and people making fun of
> the possessed girl in the Exorcist for example, laughing out loud, getting
> into fights, etc. ...

Yeah, but people were coming and going at will, which I imagine is still
pretty distracting.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
Date: 05 Oct 2000 10:38:00 -0600

> Sorry but the last person listed in the credits is often a pretty big
> star, someone you can recognize ... people were shocked when she was killed
> in the movie as they were expecting to see her for the entire time ...

Name one movie where a big star has been listed in the end of the credits AND
been the main character.  It just doesn't happen.  When a name star is at the
end of the credits, they are always playing a smaller role.  Besides, people
weren't going to see PSYCHO to see Janet Leigh.  They were going to see the
latest Hitchcock film.  Indeed, I would argue that Hitchcock is the only
director in history (with the possible exception of Steven Spielberg) where
the mainstream public went to see the films for the director rather than the
actors.

In fact, last year a film came out that had the biggest star listed last with
the "And So-and-So" credit, just like Leigh in PSYCHO.  That star was bigger
(much bigger) in 1999 than Leigh was in 1960.  Also, like in PSYCHO, that
star's character got killed early on in a surprising way.  Yet nobody walked
out then saying "I can't believe they got rid of so-and-so!"

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: [MV] Re: [MovieReview] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
Date: 05 Oct 2000 14:53:48 EDT

In a message dated 10/05/2000 10:25:18 AM Central Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< Based on everything I've read and everyone I've talked too, this simply
didn't
 happen.  For one thing, it was obvious from the opening credits that Leigh
 wasn't the star (she's listed last: "And Janet Leigh as Marian Crane"). >>

Not  true. At the time of the film's release, Janet Leigh was promoted as the
star of the film. It was done on purpose by Hitchcock because everyone knows
the star of the movie doesn't get killed halfway through the film. It has
only been later, when everyone knows about the shower scene, that Janet
Leigh's credit listing was changed.
   But I saw "Psycho" the say it opened I can tell you I was shocked and
suprised when Janet Leigh was killed because I was as conditioned as everyone
that the star doesn't die that quickly.

 <<Note
 that Leigh was not exactly a huge name either.>>
Yes, at this time, compared to the other people in the film, Janet Leigh was
a very big name, not so much for her movie career, but for her private life.
If you weren't around then, you didn't know that the movie industry was
publicized a lot differently than it is today. There was a definite star
"system" and the studios promoted these stars through all kinds of movie
magazines. The love affair and subsequent marriage of two screen "stars"--in
this case, Janet Leigh and Tony Curtis--was a very big deal.

<<  Certainly, people were
 surprised, but they weren't walking out en masse.  If that were true the film
 would never have become such a runaway hit. >>
No one walked out of the film. In fact, just the opposite. The killing of
Janet Leigh's character kept people nailed to their seats to see what in the
hell was going to happen next.
You also had to place the film in the context of the times. Look at
Hitchcock's films just prior to "Psycho"--all nice color jobs with
established stars like James Stewart and Cary Grant and Grace Kelly and Kim
Novak.
  Then along comes what appears to be this cheapie black and white job and
the only star of note in the entire film is Janet Leigh. At the time, it was
very different, radical and came as a jolt. It's too bad that people today
can't see that film in its original context.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Chazz Palminteri + Favorite actors.
Date: 06 Oct 2000 12:38:02 EDT


Hi !

I think Mr. Palminteri is a pretty good actor (He showed that in movies like
"A Bronx Tale" "Hurlyburly" "Bullets over Broadway" "the usual suspects")
and I think he appeared it pretty good films overall too, although he could
have done better picking his roles in my opinion.

I wouldn't go out of my way to see a film just because he is in the cast
though but I like him a lot !

Any actors or actresses you would see basically anything they appeared in no
matter what ??  I really like Ms. Emily Watson myself ... and Robert De Niro
of course ... these are the two names that I think of first.  Then there
would be Christina Ricci, Reese Witherspoon, Edward Norton ... etc.


Chazz Palminteri films I have seen, by order of preference.

- A Bronx tale - 1993 - 4/5

- The usual suspects - 1995 - 3.5/5
- Analyze this - 1999 - 3.5/5

- Hurlyburly - 1998 - 3/5
- Bullets over Broadway - 1994 - 3/5
- Diabolique - 1996 - 3/5
- Scar city - 1998 - 3/5

- Mulholland falls - 1996 - 2.5/5
- Jade - 1995 - 2.5/5

- Stuart Little (voice) - 1999 - 2.5/5  (Only saw this one because I was at
my brother-in-law's place and he happened to rent it for his nieces and
nephews ... of course once the movie started, the "miniatures" weren't too
interested and went to bed while all the grown-ups gathered and watched the
film together !)

- Innocent blood - 1992 - 2.5/5
- Excellent cadavers - 1999 - 2/5

Marc     ;o)

"The maple syrup is supposed to be on the table
before the pancakes ..."

Dustin Hoffman as "Raymond"
"Rain man" - 1988 - 4/5










_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [MV] Chazz Palminteri + Favorite actors.
Date: 06 Oct 2000 12:06:24 -0500

What a great question Marc! Myself, I would see anything with Al Pacino. I
had a hard time with Devil's Advocate but no other big dissapointments come
to mind. I read somewhere that he is creating a computer generated actress
for an upcoming role?
I realize that actors must put food on the table like the rest of us but it
makes me crazy when an actor like Christopher Walken participates in such
garbage as Blast from the Past.


-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 11:38 AM



Hi !

I think Mr. Palminteri is a pretty good actor (He showed that in movies like

"A Bronx Tale" "Hurlyburly" "Bullets over Broadway" "the usual suspects")
and I think he appeared it pretty good films overall too, although he could
have done better picking his roles in my opinion.

I wouldn't go out of my way to see a film just because he is in the cast
though but I like him a lot !

Any actors or actresses you would see basically anything they appeared in no

matter what ??  I really like Ms. Emily Watson myself ... and Robert De Niro

of course ... these are the two names that I think of first.  Then there
would be Christina Ricci, Reese Witherspoon, Edward Norton ... etc.


Chazz Palminteri films I have seen, by order of preference.

- A Bronx tale - 1993 - 4/5

- The usual suspects - 1995 - 3.5/5
- Analyze this - 1999 - 3.5/5

- Hurlyburly - 1998 - 3/5
- Bullets over Broadway - 1994 - 3/5
- Diabolique - 1996 - 3/5
- Scar city - 1998 - 3/5

- Mulholland falls - 1996 - 2.5/5
- Jade - 1995 - 2.5/5

- Stuart Little (voice) - 1999 - 2.5/5  (Only saw this one because I was at
my brother-in-law's place and he happened to rent it for his nieces and
nephews ... of course once the movie started, the "miniatures" weren't too
interested and went to bed while all the grown-ups gathered and watched the
film together !)

- Innocent blood - 1992 - 2.5/5
- Excellent cadavers - 1999 - 2/5

Marc     ;o)

"The maple syrup is supposed to be on the table
before the pancakes ..."

Dustin Hoffman as "Raymond"
"Rain man" - 1988 - 4/5










_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Chazz Palminteri + Favorite actors.
Date: 06 Oct 2000 21:00:04 -0400

At 12.06 PM 06/10/2000 -0500, [e-mail] wrote:
>What a great question Marc! Myself, I would see anything with Al Pacino.

Pacino could read the phone book, and it would be worth seeing.

>I realize that actors must put food on the table like the rest of us but it
>makes me crazy when an actor like Christopher Walken participates in such
>garbage as Blast from the Past.

I have to disagree here.  I actually thought Blast from the Past was
watchable.  Definately the best movie Brendan Fraser ever did (although I
have not yet seen Gods and Monsters)  The irony of that statement is
forthcoming.  (Comparing actor's movies)

>From: Marc Desbiens [mailto:[e-mail]]
>I think Mr. Palminteri is a pretty good actor (He showed that in movies like
>
>"A Bronx Tale" "Hurlyburly" "Bullets over Broadway" "the usual suspects")
>and I think he appeared it pretty good films overall too, although he could
>have done better picking his roles in my opinion.
>
>I wouldn't go out of my way to see a film just because he is in the cast
>though but I like him a lot !
>
>Any actors or actresses you would see basically anything they appeared in no
>
>matter what ??

I'd have to say Kevin Spacey is the best out there right now.  The Usual
Suspects, Hurlyburly (both he shared with Palminteri - Hurlyburly works
best if you remember it is a stage play set to film), The Negotiator,
American Beauty, not a bad one in the bunch.

I'd consider Fraser the anti-Spacey, tho.  And that ties into what I am
telling my customers.

Spacey's newest movie, The Big Kahuna, is very likely the WORST movie he
ever made.  And it is STILL better than 99% of all movies out there:-)

Compare Blast from the Past, Fraser's best movie, with Big Kahuna, Spacey's
worse movie.  I don't think I have to tell you which I'd rather watch:-)

Regards,

--Mel


--Mel Eperthener
president, Gowanna Multi-media Pty     http://www.webz.com/gowanna
mailto:[e-mail]                  mailto:[e-mail]

419 Butler Street
PO Box 95184
Pittsburgh, PA 15223-0184
[phone]                                    [phone]
1-888-45-GOWANNA -- TOLL FREE     (1-888-454-6926)
____________________________________________
"Wow! So that is what all that extra space on the movie screen is
 for!" reaction to  "Gladiator"
______________________________________________


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Bond films ... The **final** list !
Date: 08 Oct 2000 03:45:01 EDT


Ok, here are the Bond films I have seen by order of preference ... The only
one I haven't seen yet is "Never say never again" ... which is a remake of
"Thunderball" to which I gave 3.5/5 so I assume I would like that one as
well !  that would make it 13 Bond films out of 20 that I rank at 3/5 or
more  (65%)  Pretty good, although I haven't like any of them enough to go
as high as 4/5.


1- The spy who loved me - 1977 - 3.5/5   Moore

2- For your eyes only - 1981 - 3.5/5  Moore

3- Goldeneye - 1995 - 3.5/5  Brosnan

4- Thunderball - 1965 - 3.5/5  Connery

5- You only live twice - 1967 - 3.5/5   Connery

6- The living daylights - 1987 - 3.5/5   Dalton

7- Octopussy - 1983 - 3/5   Moore

8- Goldfinger - 1964 - 3/5   Connery

9- License to kill - 1989 - 3/5    Dalton

10-The world is not enough - 1999 - 3/5   Brosnan

11-Tomorrow never dies - 1997 - 3/5   Brosnan

12-A view to a kill - 1985 - 3/5    Moore


13-The man with the golden gun - 1975 - 2.5/5   Moore

14-Dr. No - 1962 - 2/5   Connery

15-Moonraker - 1979 - 2/5   Moore

16-Live and let die - 1973 - 2/5   Moore

17-From Russia with Love - 1963 - 1.5/5   Connery

18-Diamonds are forever - 1971 - 1.5/5    Connery

19-On her majesty's secret service - 1969 - 1/5   Lazenby
(Note : I only saw the first hour though ... I should see entirely in a
little while, 1/5 for the moment.)


Ratings : Moore films
----------------------

3.5 - 3.5 - 3 - 3 - 2.5 - 2 - 2
Average : 2.8/5


Ratings : Connery films
-----------------------

3.5 - 3.5 - 3 - 2 - 1.5 - 1.5
Average : 2.5/5


This doesn't mean I think Moore is a better actor than Connery ... But on
average, I gave slightly better ratings to the Moore films.  Connery is
certainly a very good James Bond indeed, how can he be in a really good Bond
film like "Thunderball" and in a really bad one like "Diamonds are forever"
though ??  Lacks "consistancy" !  ;o)


Bond films from the '60s
------------------------

3.5 - 3.5 - 3 - 2 - 1.5 - 1
Average : 2.4/5


Bond films from the '70s
------------------------

3.5 - 2.5 - 2 - 2
Average : 2.5/5


Bond films from the '80s
------------------------

3.5 - 3.5 - 3 - 3 - 3
Average : 3.2/5


Bond films from the '90s
------------------------

3.5 - 3 - 3
Average : 3.1/5


Not a surprise here as I gave higher ratings on average to the more "modern"
films from the '80s and '90s ...
I think those from the '60s were not so bad though even if on average they
get the lowest scores... that 1/5 from "On her majesty's secret service" is
certainly not helping, without that low score the films from the
60's would be higher than the films from the 70's !


Top 3 Moore films  (A bit on the "silly" side often but since I grew up in
the late 70's and early 80's I am rather fond of his films !)  I must have
seen "For your eyes only" 367 times in the early 80's (Exaggerating for
effect !)

The spy who loved me - 1977 - 3.5/5
For your eyes only - 1981 - 3.5/5
Octopussy - 1983 - 3/5


Top 3 Connery films  (Love his "Cat-like" walk, but I don't like "Dr. No" of
"From Russia with love" as much
as most people ...)

Thunderball - 1965 - 3.5/5
You only live twice - 1967 - 3.5/5
Goldfinger - 1964 - 3/5


Favorite title songs : Random order

For your eyes only - 1981
Live and let die - 1973
Thunderball - 1965
Goldeneye - 1995
Goldfinger - 1964
Title song from "You only live twice" - 1967


Favorite Villains
---------------------
Auric Goldfinger (Goldfinger)
Ernst Blofeld (Donald Pleasance, You only live twice)


Favorite Bond girls  : Random order
--------------------

Barbara Bach from "The spy who loved me" (Major Amorosova)

Akiko Wakabayashi from "You only live twice"

Honor Blackman from "Goldfinger"  (Pussy Galore !)

Michelle Yeoh from "Tomorrow never dies"  (Wai lin)


Scariest moment
----------------

- When Bond strapped to the table as that laser is slowly approaching the
"Crown jewels" in "Goldfinger" ...


Best line by a VILLAIN
-----------------------

Bond : "Do you expect me to talk ?"
Goldfinger : "No, I expect you to DIE !"


Your choices ??

Marc     ;o)

"The maple syrup is supposed to be on the table
before the pancakes ..."

Dustin Hoffman as "Raymond"
"Rain man" - 1988 - 4/5










_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Bond films ... The **final** list !
Date: 08 Oct 2000 11:20:06 EDT


1- The spy who loved me - 1977 - 3.5/5   Moore

2- For your eyes only - 1981 - 3.5/5  Moore

3- Goldeneye - 1995 - 3.5/5  Brosnan

4- Thunderball - 1965 - 3.5/5  Connery

5- You only live twice - 1967 - 3.5/5   Connery

6- The living daylights - 1987 - 3.5/5   Dalton

7- Octopussy - 1983 - 3/5   Moore

8- Goldfinger - 1964 - 3/5   Connery

9- License to kill - 1989 - 3/5    Dalton

10-The world is not enough - 1999 - 3/5   Brosnan

11-Tomorrow never dies - 1997 - 3/5   Brosnan

12-A view to a kill - 1985 - 3/5    Moore


13-The man with the golden gun - 1975 - 2.5/5   Moore

14-Dr. No - 1962 - 2/5   Connery

15-Moonraker - 1979 - 2/5   Moore

16-Live and let die - 1973 - 2/5   Moore

17-From Russia with Love - 1963 - 1.5/5   Connery

18-Diamonds are forever - 1971 - 1.5/5    Connery

19-On her majesty's secret service - 1969 - 1/5   Lazenby
(Note : I only saw the first hour though ... I should see entirely in a
little while, 1/5 for the moment.)

Lazenby was a bad actor, i did'nt like that movie at all.diamons are forever
are cool though. Moonraker really sucked for me. Goldeneye was cool, so was
the living daylights and license to kill. I forget most of what i have seen
from each movie though.

-/Jed
msn messenger:[e-mail]

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Bond films ... The **final** list !
Date: 08 Oct 2000 11:22:48 EDT



Barbara Bach from "The spy who loved me" (Major Amorosova)

Akiko Wakabayashi from "You only live twice"

Honor Blackman from "Goldfinger"  (Pussy Galore !)

Michelle Yeoh from "Tomorrow never dies"  (Wai lin)


Yeah, i liked that second girl in the world is not enough. I forget the rest
of em though, and i wonder, should'nt bond have any diseases(From you know
what)

-Jed
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Bond films ... The **final** list !
Date: 08 Oct 2000 11:24:49 EDT


Best line by a VILLAIN
-----------------------

Bond : "Do you expect me to talk ?"
Goldfinger : "No, I expect you to DIE !"


Your choices ??

Marc     ;o)

Mine is not by a villain, it's more from a good guy, just about every line
that Q(Desmond llewyin) said to bond, like OH GROW UP 007.

-jeD
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Bond films ... The **final** list !
Date: 08 Oct 2000 11:26:50 EDT

In a message dated 10/08/2000 8:21:02 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< Lazenby was a bad actor, i did'nt like that movie at all.diamons are
forever
 are cool though. Moonraker really sucked for me. Goldeneye was cool, so was
 the living daylights and license to kill. I forget most of what i have seen
 from each movie though. >>

I might as well give my feedback, although I can't say much (I've only seen
four Bond movies).  I've seen the three by Brosnan and Goldfinger.  In order
of preference:

1: Goldeneye
2: Goldfinger
3: The World is Not Enough
4: Tomorrow Never Dies

All very entertaining movies; all recommended.  And, as of now, Superstation
(a cable channel) is having a special called fifteen days of Bond.  I should
check out some classic Bond, as I've only seen one.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Bond films ... The **final** list !
Date: 08 Oct 2000 11:34:30 EDT

In a message dated 10/08/2000 8:23:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< Yeah, i liked that second girl in the world is not enough. I forget the
rest
 of em though, and i wonder, should'nt bond have any diseases(From you know
 what)

 -Jed >>

Denise Richards?  Her only purpose was eye candy (all guys know what I mean).
 I didn't see very much talent on her part.  Sophie Marceau was many times
better than her.  Michelle Yeoh was good in Tomorrow Never Dies.  I'd have to
say, though, Izabella Scorupco (Natalya of Goldeneye) is, thus far, my
favorite Bond girl.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Bond films ... The **final** list !
Date: 08 Oct 2000 11:40:14 EDT

In a message dated 10/08/2000 8:25:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< Mine is not by a villain, it's more from a good guy, just about every line
 that Q (Desmond Llewelyn) said to bond, like OH GROW UP 007.

 -Jed >>

By a villain, either the one Marc posted about Goldfinger or Alec's line:
"Why can't you just be a good boy and die?"  Pierce's response was very cool,
as well: "You first, you second.... UP!!!!"  And, yes, Desmond Llewelyn had
some of the best lines.  My favorite of his is when, in Goldeneye, he entered
the scene in a wheelchair and cast.  Bond: "Oh, Q, sorry about the leg.
Skiing?"  Rocket shoots out.  Q: "Hunting."
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Bond films ... The **final** list !
Date: 08 Oct 2000 11:47:35 EDT


All very entertaining movies; all recommended.  And, as of now, Superstation
(a cable channel) is having a special called fifteen days of Bond.  I should
check out some classic Bond, as I've only seen one.
-Eric-

I remember superstation, WTBS right? I had it, but we switched package wityh
our satelite company(STarchoice) and now we get bronze. they have that 15
days of 007 once a year or something.

-Jed
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Hollow Man / Low & High budget films.
Date: 08 Oct 2000 22:49:46 EDT


Yes, this movie looks so-so ... good for a video rental, nothing more
probably ... I would expect between 2 and 3 out of 5 on that one ...

Graham, I disagree about your comments that a film with a nice big budget is
a sign that a movie will be good though ... You can make an excellent movie
with very little money and you can make an awful one with a huge budget as
well (Example : Wild wild west, Waterworld) ...

Money as nothing to do with the quality of a film in my opinion ... Money,
fancy graphics, special effects, stunts, big name actors ... that doesn't
replace talent or imagination, technical skills, knowing how to tell a good
story ...

In fact I tend to like more the films that have a low budget in general over
the ones that have a huge budget ... Among my Top 10 favorite films of 1999
maybe 7 had a small or medium budget (less than 10M$)

I gave 4.5/5 to the Blair witch project for example ... and that was made
for about 30,000$ ???  Having less money means no fancy stunts or graphics
like in "The Phantom menace" but the movie was much more effective and
interesting in my opinion.

Marc   ;o)


   Graham <[e-mail]> wrote:
I was really looking forward to seeing Hollow Man. Paul Verhoeven
(can even HE spell that right?), Kevin Bacon, good budget, great
effects...it seemingly had everything going for it, but man what a
disappointment! What would YOU do if you didn't have to look at
yourself in the mirror anymore? Ooooh, I'd probably just ruffle a
couple of peoples hair, and voyeur my neighbour...like I'd already
been doing for the first half of the film before i was even
invisible! Then how would I try and evade detection, and escape?
Well I'd return to an enclosed basement, where everyone knew how to
see me, & had the equipment to track me! For Christ's sake, did
anyone read the script before they started shooting? Did they even
have one!? Should have been THE movie event of the Summer...was the
limpest pair of pants since Batman & Robin...now don't even get me
started on that topic! So did anyone actually like it?
Graham





_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Hollow Man / Low & High budget films.
Date: 09 Oct 2000 00:36:41 EDT

4.5/5 to the Blair witch project for example ... and that was made
for about 30,000$ ???  Having less money means no fancy stunts or graphics
like in "The Phantom menace" but the movie was much more effective and
interesting in my opinion.

Marc   ;o)

The phantom menace was great, but i mean, the blair witch project probaly
made the most profit out of em all, i have not seen that one yet though, and
waterworld, they spent way too much on it, i wonder if they made a profit?

-jed
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Hollow Man / Low & High budget films.
Date: 09 Oct 2000 00:52:34 EDT

In a message dated 10/08/2000 9:37:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< The phantom menace was great, but i mean, the blair witch project probaly
 made the most profit out of em all, i have not seen that one yet though, and
 waterworld, they spent way too much on it, i wonder if they made a profit?

 -jed >>

I haven't seen Blair Witch either, but I should some time.  The Phantom
Menace, IMO, was very disappointing.  The story was OK, but the actors....
uh, no.  Sorry, but not one of them did, what I would call, a spectacular
job, especially with what I've come to expect of Star Wars.  Jake Lloyd was
especially terrible, and, really, I hated the scene where he destroys the
spaceship by accident.  "I'll hide in this ship.  Uh oh, I better help my
friends.  Oops, I turned the ship on.  Oh no, it's on autopilot.  Oh, I'm in
a battle."  Ugh.  Granted, the lightsaber battle was incredibly well done,
but that was the only scene that was really worth all the hype.  I'm hoping
Episode 2 will be better, or this franchise is in trouble. (IMO)
-Eric- knows he's getting a bad reply from Dex on this one.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Hollow Man / Low & High budget films.
Date: 09 Oct 2000 01:15:45 EDT


I haven't seen Blair Witch either, but I should some time.  The Phantom
Menace, IMO, was very disappointing.  The story was OK, but the actors....
uh, no.  Sorry, but not one of them did, what I would call, a spectacular
job, especially with what I've come to expect of Star Wars.  Jake Lloyd was
especially terrible, and, really, I hated the scene where he destroys the
spaceship by accident.  "I'll hide in this ship.  Uh oh, I better help my
friends.  Oops, I turned the ship on.  Oh no, it's on autopilot.  Oh, I'm in
a battle."  Ugh.  Granted, the lightsaber battle was incredibly well done,
but that was the only scene that was really worth all the hype.  I'm hoping
Episode 2 will be better, or this franchise is in trouble. (IMO)
-Eric- knows he's getting a bad reply from Dex on this one.


Episode 2 should be in theatrest by next spring I think

-JEd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Hollow Man / Low & High budget films.
Date: 09 Oct 2000 01:22:11 EDT

In a message dated 10/08/2000 10:17:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< Episode 2 should be in theatrest by next spring I think

 -JEd >>

Nah, they said three years in between.  In other words, we'll be getting 2 in
2002, and 3 in 2005.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
Date: 09 Oct 2000 11:35:34 +0100

hmmmmmmm the "And so-and-so" star wasn't Anne Heche in Psycho 1999 was
it?  :)

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    [e-mail] [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    05 October 2000 17:38
> To:    [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject:    [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
>
> > Sorry but the last person listed in the credits is often a pretty
> big
> > star, someone you can recognize ... people were shocked when she was
> killed
> > in the movie as they were expecting to see her for the entire time
> ...
>
> Name one movie where a big star has been listed in the end of the
> credits AND
> been the main character.  It just doesn't happen.  When a name star is
> at the
> end of the credits, they are always playing a smaller role.  Besides,
> people
> weren't going to see PSYCHO to see Janet Leigh.  They were going to
> see the
> latest Hitchcock film.  Indeed, I would argue that Hitchcock is the
> only
> director in history (with the possible exception of Steven Spielberg)
> where
> the mainstream public went to see the films for the director rather
> than the
> actors.
>
> In fact, last year a film came out that had the biggest star listed
> last with
> the "And So-and-So" credit, just like Leigh in PSYCHO.  That star was
> bigger
> (much bigger) in 1999 than Leigh was in 1960.  Also, like in PSYCHO,
> that
> star's character got killed early on in a surprising way.  Yet nobody
> walked
> out then saying "I can't believe they got rid of so-and-so!"
>
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 09 Oct 2000 11:33:38 +0100

So let me get this right, you see movies based on their titles??? GET
FREAKING REAL!!

Are you telling me you would miss out on films like "FARGO" or "Rivers
Edge" because they don't have 2 or 3 syllable snappy titles?  That is
the most unfathomably STUPID way of vetting a film.

MAN, I DON'T EVER WANT TO TALK TO YOU AGAIN - YOU ARE AN INSULT TO THIS
LIST

MARK

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    08 October 2000 01:53
> To:    [e-mail]
> Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
>
> I guess "O Brother Where Art Thou" and "Billy Elliot" are movies that
> have
> pretty plan titles which don't catch my eye.  You need to see "Casino"
> or
> "GoodFellas" now those are classic that everyone needs to see at least
> once.
>   Robert DeNiro and Joe Pecei make a great team.
>
>
> >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> >To: 'zachary rivera' <[e-mail]>
> >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> >Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:07:36 +0100
> >
> >WHATTT!!!!!!!! pretty old - get REAL!!   "O Brother" and "Billy
> Elliot"
> >are new releases, you guys in the states don't have em yet.
> >
> >As for Sleeping with The Enemy - hahahahahahahahahahahaha
> >
> >you ARE winding me up, aren't you?
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > Sent:    05 October 2000 18:36
> > > To:    [e-mail]
> > > Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > >
> > > Hey Mark what kind of movies are those?  They sound to be pretty
> old.
> > > Have
> > > you seen the movie Sleeping with the Enemy?  Now that is a great
> movie
> > > if
> > > you like movies with suspence.  Its with Julia Roberts and some
> psycho
> > > who
> > > is stacking her, well I won't tell you about the whole
> movie.......
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> > > >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> > > >To: "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>,
> > > >"'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
> > > >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > >Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:42:00 +0100
> > > >
> > > >either "O Brother Where Art Thou?" or "Billy Elliot"
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From:    ILLSLEY, KENNETH
> > > [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > > > Sent:    04 October 2000 00:57
> > > > > To:    '[e-mail]'
> > > > > Subject:    [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > > >
> > > > > What is the Best movie out there!
> > > > >
> > > > > [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message
> "unsubscribe
> > > ]
> > > > > [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> > > ]
> > > >
> > > >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe
> ]
> > > >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> ]
> > >
> > >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > > ___
> > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > http://www.hotmail.com.
> > >
> > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile
> at
> > > http://profiles.msn.com.
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ___
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Re: Hollow Man / Low & High
Date: 09 Oct 2000 09:54:00 -0600

> The Phantom Menace, IMO, was very disappointing.  The story was
> OK, but the actors.... uh, no.  Sorry, but not one of them did,
> what I would call, a spectacular job, especially with what I've
> come to expect of Star Wars.

You've come to expect good acting from STAR WARS?  Let's face it, the original
trilogy was carried by Mark Hamill whose performance as Luke Skywalker was so
wooden that the Sierra Club has named him a national treasure.  Carrie Fisher
was so high on drugs that a good performance was impossible.  Harrison Ford
looks embarassed to be part of the films at all.

>I'm hoping Episode 2 will be better, or this franchise is in trouble.

Why?  TPM did great with a lousy script and bad acting.  Episode 2 could
consist of nothing more than George Lucas reading his shopping list and it
would still gross hundreds of millions of dollars.  Never underestimate the
power of the fanboy.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
Date: 09 Oct 2000 09:58:00 -0600

>> In fact, last year a film came out that had the biggest star
>> listed last with the "And So-and-So" credit, just like Leigh
>> in PSYCHO.  That star was bigger (much bigger) in 1999 than
>> Leigh was in 1960.

> hmmmmmmm the "And so-and-so" star wasn't Anne Heche in
> Psycho 1999 was it?  :)

No.  That was obvious, so there would have been no reason for me to be veiled.
 Also, PSYCHO came out in 1998...I'm thinking of a 1999 picture with a star
who is a lot bigger than Heche or Leigh every were.  I'm trying to be vague to
avoid giving a spoiler for the film in question.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: RICHARD BENJAMIN <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
Date: 09 Oct 2000 17:19:06 +0100

Trying to be 'veiled' here. Does the 'star' in question die after giving
a long-winded, tongue-in-cheek, morale boosting speech?

Richardson.Paul wrote:
>>> In fact, last year a film came out that had the biggest star
>>> listed last with the "And So-and-So" credit, just like Leigh
>>> in PSYCHO.  That star was bigger (much bigger) in 1999 than
>>> Leigh was in 1960.
>
>> hmmmmmmm the "And so-and-so" star wasn't Anne Heche in
>> Psycho 1999 was it?  :)
>
>No.  That was obvious, so there would have been no reason for me to be
veiled.
> Also, PSYCHO came out in 1998...I'm thinking of a 1999 picture with a
star
>who is a lot bigger than Heche or Leigh every were.  I'm trying to be
vague to
>avoid giving a spoiler for the film in question.
>
>[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
>
>RFC822 header
>-----------------------------------
>
>RECEIVED: from SF_Database by POP_Mailbox_-1241011206 ; 09 OCT 00
17:08:10 UT
>Received: from LISTS.XMISSION.COM by mail.sourcedesign.co.uk
>     with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for MacOS 1.1.2); 09-Oct-2000
17:08:09
>+0000
>Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13ifKI-0001OE-00
>    for [e-mail]; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:58:54 -0600
>Received: from [167.234.1.10] (helo=ns.albertsons.com)
>    by lists.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13ifKG-0001O8-00
>    for [e-mail]; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:58:52 -0600
>Received: from S7352c (S7352c.7000.albertsons.com [167.234.12.204]) by
>ns.albertsons.com (AIX4.3/UCB 8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA20790 for
><[e-mail]>; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:55:52 -0600
>Received: from dubs0001.amstr.com (dubs0001.albertsons.com
[162.120.128.9])
>    by S7352c (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA159744
>    for <[e-mail]>; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:57:38 -0600
>X-Internal-ID: 39DF1C5E00002FE4
>Received: from amstr.com (162.120.128.9) by dubs0001.amstr.com (NPlex
>2.0.119) for [e-mail]; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 08:58:50 -0700
>Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:58:00 -0600
>From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
>To: (movies lists xmission co) <[e-mail]>
>Subject: [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
>Sender: [e-mail]
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] MEET THE PARENTS/TAO OF STEVE
Date: 09 Oct 2000 10:29:00 -0600

Once again I offer brief thoughts on two films, one mainstream and one
independent.

No man is good enough for any other man's daughter.  Every man knows this, so
meeting the father of your girlfriend and/or fiancee for the first time can be
absolutely terrifying.  MEET THE PARENTS takes this fear and raises it to
comic heights, with great results.

Greg (Ben Stiller) is perfectly content with his life and his job as a nurse.
However, he knows that he'll have to be on his best behavior with Jack (Robert
DeNiro), his perspective father-in-law who by all accounts wants the best for
his daughter.  Of course, the harder Greg tries to please Jack, the worse he
ends up looking.  Things gradually progress from social faux paus to outright
destruction as Greg digs himself deeper and deeper into Jack's disapproval.

I don't want to spoil the jokes in the film by laying them out here, but rest
assured: most are very very funny, especially in the first part of the film.
As things get worse and worse, the humor goes a bit over-the-top and isn't
quite as hilarious.  Still, overall the film is a very entertaining comedy and
worth seeing for a laugh.  Recommended.

***

Dex (Donal Logue) is the ultimate slacker.  He smokes pot for breakfast, only
works part time teaching Kindergarden, and spends most of his time lazing
about and drinking beer.  He's scruffy and very overweight.  However, Dex has
one unique talent: he has no problem getting girls.  In fact, he's been with
so many he has problems remembering names...if he even remembers the girl at
all.

How does Dex do it?  The "Tao of Steve."  Through the course of the film, we
watch Dex teach a young protege his secrets of seducing women, which amount to
one base axiom ("We pursue that which retreats from us.")  At the same time,
we watch Dex face his greatest challenge as he finds himself falling in love
for the first time with Syd (Greer Goodman).

The results are predictable, but the execution of the film (as well as the
fine acting and script) overcome the color-by-numbers plot.  While, it's not
as funny as MEET THE PARENTS, it certainly is deeper...and therefore the
better film.  Highly recommended.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
Date: 09 Oct 2000 10:30:00 -0600

> Trying to be 'veiled' here. Does the 'star' in question die
> after giving a long-winded, tongue-in-cheek, morale boosting
> speech?

Yep.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Re: TMP
Date: 09 Oct 2000 13:22:02 EDT

In a message dated 10/09/2000 8:54:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< > The Phantom Menace, IMO, was very disappointing.  The story was
 > OK, but the actors.... uh, no.  Sorry, but not one of them did,
 > what I would call, a spectacular job, especially with what I've
 > come to expect of Star Wars.

 You've come to expect good acting from STAR WARS?  Let's face it, the
original
 trilogy was carried by Mark Hamill whose performance as Luke Skywalker was so
 wooden that the Sierra Club has named him a national treasure.  Carrie Fisher
 was so high on drugs that a good performance was impossible.  Harrison Ford
 looks embarassed to be part of the films at all.

 >I'm hoping Episode 2 will be better, or this franchise is in trouble.

 Why?  TPM did great with a lousy script and bad acting.  Episode 2 could
 consist of nothing more than George Lucas reading his shopping list and it
 would still gross hundreds of millions of dollars.  Never underestimate the
 power of the fanboy. >>

I don't know why so many say the acting in the original trilogy was bad.  Of
course, I'm speaking from the point of view I had when I saw it at 12.
However, the acting in TMP was worse than anything in the original trilogy
(at least give me that).  The reason I put the IMO after my last statement
was because, in my own point of view, the Star Wars franchise would not be as
appealing as it once was.  TMP hurt my view on Star Wars as it is, so the
next one better be an improvement.  I didn't mean that it would stop people
from seeing it.  I mean, Star Wars has such a huge following that it'll
probably be making money for another 20 years.  Plus, I know many that saw
TMP and liked what they saw, it's definitely going to stick around.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Re: TPM
Date: 09 Oct 2000 13:33:31 EDT

In a message dated 10/09/2000 10:27:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< the acting in TMP >>

Meant TPM.  Dammit. :o

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 09 Oct 2000 15:11:40 EDT


***** No worries, Barbara .. contrarely to some people I don't resort to
name-calling when someone disagrees with me, I try to explain my point of
view instead ! ... I know The Blair Witch project was loved (and hated !) by
a lot of people ...

I thought it was a great horror film and I did find it very scary ... I just
saw it again a week ago (My 2nd time seeing that one !) and I was scared,
what can I tell you ... cranking up the speakers of the surround system and
listening to those "sounds" ...

Contrarely to you I identified with those people ... being lost and losing
track of where they are ... running out of food and water ... hearing sounds
late at night ... I thought it was excellent in fact ... except maybe for
the swearing ... they should have cut down on it a bit ... I usually don't
mind but I felt in that one it was a bit overwhelming in part (especially in
the first third of the film ... I can understand someone swearing and being
frustrated later on ...)

There is this guy that I always agree with .. well .. maybe 80 or 90% of the
times we agree if a film is good or bad ... and on BWP we disagree strongly
... I think it is very effective and scary and he found it boring and silly
... I say 4.5/5 .. he says 2/5 ... so this is a film that is a bit different
than the other ones out there, lots of different opinions.

Marc   ;o)


Fine, except for The Blair Witch Scam.  How could anyone have found it
scary?  It was a non-story.  They set it in 1993 because in 1998 or
whenever, the people would have had cell phones and there'd have been
even less plot than there was.  They were unreal and impossible to
identify with or be scared for.

I felt really ripped off after seeing that movie.

Now I'll sit back and wait for the flames.

Barbara


Marc Desbiens wrote:
 >
 > I'll make this a top "6" .. ok ??

Good horror films, off the top of my head ...
 >
 > 1- The shining
 > 2- The Blair witch project
 > 3- Scream
 > 4- The exorcist
 > 5- Jaws
 > 6- Halloween
 >
 > Marc   ;o)
 >

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Enrique Bird <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Movie seen in Nice, France in June 1974
Date: 09 Oct 2000 15:42:59 -0400

Friends:

In June, 1974 a group of colleagues and myself found ourselves in Nice,
France for the World Chess Olympiad. In one of the off days, we went to wath
a movie, in a theatre which was to one accustomed to mainstream Hollywood
movies up to that time quite shocking. As it was in French, with no
subtitles, and me with very limited knowledge of the language, I did not
even understand most of what went on, except for some of the shocking
details:

***   WARNING: Sorry, contains some explicit language - do not scroll if you
are not comfortable with this; I personally also find it still shocking ***




* near the beginning, a man and a woman are in a room and the man, as far as
I remember, undresses to his boxers. I do not remember if this was an after
wedding or an affair or what, but the man then procedes to either take off
his boxers or merely take out his penis, which is large and circumcised. The
womand proceeds to scream and I do not remember how it proceeded.

* somehere after the middle, and am not sure if preceding or following the
next detail, a young lady is seated in a wooeden chair. A peasant man stands
to her right. I believe, but am bit surem that others are to his right.
There might have been others seating in the table. The lady inserts her hand
into the crotch area of the man standing next to her and takes out a limp (I
think), uncircumcised penis. She caresses it or something for a while; I do
not remember if she used her mouth but seem to faintly recall the scene as,
curiously non-erotic. As if she was caressing a child's hand?

* maybe before or after  the previous scene and maybe the same woman: she
and a man are both naked, although, if remembering correct, no intimate
parts displayed, and in a stable or something, with some sort of gray hay.
They mix themselves with it and laugh and play a lot. Then she takes a knife
and plunges it into his belly; at first, he laughs, as his parts come out,
and mix with the hay. But he soon realizes he is dying and screams in horror
before dying.

I do not remember anything else; these parts, the frontal exposure of male
nudity and the graphic, horrific violence, always stuck in my mind. Although
I doubt that I would care to see it again, I would like to know its title,
any fame it night have (a friend who took is commented then something about
the famous director or whatever), and, please, a plot summary! Can anyone
help?

Sorry for any discomfort!

Enrique



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "zachary rivera" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 09 Oct 2000 18:51:45 MDT

YEAH THE "BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" WAS THE DUMBEST MOVIE THAT WAS ADVERTISED TO
THE FULLEST IN ORDER TO TRICK EVERYONE INTO SEEING THAT STUPID MOVIE!!!!!


>From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 15:11:40 EDT
>
>
>***** No worries, Barbara .. contrarely to some people I don't resort to
>name-calling when someone disagrees with me, I try to explain my point of
>view instead ! ... I know The Blair Witch project was loved (and hated !)
>by
>a lot of people ...
>
>I thought it was a great horror film and I did find it very scary ... I
>just
>saw it again a week ago (My 2nd time seeing that one !) and I was scared,
>what can I tell you ... cranking up the speakers of the surround system and
>listening to those "sounds" ...
>
>Contrarely to you I identified with those people ... being lost and losing
>track of where they are ... running out of food and water ... hearing
>sounds
>late at night ... I thought it was excellent in fact ... except maybe for
>the swearing ... they should have cut down on it a bit ... I usually don't
>mind but I felt in that one it was a bit overwhelming in part (especially
>in
>the first third of the film ... I can understand someone swearing and being
>frustrated later on ...)
>
>There is this guy that I always agree with .. well .. maybe 80 or 90% of
>the
>times we agree if a film is good or bad ... and on BWP we disagree strongly
>... I think it is very effective and scary and he found it boring and silly
>... I say 4.5/5 .. he says 2/5 ... so this is a film that is a bit
>different
>than the other ones out there, lots of different opinions.
>
>Marc   ;o)
>
>-------------------------------------
>
>Fine, except for The Blair Witch Scam.  How could anyone have found it
>scary?  It was a non-story.  They set it in 1993 because in 1998 or
>whenever, the people would have had cell phones and there'd have been
>even less plot than there was.  They were unreal and impossible to
>identify with or be scared for.
>
>I felt really ripped off after seeing that movie.
>
>Now I'll sit back and wait for the flames.
>
>Barbara
>
>-----------------------------------------------------
>
>Marc Desbiens wrote:
> >
> > I'll make this a top "6" .. ok ??
>
>Good horror films, off the top of my head ...
> >
> > 1- The shining
> > 2- The Blair witch project
> > 3- Scream
> > 4- The exorcist
> > 5- Jaws
> > 6- Halloween
> >
> > Marc   ;o)
> >
>
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>
>[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Re: Good horror films
Date: 09 Oct 2000 18:06:02 -0700

I would say that although it's usually thought of as a sci-fi flick, the
original "Alien" is really a horror movie, and a damned good one! Likewise
the original "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" and the original "Night of the
Living Dead."   And of course, any list of great horror movies has to
include "Psycho" and "Texas Chainsaw Massacre."


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "zachary rivera" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 09 Oct 2000 19:12:51 MDT

You got me all wrong!  Those titles I have never heard of so I'm not going
to the movies to see a movie I have never seen the previews of.  "Fargo" was
decient, but "Rivers Edge"  was a great movie.  Don't you know in most cases
like "Jurassic Park" for example they spent more money on advertising the
movie then they did actually making the movie.  Look at how much that movie
made far more than "O Bother All Now" and "Billy Idiot".


>From: MARK <[e-mail]>
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
>Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 11:33:38 +0100
>
>So let me get this right, you see movies based on their titles??? GET
>FREAKING REAL!!
>
>Are you telling me you would miss out on films like "FARGO" or "Rivers
>Edge" because they don't have 2 or 3 syllable snappy titles?  That is
>the most unfathomably STUPID way of vetting a film.
>
>MAN, I DON'T EVER WANT TO TALK TO YOU AGAIN - YOU ARE AN INSULT TO THIS
>LIST
>
>MARK
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > Sent:    08 October 2000 01:53
> > To:    [e-mail]
> > Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> >
> > I guess "O Brother Where Art Thou" and "Billy Elliot" are movies that
> > have
> > pretty plan titles which don't catch my eye.  You need to see "Casino"
> > or
> > "GoodFellas" now those are classic that everyone needs to see at least
> > once.
> >   Robert DeNiro and Joe Pecei make a great team.
> >
> >
> > >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> > >To: 'zachary rivera' <[e-mail]>
> > >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > >Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:07:36 +0100
> > >
> > >WHATTT!!!!!!!! pretty old - get REAL!!   "O Brother" and "Billy
> > Elliot"
> > >are new releases, you guys in the states don't have em yet.
> > >
> > >As for Sleeping with The Enemy - hahahahahahahahahahahaha
> > >
> > >you ARE winding me up, aren't you?
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > > Sent:    05 October 2000 18:36
> > > > To:    [e-mail]
> > > > Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > >
> > > > Hey Mark what kind of movies are those?  They sound to be pretty
> > old.
> > > > Have
> > > > you seen the movie Sleeping with the Enemy?  Now that is a great
> > movie
> > > > if
> > > > you like movies with suspence.  Its with Julia Roberts and some
> > psycho
> > > > who
> > > > is stacking her, well I won't tell you about the whole
> > movie.......
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> > > > >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> > > > >To: "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>,
> > > > >"'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
> > > > >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > > >Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:42:00 +0100
> > > > >
> > > > >either "O Brother Where Art Thou?" or "Billy Elliot"
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From:    ILLSLEY, KENNETH
> > > > [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > > > > Sent:    04 October 2000 00:57
> > > > > > To:    '[e-mail]'
> > > > > > Subject:    [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What is the Best movie out there!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message
> > "unsubscribe
> > > > ]
> > > > > > [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> > > > ]
> > > > >
> > > > >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe
> > ]
> > > > >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> > ]
> > > >
> > > >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > > > ___
> > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > > http://www.hotmail.com.
> > > >
> > > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile
> > at
> > > > http://profiles.msn.com.
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > ___
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > http://www.hotmail.com.
> >
> > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> > http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Diane Christy <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Re: Good horror films
Date: 09 Oct 2000 22:18:01 -0500

At 6:06 PM -0700 10/9/00, David F. Nolan wrote:
>  And of course, any list of great horror movies has to
>include "Psycho" and "Texas Chainsaw Massacre."

I love "Psycho".  Anyone seen the re-release of "The Exorcist"?  I'm
leery because I loved it so much.  I can't see what they could add to
it to make it better.  I'm afraid they would ruin it.
--
~~~~~
Diane Christy (Samantha and Joshua's Mom)
Jefferson, LA
http://www.geocities.com/diane507/
mailto:[e-mail]
ICQ #12904700  <dkbc10> on Instant AOL Messenger
~~~~~

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Re: Good horror films
Date: 10 Oct 2000 08:45:24 +0100

Thoroughly agree with you, just because of its setting it doesn't make
it a sci-fi film.  Alien would rank as my all time favourite horror
film.

MARK

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    David F. Nolan [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    10 October 2000 02:06
> To:    [e-mail]
> Subject:    [MV] Re: Good horror films
>
> I would say that although it's usually thought of as a sci-fi flick,
> the
> original "Alien" is really a horror movie, and a damned good one!
> Likewise
> the original "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" and the original "Night
> of the
> Living Dead."   And of course, any list of great horror movies has to
> include "Psycho" and "Texas Chainsaw Massacre."
>
>
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 10 Oct 2000 08:58:58 +0100

So you have not seen trailers for "O Brother...., I was in the States
for only 3 weeks, and I managed to catch it 3 times!!!
"Billy Elliot" (a.k.a. "The Dancer) won all sorts of accolades from the
Sundance festival.

And you are only going to see a film if it is heavily advertised?  You
post on this list, so therefore one would assume that you have an active
interest in the movies, right?? But you only go and see films that are
heavily advertised??  And a films takings are not comparative to how
successful it was.  For example, take "Wild Wild West", my all time
least favourite film.  That film was promoted to buggery, and it took in
the region of $120m at the US Box Office, was it a success, hell no!!!
Certainly as from a financial standpoint it was only a minor hit, but
from a film point of view it was an unnmitigated DISASTER!!

When a film studio spends a lot of money on making a blockbuster they
have to spend a huge amount on advertising, if you ran a factory you
wouldn't spend $180m on a new machine, and then let nobody know that you
had it, (unless you are a) a secret facility, b) planning to take over
the world with it), it doesn't make the films successful, it just gives
them a wider image.  Also look at the content of "Jurassic Park", ideal
family film - accessible to all ages.  Would either "O Brother.." or
"Billy Elliot" be classed as the same - hell no, are they being marketed
the same - of course not, did they cost the same - the two film combined
were made for less than 50% of "Jurassic Park's" budget,  ARE THEY AS
GOOD - for the markets that they are aiming for - ABSOLUTELY.

I'm sure that I am speaking for the majority of the list here when I say
- GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS AND GROW UP.

Maybe if we got the Coen's to launch a George Clooney doll for "O
Brother.." then you would go and see the film - SCHMUCK!!!

MARK

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    10 October 2000 02:13
> To:    [e-mail]
> Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
>
> You got me all wrong!  Those titles I have never heard of so I'm not
> going
> to the movies to see a movie I have never seen the previews of.
> "Fargo" was
> decient, but "Rivers Edge"  was a great movie.  Don't you know in most
> cases
> like "Jurassic Park" for example they spent more money on advertising
> the
> movie then they did actually making the movie.  Look at how much that
> movie
> made far more than "O Bother All Now" and "Billy Idiot".
>
>
> >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> >To: [e-mail]
> >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> >Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 11:33:38 +0100
> >
> >So let me get this right, you see movies based on their titles??? GET
> >FREAKING REAL!!
> >
> >Are you telling me you would miss out on films like "FARGO" or
> "Rivers
> >Edge" because they don't have 2 or 3 syllable snappy titles?  That is
> >the most unfathomably STUPID way of vetting a film.
> >
> >MAN, I DON'T EVER WANT TO TALK TO YOU AGAIN - YOU ARE AN INSULT TO
> THIS
> >LIST
> >
> >MARK
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > Sent:    08 October 2000 01:53
> > > To:    [e-mail]
> > > Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > >
> > > I guess "O Brother Where Art Thou" and "Billy Elliot" are movies
> that
> > > have
> > > pretty plan titles which don't catch my eye.  You need to see
> "Casino"
> > > or
> > > "GoodFellas" now those are classic that everyone needs to see at
> least
> > > once.
> > >   Robert DeNiro and Joe Pecei make a great team.
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> > > >To: 'zachary rivera' <[e-mail]>
> > > >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > >Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:07:36 +0100
> > > >
> > > >WHATTT!!!!!!!! pretty old - get REAL!!   "O Brother" and "Billy
> > > Elliot"
> > > >are new releases, you guys in the states don't have em yet.
> > > >
> > > >As for Sleeping with The Enemy - hahahahahahahahahahahaha
> > > >
> > > >you ARE winding me up, aren't you?
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > > > Sent:    05 October 2000 18:36
> > > > > To:    [e-mail]
> > > > > Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey Mark what kind of movies are those?  They sound to be
> pretty
> > > old.
> > > > > Have
> > > > > you seen the movie Sleeping with the Enemy?  Now that is a
> great
> > > movie
> > > > > if
> > > > > you like movies with suspence.  Its with Julia Roberts and
> some
> > > psycho
> > > > > who
> > > > > is stacking her, well I won't tell you about the whole
> > > movie.......
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> > > > > >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> > > > > >To: "'[e-mail]'"
> <[e-mail]>,
> > > > > >"'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
> > > > > >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > > > >Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:42:00 +0100
> > > > > >
> > > > > >either "O Brother Where Art Thou?" or "Billy Elliot"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From:    ILLSLEY, KENNETH
> > > > > [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > > > > > Sent:    04 October 2000 00:57
> > > > > > > To:    '[e-mail]'
> > > > > > > Subject:    [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What is the Best movie out there!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message
> > > "unsubscribe
> > > > > ]
> > > > > > > [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> > > > > ]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message
> "unsubscribe
> > > ]
> > > > > >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> > > ]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > > > http://www.hotmail.com.
> > > > >
> > > > > Share information about yourself, create your own public
> profile
> > > at
> > > > > http://profiles.msn.com.
> > >
> > >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > > ___
> > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > http://www.hotmail.com.
> > >
> > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile
> at
> > > http://profiles.msn.com.
> >
> >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ___
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 10 Oct 2000 09:08:18 +0100

Once again, my misguided friend, you are wrong!!  Blair Witch Project
was cleverly advertised, the media then just took up the stick and ran
with it - it was a victim of it's own success.

The makers never set out to produce a $200m grossing movie, they just
decided to make something truly different, and market it with a very
effective web-site.  If you want to blame anyone for getting caught up
in the media hype, and disliking a film that could never appeal to
anyone, blame yourself for being easily led by the media.

As for me, I loved the film, it ranks right up there in my top 5 horror
movies, I love the sense of desolation and desperation.  Do I try to
force my views on all and sundry, NO, because I know the film will not
appeal to everyone.

MARK

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    10 October 2000 01:52
> To:    [e-mail]
> Subject:    Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>
> YEAH THE "BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" WAS THE DUMBEST MOVIE THAT WAS
> ADVERTISED TO
> THE FULLEST IN ORDER TO TRICK EVERYONE INTO SEEING THAT STUPID
> MOVIE!!!!!
>
>
> >From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
> >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> >To: [e-mail]
> >Subject: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
> >Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 15:11:40 EDT
> >
> >
> >***** No worries, Barbara .. contrarely to some people I don't resort
> to
> >name-calling when someone disagrees with me, I try to explain my
> point of
> >view instead ! ... I know The Blair Witch project was loved (and
> hated !)
> >by
> >a lot of people ...
> >
> >I thought it was a great horror film and I did find it very scary ...
> I
> >just
> >saw it again a week ago (My 2nd time seeing that one !) and I was
> scared,
> >what can I tell you ... cranking up the speakers of the surround
> system and
> >listening to those "sounds" ...
> >
> >Contrarely to you I identified with those people ... being lost and
> losing
> >track of where they are ... running out of food and water ... hearing
>
> >sounds
> >late at night ... I thought it was excellent in fact ... except maybe
> for
> >the swearing ... they should have cut down on it a bit ... I usually
> don't
> >mind but I felt in that one it was a bit overwhelming in part
> (especially
> >in
> >the first third of the film ... I can understand someone swearing and
> being
> >frustrated later on ...)
> >
> >There is this guy that I always agree with .. well .. maybe 80 or 90%
> of
> >the
> >times we agree if a film is good or bad ... and on BWP we disagree
> strongly
> >... I think it is very effective and scary and he found it boring and
> silly
> >... I say 4.5/5 .. he says 2/5 ... so this is a film that is a bit
> >different
> >than the other ones out there, lots of different opinions.
> >
> >Marc   ;o)
> >
> >-------------------------------------
> >
> >Fine, except for The Blair Witch Scam.  How could anyone have found
> it
> >scary?  It was a non-story.  They set it in 1993 because in 1998 or
> >whenever, the people would have had cell phones and there'd have been
> >even less plot than there was.  They were unreal and impossible to
> >identify with or be scared for.
> >
> >I felt really ripped off after seeing that movie.
> >
> >Now I'll sit back and wait for the flames.
> >
> >Barbara
> >
> >-----------------------------------------------------
> >
> >Marc Desbiens wrote:
> > >
> > > I'll make this a top "6" .. ok ??
> >
> >Good horror films, off the top of my head ...
> > >
> > > 1- The shining
> > > 2- The Blair witch project
> > > 3- Scream
> > > 4- The exorcist
> > > 5- Jaws
> > > 6- Halloween
> > >
> > > Marc   ;o)
> > >
> >
> >_____________________________________________________________________
> ____
> >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> http://www.hotmail.com.
> >
> >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> >http://profiles.msn.com.
> >
> >
> >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ___
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
Date: 10 Oct 2000 09:00:42 +0100

And if it were another film of the same genre, would the music go
"Derrr-dum, derrr-dum, dum-dum, dum-dum, dum-dum, dum-dum, diddle-derr"

MARK

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    RICHARD BENJAMIN [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    09 October 2000 17:19
> To:    movies
> Subject:    RE: [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
>
> Trying to be 'veiled' here. Does the 'star' in question die after
> giving
> a long-winded, tongue-in-cheek, morale boosting speech?
>
> Richardson.Paul wrote:
> >>> In fact, last year a film came out that had the biggest star
> >>> listed last with the "And So-and-So" credit, just like Leigh
> >>> in PSYCHO.  That star was bigger (much bigger) in 1999 than
> >>> Leigh was in 1960.
> >
> >> hmmmmmmm the "And so-and-so" star wasn't Anne Heche in
> >> Psycho 1999 was it?  :)
> >
> >No.  That was obvious, so there would have been no reason for me to
> be
> veiled.
> > Also, PSYCHO came out in 1998...I'm thinking of a 1999 picture with
> a
> star
> >who is a lot bigger than Heche or Leigh every were.  I'm trying to be
> vague to
> >avoid giving a spoiler for the film in question.
> >
> >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
> >
> >
> >RFC822 header
> >-----------------------------------
> >
> >RECEIVED: from SF_Database by POP_Mailbox_-1241011206 ; 09 OCT 00
> 17:08:10 UT
> >Received: from LISTS.XMISSION.COM by mail.sourcedesign.co.uk
> >     with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for MacOS 1.1.2); 09-Oct-2000
> 17:08:09
> >+0000
> >Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 2.12 #2)
> >    id 13ifKI-0001OE-00
> >    for [e-mail]; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:58:54
> -0600
> >Received: from [167.234.1.10] (helo=ns.albertsons.com)
> >    by lists.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2)
> >    id 13ifKG-0001O8-00
> >    for [e-mail]; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:58:52 -0600
> >Received: from S7352c (S7352c.7000.albertsons.com [167.234.12.204])
> by
> >ns.albertsons.com (AIX4.3/UCB 8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA20790 for
>
> ><[e-mail]>; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:55:52 -0600
> >Received: from dubs0001.amstr.com (dubs0001.albertsons.com
> [162.120.128.9])
> >    by S7352c (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA159744
> >    for <[e-mail]>; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:57:38 -0600
> >X-Internal-ID: 39DF1C5E00002FE4
> >Received: from amstr.com (162.120.128.9) by dubs0001.amstr.com (NPlex
>
> >2.0.119) for [e-mail]; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 08:58:50
> -0700
> >Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
> >Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:58:00 -0600
> >From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
> >To: (movies lists xmission co) <[e-mail]>
> >Subject: [MV] RE: Movie Times and Psycho
> >Sender: [e-mail]
> >Precedence: bulk
> >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> >
>
>
>
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: RICHARD BENJAMIN <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 10 Oct 2000 15:15:16 +0100

It does seem to be becoming more apparent that Zachary Rivera (stage
name) is a blinkered, gullible, mainstream fool who would be more at home on
the Steven Segal mailing list.

MARK wrote:
>Once again, my misguided friend, you are wrong!!  Blair Witch Project
>was cleverly advertised, the media then just took up the stick and ran
>with it - it was a victim of it's own success.
>
>The makers never set out to produce a $200m grossing movie, they just
>decided to make something truly different, and market it with a very
>effective web-site.  If you want to blame anyone for getting caught up
>in the media hype, and disliking a film that could never appeal to
>anyone, blame yourself for being easily led by the media.
>
>As for me, I loved the film, it ranks right up there in my top 5 horror
>movies, I love the sense of desolation and desperation.  Do I try to
>force my views on all and sundry, NO, because I know the film will not
>appeal to everyone.
>
>MARK
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
>> Sent:    10 October 2000 01:52
>> To:    [e-mail]
>> Subject:    Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>>
>> YEAH THE "BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" WAS THE DUMBEST MOVIE THAT WAS
>> ADVERTISED TO
>> THE FULLEST IN ORDER TO TRICK EVERYONE INTO SEEING THAT STUPID
>> MOVIE!!!!!
>>
>>
>> >From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
>> >Reply-To: [e-mail]
>> >To: [e-mail]
>> >Subject: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>> >Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 15:11:40 EDT
>> >
>> >
>> >***** No worries, Barbara .. contrarely to some people I don't resort
>> to
>> >name-calling when someone disagrees with me, I try to explain my
>> point of
>> >view instead ! ... I know The Blair Witch project was loved (and
>> hated !)
>> >by
>> >a lot of people ...
>> >
>> >I thought it was a great horror film and I did find it very scary ...
>> I
>> >just
>> >saw it again a week ago (My 2nd time seeing that one !) and I was
>> scared,
>> >what can I tell you ... cranking up the speakers of the surround
>> system and
>> >listening to those "sounds" ...
>> >
>> >Contrarely to you I identified with those people ... being lost and
>> losing
>> >track of where they are ... running out of food and water ... hearing
>>
>> >sounds
>> >late at night ... I thought it was excellent in fact ... except maybe
>> for
>> >the swearing ... they should have cut down on it a bit ... I usually
>> don't
>> >mind but I felt in that one it was a bit overwhelming in part
>> (especially
>> >in
>> >the first third of the film ... I can understand someone swearing and
>> being
>> >frustrated later on ...)
>> >
>> >There is this guy that I always agree with .. well .. maybe 80 or 90%
>> of
>> >the
>> >times we agree if a film is good or bad ... and on BWP we disagree
>> strongly
>> >... I think it is very effective and scary and he found it boring and
>> silly
>> >... I say 4.5/5 .. he says 2/5 ... so this is a film that is a bit
>> >different
>> >than the other ones out there, lots of different opinions.
>> >
>> >Marc   ;o)
>> >
>> >-------------------------------------
>> >
>> >Fine, except for The Blair Witch Scam.  How could anyone have found
>> it
>> >scary?  It was a non-story.  They set it in 1993 because in 1998 or
>> >whenever, the people would have had cell phones and there'd have been
>> >even less plot than there was.  They were unreal and impossible to
>> >identify with or be scared for.
>> >
>> >I felt really ripped off after seeing that movie.
>> >
>> >Now I'll sit back and wait for the flames.
>> >
>> >Barbara
>> >
>> >-----------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> >Marc Desbiens wrote:
>> > >
>> > > I'll make this a top "6" .. ok ??
>> >
>> >Good horror films, off the top of my head ...
>> > >
>> > > 1- The shining
>> > > 2- The Blair witch project
>> > > 3- Scream
>> > > 4- The exorcist
>> > > 5- Jaws
>> > > 6- Halloween
>> > >
>> > > Marc   ;o)
>> > >
>> >
>> >_____________________________________________________________________
>> ____
>> >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
>> http://www.hotmail.com.
>> >
>> >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>> >http://profiles.msn.com.
>> >
>> >
>> >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>> >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> ___
>> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
>> http://www.hotmail.com.
>>
>> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>> http://profiles.msn.com.
>>
>>
>> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
>[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
>
>RFC822 header
>-----------------------------------
>
>RECEIVED: from SF_Database by POP_Mailbox_-1240953495 ; 10 OCT 00
09:10:01 UT
>Received: from LISTS.XMISSION.COM by mail.sourcedesign.co.uk
>     with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for MacOS 1.1.2); 10-Oct-2000
09:09:53
>+0000
>Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13iuKt-0003CO-00
>    for [e-mail]; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 02:00:31 -0600
>Received: from [195.166.128.23] (helo=merlins.force9.net)
>    by lists.xmission.com with smtp (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13iuKq-0003C7-00
>    for [e-mail]; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 02:00:28 -0600
>Received: (qmail 25509 invoked from network); 10 Oct 2000 08:03:10 -0000
>Received: from relay5.force9.net (HELO autoturn.plus.net.uk)
(195.166.128.22)
>  by merlins.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 10 Oct 2000 08:03:10 -0000
>Received: (qmail 14191 invoked from network); 10 Oct 2000 07:55:14 -0000
>Received: from zippack.force9.co.uk (HELO SERVERA.ZIPPACK.CO.UK)
>(195.166.136.140)
>  by relay5.force9.net with SMTP; 10 Oct 2000 07:55:14 -0000
>Received: by SERVERA with Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3)
>    id <TZD771K4>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:08:19 +0100
>Message-ID: <8177A6A8FD17D21182BE0080C8470DA70710C9@SERVERA>
>From: MARK <[e-mail]>
>To: "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
>Subject: RE: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:08:18 +0100
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3)
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>    charset="iso-8859-1"
>Sender: [e-mail]
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Re: Blair Witch Project
Date: 10 Oct 2000 09:05:00 -0600

> YEAH THE "BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" WAS THE DUMBEST
> MOVIE THAT WAS ADVERTISED TO THE FULLEST IN ORDER
> TO TRICK EVERYONE INTO SEEING THAT STUPID MOVIE!!!!!

Tricked?  I don't know about you, but I paid money to see the film of my own
free will.  I don't recall a man in a black sedan tricking people into the
theater with promises of candy and comic books.

Also, you may need to get your computer serviced.  It appears there is
something wrong with your caps lock key.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 1
Date: 10 Oct 2000 09:08:00 -0600

> Don't you know in most cases like "Jurassic Park"
> for example they spent more money on advertising the
> movie then they did actually making the movie.  Look
> at how much that movie made far more than "O Bother
> All Now" and "Billy Idiot".

Well, considering O BROTHER WHERE ART THOU hasn't even been released yet in
the U.S., it's no surprise that it hasn't made as much money as JURASSIC PARK.
 Of course, it never will, since BROTHER appeals to a smaller audience.  In
addition, the gross profit of a film is in no way indicative of it's quality.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Michael Giles" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Remember the titans
Date: 10 Oct 2000 16:28:59 MDT

Has anyone seen Remember the Titans?  I love football movies and am
wondering if it is worth seeing.

Thanks,
Mike
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Diane Christy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Remember the titans
Date: 10 Oct 2000 19:14:16 -0500

At 4:28 PM -0600 10/10/00, Michael Giles wrote:
>Has anyone seen Remember the Titans?  I love football movies and am
>wondering if it is worth seeing.

I saw it Sunday night.  It was entertaining enough and a very
inspirational story.  It was predictable and hokey but that was ok
with me.  I read a review in either Time or Newsweek and the reviewer
made a comment about the movie being cliche and then stated that that
really wasn't Disney's doing.  The story told on the screen is pretty
much the way it happened back in '71.  I did find myself wanting more
depth to Washington's character.  I thought he wasn't very
interesting and I wanted to know more about him.  I enjoyed it.  Some
of you hard-core film critics may find it a waste of time, however.
Anything that inspires, though I think is worthwhile.
--
~~~~~
Diane Christy (Samantha and Joshua's Mom)
Jefferson, LA
http://www.geocities.com/diane507/
mailto:[e-mail]
ICQ #12904700  <dkbc10> on Instant AOL Messenger
~~~~~

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 10 Oct 2000 21:52:31 EDT

In a message dated 10/10/2000 1:01:17 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< And you are only going to see a film if it is heavily advertised?  You
 post on this list, so therefore one would assume that you have an active
 interest in the movies, right?? But you only go and see films that are
 heavily advertised??  And a films takings are not comparative to how
 successful it was.  For example, take "Wild Wild West", my all time
 least favourite film.  That film was promoted to buggery, and it took in
 the region of $120m at the US Box Office, was it a success, hell no!!!
 Certainly as from a financial standpoint it was only a minor hit, but
 from a film point of view it was an unnmitigated DISASTER!! >>

Sorry, but I'm going to have to go with Mark on this one (did anyone else
sense hell freezing over).  Trailers can only do so much for a movie.  I
mean, there's no problem in taking a tip from someone else to see a something
that wasn't advertised, especially when they can describe to you what it's
about.  Flashy trailers or titles don't signify a good or bad movie, just how
much the film makers want people to see it.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Remember the titans
Date: 10 Oct 2000 22:19:34 EDT

In a message dated 10/10/2000 3:29:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< Has anyone seen Remember the Titans?  I love football movies and am
 wondering if it is worth seeing.

 Thanks,
 Mike >>

Haven't seen it, but a football movie that gets mostly good reviews has to be
doing something right.  Most of the critics complain about cliches in sports
films.  Of course, maybe I should read some of them first to find out why
they're good. :)
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] The war zone - 1999
Date: 10 Oct 2000 22:29:02 EDT


** Minor spoilers **

Hello !

I just watched this great film ... Excellent, but boy was it grimm and
disturbing in part ... amazing acting by everyone involved, especially the
teenage daughter of the family that was incredible ... so touching and
believable ... this was a very difficult part to play, long and emotional
scenes with little dialogues ...  yet she
gives an unbelievable performance a-la Emily Watson in "Breaking the waves"
!!

Story of a family in England (Watch out for the thick english accent in
part, especially in the first 10-15 minutes ... hard to make out what they
were saying sometimes !)  Thankfully, after that they are easier to
understand ...

Everything appears to be normal at first glance ... mom & dad happily
married, son around 15 years old, daughter around 17 years old ... and a new
born baby daughter too ... Little house in the countryside, dad with a good
job ...etc.

The problem is the father has incestuous relations with his teenage daughter
... and this of course creates a lot of issues ... tearing the whole family
apart, especially after the son finds out (as he is looking inside the
bathroom through a window late at night he sees his father "with" his sister
in the bath tub ...)   Now this is not done in an exploitive way, we don't
even actually see the father and his daughter, we only see the son's
reaction ... and he is in shock, he can't believe it as you imagine !

Of course then the son confronts his sister, trying to find out what the
hell is going on beyween her and his father ... why she is lying to protect
her father (the daughter insists that nothing is wrong and he must be sick
for imagining such things, that nothing happened ... Even is he has seen it
with his own eyes, she si trying to convince him that he is wrong ... the
works !

This is only the beginning ... I mean this is MAJOR of course, it's the
heart of the movie so the film is not easy to watch, you've been warned !
... the son not knowing what he should do .. tell the mother ... tell the
coppers ... try to convince his father that what he is doing his wrong .. if
he can get him to admit it of course ...

I won't go too much into the twists and turns along the way but the film is
certainly NASTY ... It is directed by Tim Roth who was abused himself as a
child.  Very well made technically ... music, sound, cinematography ... Top
notch acting as I said !

James Berardinelli (famous movie critic !) picks this one as his #1 film for
1999 (4/4 !) and also is in his Top 10 for the 1990's ... as for myself it
is "only" in 17th place for 1999 due to quite a few rather slow patches in
the first half  ...

I felt it was dragging a bit and wasn't moving at a pace that was
appropriate.  Well ... I guess I am picky but it's still a damn good film of
course !!  It is NOT for everybody though ... I can see how some people
would turn it off ...

It had the potential to go as high as 4.5/5 but I have to penalize it a bit
for the story that could have been improved or told in a slightly different
way ...

4/5  (excellent)

Marc     ;o)

"The maple syrup is supposed to be on the table
before the pancakes ..."

Dustin Hoffman as "Raymond"
"Rain man" - 1988 - 4/5










_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 11 Oct 2000 09:11:22 +0100

wonders will never cease - ERIC agreed with me, maybe this is the start
of a beautiful friendship - NOT!!!

:)

MARK

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    [e-mail] [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    11 October 2000 02:53
> To:    [e-mail]
> Subject:    Re: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
>
> In a message dated 10/10/2000 1:01:17 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> [e-mail] writes:
>
> << And you are only going to see a film if it is heavily advertised?
> You
>  post on this list, so therefore one would assume that you have an
> active
>  interest in the movies, right?? But you only go and see films that
> are
>  heavily advertised??  And a films takings are not comparative to how
>  successful it was.  For example, take "Wild Wild West", my all time
>  least favourite film.  That film was promoted to buggery, and it took
> in
>  the region of $120m at the US Box Office, was it a success, hell
> no!!!
>  Certainly as from a financial standpoint it was only a minor hit, but
>  from a film point of view it was an unnmitigated DISASTER!! >>
>
> Sorry, but I'm going to have to go with Mark on this one (did anyone
> else
> sense hell freezing over).  Trailers can only do so much for a movie.
> I
> mean, there's no problem in taking a tip from someone else to see a
> something
> that wasn't advertised, especially when they can describe to you what
> it's
> about.  Flashy trailers or titles don't signify a good or bad movie,
> just how
> much the film makers want people to see it.
> -Eric-
>
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
Date: 11 Oct 2000 11:07:58 +0100



> -----Original Message-----
> From:    MARK
> Sent:    11 October 2000 09:23
> To:    'zachary rivera'
> Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
>
> Errrrmm,,,I take this "movie shit too seriously", don't know if you've
> noticed what list you are on -it's a MOVIE LIST!!!
>
> How old are you 12/13???
>
> You say that the movies I mentioned seemed common - I have no idea
> what you mean by this.
>
> "a good movie to me is SEX, VIOLENCE, DRUGS, AND ROCK N' ROLL" - did
> you actually say this, if so what are your thoughts on Julien Temples
> "The Great Rock n Roll Swindle"?, how about the Rupert Everett/Bob
> Dylan Starrer "Hearts of Fire"?, or how about "Velvet Goldmine"?
>
> Listen kiddo, why not stop using daddies computer and begin to grow a
> little, try opening your eyes.
>
> Oh and just in case you thought I was some stuffed shirt who wouldn't
> know a Joel Silver pic if it hit him in the face - my all time
> favourite movie is "DIE HARD"
>
> MARK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    10 October 2000 18:22
> To:    [e-mail]
> Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
>
>
> Wow you take this movie shit too serious slow down buddy your liable
> to hurt
> yourself.  Yes Wild Wild West sucked however I did like the part where
> Salma
> Hayek showed off her ass!  That was the movie to me.   Besides the
> movies
> you have stated seem to be common which in my eyes are boring.
> Heavily
> advertised does not mean I will see the movie I was just making a
> point on
> how well some movies are marketed.  A good movie to me is SEX,
> VIOLENCE,
> DRUGS, AND ROCK N' ROLL, that is what matters out here in the states.
> If
> you don't like it watch your cartoons and sissy movies SCHMUCK!!!
> hahahaha!!!
>
> >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> >To: "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
> >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:58:58 +0100
> >
> >So you have not seen trailers for "O Brother...., I was in the States
> >for only 3 weeks, and I managed to catch it 3 times!!!
> >"Billy Elliot" (a.k.a. "The Dancer) won all sorts of accolades from
> the
> >Sundance festival.
> >
> >And you are only going to see a film if it is heavily advertised?
> You
> >post on this list, so therefore one would assume that you have an
> active
> >interest in the movies, right?? But you only go and see films that
> are
> >heavily advertised??  And a films takings are not comparative to how
> >successful it was.  For example, take "Wild Wild West", my all time
> >least favourite film.  That film was promoted to buggery, and it took
> in
> >the region of $120m at the US Box Office, was it a success, hell
> no!!!
> >Certainly as from a financial standpoint it was only a minor hit, but
> >from a film point of view it was an unnmitigated DISASTER!!
> >
> >When a film studio spends a lot of money on making a blockbuster they
> >have to spend a huge amount on advertising, if you ran a factory you
> >wouldn't spend $180m on a new machine, and then let nobody know that
> you
> >had it, (unless you are a) a secret facility, b) planning to take
> over
> >the world with it), it doesn't make the films successful, it just
> gives
> >them a wider image.  Also look at the content of "Jurassic Park",
> ideal
> >family film - accessible to all ages.  Would either "O Brother.." or
> >"Billy Elliot" be classed as the same - hell no, are they being
> marketed
> >the same - of course not, did they cost the same - the two film
> combined
> >were made for less than 50% of "Jurassic Park's" budget,  ARE THEY AS
> >GOOD - for the markets that they are aiming for - ABSOLUTELY.
> >
> >I'm sure that I am speaking for the majority of the list here when I
> say
> >- GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS AND GROW UP.
> >
> >Maybe if we got the Coen's to launch a George Clooney doll for "O
> >Brother.." then you would go and see the film - SCHMUCK!!!
> >
> >MARK
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > Sent:    10 October 2000 02:13
> > > To:    [e-mail]
> > > Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > >
> > > You got me all wrong!  Those titles I have never heard of so I'm
> not
> > > going
> > > to the movies to see a movie I have never seen the previews of.
> > > "Fargo" was
> > > decient, but "Rivers Edge"  was a great movie.  Don't you know in
> most
> > > cases
> > > like "Jurassic Park" for example they spent more money on
> advertising
> > > the
> > > movie then they did actually making the movie.  Look at how much
> that
> > > movie
> > > made far more than "O Bother All Now" and "Billy Idiot".
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> > > >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> > > >To: [e-mail]
> > > >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > >Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 11:33:38 +0100
> > > >
> > > >So let me get this right, you see movies based on their titles???
> GET
> > > >FREAKING REAL!!
> > > >
> > > >Are you telling me you would miss out on films like "FARGO" or
> > > "Rivers
> > > >Edge" because they don't have 2 or 3 syllable snappy titles?
> That is
> > > >the most unfathomably STUPID way of vetting a film.
> > > >
> > > >MAN, I DON'T EVER WANT TO TALK TO YOU AGAIN - YOU ARE AN INSULT
> TO
> > > THIS
> > > >LIST
> > > >
> > > >MARK
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > > > Sent:    08 October 2000 01:53
> > > > > To:    [e-mail]
> > > > > Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess "O Brother Where Art Thou" and "Billy Elliot" are
> movies
> > > that
> > > > > have
> > > > > pretty plan titles which don't catch my eye.  You need to see
> > > "Casino"
> > > > > or
> > > > > "GoodFellas" now those are classic that everyone needs to see
> at
> > > least
> > > > > once.
> > > > >   Robert DeNiro and Joe Pecei make a great team.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> > > > > >To: 'zachary rivera' <[e-mail]>
> > > > > >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > > > >Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:07:36 +0100
> > > > > >
> > > > > >WHATTT!!!!!!!! pretty old - get REAL!!   "O Brother" and
> "Billy
> > > > > Elliot"
> > > > > >are new releases, you guys in the states don't have em yet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >As for Sleeping with The Enemy - hahahahahahahahahahahaha
> > > > > >
> > > > > >you ARE winding me up, aren't you?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > > > > > Sent:    05 October 2000 18:36
> > > > > > > To:    [e-mail]
> > > > > > > Subject:    RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hey Mark what kind of movies are those?  They sound to be
> > > pretty
> > > > > old.
> > > > > > > Have
> > > > > > > you seen the movie Sleeping with the Enemy?  Now that is a
> > > great
> > > > > movie
> > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > you like movies with suspence.  Its with Julia Roberts and
> > > some
> > > > > psycho
> > > > > > > who
> > > > > > > is stacking her, well I won't tell you about the whole
> > > > > movie.......
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> > > > > > > >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> > > > > > > >To: "'[e-mail]'"
> > > <[e-mail]>,
> > > > > > > >"'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
> > > > > > > >Subject: RE: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
> > > > > > > >Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:42:00 +0100
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >either "O Brother Where Art Thou?" or "Billy Elliot"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > From:    ILLSLEY, KENNETH
> > > > > > > [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > > > > > > > Sent:    04 October 2000 00:57
> > > > > > > > > To:    '[e-mail]'
> > > > > > > > > Subject:    [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29
> -0400
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > What is the Best movie out there!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message
> > > > > "unsubscribe
> > > > > > > ]
> > > > > > > > > [ movies" (without the quotes) to
> [e-mail]
> > > > > > > ]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message
> > > "unsubscribe
> > > > > ]
> > > > > > > >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> > > > > ]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > > > > > > ___
> > > > > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > > > > > http://www.hotmail.com.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Share information about yourself, create your own public
> > > profile
> > > > > at
> > > > > > > http://profiles.msn.com.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > > > http://www.hotmail.com.
> > > > >
> > > > > Share information about yourself, create your own public
> profile
> > > at
> > > > > http://profiles.msn.com.
> > > >
> > > >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe
> ]
> > > >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> ]
> > >
> > >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > > ___
> > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > http://www.hotmail.com.
> > >
> > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile
> at
> > > http://profiles.msn.com.
> > >
> > >
> > > [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe
> ]
> > > [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> ]
> >
> >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ___
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 11 Oct 2000 11:08:32 +0100



> -----Original Message-----
> From:    MARK
> Sent:    11 October 2000 08:48
> To:    'zachary rivera'
> Subject:    RE: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>
> Candyman is o.k. if a bit contrived, and The Exorcist is my all time
> No. 2 horror film.
>
> As for the first part of your statement, you managed to contradict
> yourself and dismiss your previous argument  - no hope for you, my
> friend.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    10 October 2000 18:12
> To:    [e-mail]
> Subject:    RE: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>
> Don't believe the hype!  The media blew up Blair Witch Project because
> it
> was the first low budget film to make it as big as it did.  As far as
> being
> a good horror the only thing I was scared of was throwing up in the
> movie
> theater because the camera work sucked!  You want to get scared watch
> "Candyman"  or the "Exorcist" if you want a real scare!!
>
>
> >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
> >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> >To: "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
> >Subject: RE: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
> >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:08:18 +0100
> >
> >Once again, my misguided friend, you are wrong!!  Blair Witch Project
> >was cleverly advertised, the media then just took up the stick and
> ran
> >with it - it was a victim of it's own success.
> >
> >The makers never set out to produce a $200m grossing movie, they just
> >decided to make something truly different, and market it with a very
> >effective web-site.  If you want to blame anyone for getting caught
> up
> >in the media hype, and disliking a film that could never appeal to
> >anyone, blame yourself for being easily led by the media.
> >
> >As for me, I loved the film, it ranks right up there in my top 5
> horror
> >movies, I love the sense of desolation and desperation.  Do I try to
> >force my views on all and sundry, NO, because I know the film will
> not
> >appeal to everyone.
> >
> >MARK
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> > > Sent:    10 October 2000 01:52
> > > To:    [e-mail]
> > > Subject:    Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
> > >
> > > YEAH THE "BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" WAS THE DUMBEST MOVIE THAT WAS
> > > ADVERTISED TO
> > > THE FULLEST IN ORDER TO TRICK EVERYONE INTO SEEING THAT STUPID
> > > MOVIE!!!!!
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
> > > >Reply-To: [e-mail]
> > > >To: [e-mail]
> > > >Subject: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
> > > >Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 15:11:40 EDT
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >***** No worries, Barbara .. contrarely to some people I don't
> resort
> > > to
> > > >name-calling when someone disagrees with me, I try to explain my
> > > point of
> > > >view instead ! ... I know The Blair Witch project was loved (and
> > > hated !)
> > > >by
> > > >a lot of people ...
> > > >
> > > >I thought it was a great horror film and I did find it very scary
> ...
> > > I
> > > >just
> > > >saw it again a week ago (My 2nd time seeing that one !) and I was
> > > scared,
> > > >what can I tell you ... cranking up the speakers of the surround
> > > system and
> > > >listening to those "sounds" ...
> > > >
> > > >Contrarely to you I identified with those people ... being lost
> and
> > > losing
> > > >track of where they are ... running out of food and water ...
> hearing
> > >
> > > >sounds
> > > >late at night ... I thought it was excellent in fact ... except
> maybe
> > > for
> > > >the swearing ... they should have cut down on it a bit ... I
> usually
> > > don't
> > > >mind but I felt in that one it was a bit overwhelming in part
> > > (especially
> > > >in
> > > >the first third of the film ... I can understand someone swearing
> and
> > > being
> > > >frustrated later on ...)
> > > >
> > > >There is this guy that I always agree with .. well .. maybe 80 or
> 90%
> > > of
> > > >the
> > > >times we agree if a film is good or bad ... and on BWP we
> disagree
> > > strongly
> > > >... I think it is very effective and scary and he found it boring
> and
> > > silly
> > > >... I say 4.5/5 .. he says 2/5 ... so this is a film that is a
> bit
> > > >different
> > > >than the other ones out there, lots of different opinions.
> > > >
> > > >Marc   ;o)
> > > >
> > > >-------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >Fine, except for The Blair Witch Scam.  How could anyone have
> found
> > > it
> > > >scary?  It was a non-story.  They set it in 1993 because in 1998
> or
> > > >whenever, the people would have had cell phones and there'd have
> been
> > > >even less plot than there was.  They were unreal and impossible
> to
> > > >identify with or be scared for.
> > > >
> > > >I felt really ripped off after seeing that movie.
> > > >
> > > >Now I'll sit back and wait for the flames.
> > > >
> > > >Barbara
> > > >
> > > >-----------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >Marc Desbiens wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll make this a top "6" .. ok ??
> > > >
> > > >Good horror films, off the top of my head ...
> > > > >
> > > > > 1- The shining
> > > > > 2- The Blair witch project
> > > > > 3- Scream
> > > > > 4- The exorcist
> > > > > 5- Jaws
> > > > > 6- Halloween
> > > > >
> > > > > Marc   ;o)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >_____________________________________________________________________
> > > ____
> > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > http://www.hotmail.com.
> > > >
> > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile
> at
> > > >http://profiles.msn.com.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe
> ]
> > > >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> ]
> > >
> > >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > > ___
> > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > http://www.hotmail.com.
> > >
> > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile
> at
> > > http://profiles.msn.com.
> > >
> > >
> > > [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe
> ]
> > > [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
> ]
> >
> >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ___
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: RICHARD BENJAMIN <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: FW: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 11 Oct 2000 13:53:16 +0100

Something is wrong here. How come Zachary Rivera (stage name) can
suddenly string a sentence together (albeit a dumb one)? The other day he typed
as if he was a 12 year old, Italian farmer learning Englsih from a Dr.
Seuss book!!!!

MARK wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:    MARK
>> Sent:    11 October 2000 08:48
>> To:    'zachary rivera'
>> Subject:    RE: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>>
>> Candyman is o.k. if a bit contrived, and The Exorcist is my all time
>> No. 2 horror film.
>>
>> As for the first part of your statement, you managed to contradict
>> yourself and dismiss your previous argument  - no hope for you, my
>> friend.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
>> Sent:    10 October 2000 18:12
>> To:    [e-mail]
>> Subject:    RE: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>>
>> Don't believe the hype!  The media blew up Blair Witch Project because
>> it
>> was the first low budget film to make it as big as it did.  As far as
>> being
>> a good horror the only thing I was scared of was throwing up in the
>> movie
>> theater because the camera work sucked!  You want to get scared watch
>> "Candyman"  or the "Exorcist" if you want a real scare!!
>>
>>
>> >From: MARK <[e-mail]>
>> >Reply-To: [e-mail]
>> >To: "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
>> >Subject: RE: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>> >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:08:18 +0100
>> >
>> >Once again, my misguided friend, you are wrong!!  Blair Witch Project
>> >was cleverly advertised, the media then just took up the stick and
>> ran
>> >with it - it was a victim of it's own success.
>> >
>> >The makers never set out to produce a $200m grossing movie, they just
>> >decided to make something truly different, and market it with a very
>> >effective web-site.  If you want to blame anyone for getting caught
>> up
>> >in the media hype, and disliking a film that could never appeal to
>> >anyone, blame yourself for being easily led by the media.
>> >
>> >As for me, I loved the film, it ranks right up there in my top 5
>> horror
>> >movies, I love the sense of desolation and desperation.  Do I try to
>> >force my views on all and sundry, NO, because I know the film will
>> not
>> >appeal to everyone.
>> >
>> >MARK
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From:    zachary rivera [SMTP:[e-mail]]
>> > > Sent:    10 October 2000 01:52
>> > > To:    [e-mail]
>> > > Subject:    Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>> > >
>> > > YEAH THE "BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" WAS THE DUMBEST MOVIE THAT WAS
>> > > ADVERTISED TO
>> > > THE FULLEST IN ORDER TO TRICK EVERYONE INTO SEEING THAT STUPID
>> > > MOVIE!!!!!
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
>> > > >Reply-To: [e-mail]
>> > > >To: [e-mail]
>> > > >Subject: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>> > > >Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 15:11:40 EDT
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >***** No worries, Barbara .. contrarely to some people I don't
>> resort
>> > > to
>> > > >name-calling when someone disagrees with me, I try to explain my
>> > > point of
>> > > >view instead ! ... I know The Blair Witch project was loved (and
>> > > hated !)
>> > > >by
>> > > >a lot of people ...
>> > > >
>> > > >I thought it was a great horror film and I did find it very scary
>> ...
>> > > I
>> > > >just
>> > > >saw it again a week ago (My 2nd time seeing that one !) and I was
>> > > scared,
>> > > >what can I tell you ... cranking up the speakers of the surround
>> > > system and
>> > > >listening to those "sounds" ...
>> > > >
>> > > >Contrarely to you I identified with those people ... being lost
>> and
>> > > losing
>> > > >track of where they are ... running out of food and water ...
>> hearing
>> > >
>> > > >sounds
>> > > >late at night ... I thought it was excellent in fact ... except
>> maybe
>> > > for
>> > > >the swearing ... they should have cut down on it a bit ... I
>> usually
>> > > don't
>> > > >mind but I felt in that one it was a bit overwhelming in part
>> > > (especially
>> > > >in
>> > > >the first third of the film ... I can understand someone swearing
>> and
>> > > being
>> > > >frustrated later on ...)
>> > > >
>> > > >There is this guy that I always agree with .. well .. maybe 80 or
>> 90%
>> > > of
>> > > >the
>> > > >times we agree if a film is good or bad ... and on BWP we
>> disagree
>> > > strongly
>> > > >... I think it is very effective and scary and he found it boring
>> and
>> > > silly
>> > > >... I say 4.5/5 .. he says 2/5 ... so this is a film that is a
>> bit
>> > > >different
>> > > >than the other ones out there, lots of different opinions.
>> > > >
>> > > >Marc   ;o)
>> > > >
>> > > >-------------------------------------
>> > > >
>> > > >Fine, except for The Blair Witch Scam.  How could anyone have
>> found
>> > > it
>> > > >scary?  It was a non-story.  They set it in 1993 because in 1998
>> or
>> > > >whenever, the people would have had cell phones and there'd have
>> been
>> > > >even less plot than there was.  They were unreal and impossible
>> to
>> > > >identify with or be scared for.
>> > > >
>> > > >I felt really ripped off after seeing that movie.
>> > > >
>> > > >Now I'll sit back and wait for the flames.
>> > > >
>> > > >Barbara
>> > > >
>> > > >-----------------------------------------------------
>> > > >
>> > > >Marc Desbiens wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'll make this a top "6" .. ok ??
>> > > >
>> > > >Good horror films, off the top of my head ...
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 1- The shining
>> > > > > 2- The Blair witch project
>> > > > > 3- Scream
>> > > > > 4- The exorcist
>> > > > > 5- Jaws
>> > > > > 6- Halloween
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Marc   ;o)
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >_____________________________________________________________________
>> > > ____
>> > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
>> > > http://www.hotmail.com.
>> > > >
>> > > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile
>> at
>> > > >http://profiles.msn.com.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe
>> ]
>> > > >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
>> ]
>> > >
>> > >
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> > > ___
>> > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
>> > > http://www.hotmail.com.
>> > >
>> > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile
>> at
>> > > http://profiles.msn.com.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe
>> ]
>> > > [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]
>> ]
>> >
>> >[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>> >[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> ___
>> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
>> http://www.hotmail.com.
>>
>> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>> http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
>
>RFC822 header
>-----------------------------------
>
>RECEIVED: from SF_Database by POP_Mailbox_-1240855060 ; 11 OCT 00
12:30:36 UT
>Received: from LISTS.XMISSION.COM by mail.sourcedesign.co.uk
>     with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for MacOS 1.1.2); 11-Oct-2000
12:30:29
>+0000
>Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13jIfh-0001Ow-00
>    for [e-mail]; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 03:59:37 -0600
>Received: from [195.166.128.28] (helo=mayfly.force9.net)
>    by lists.xmission.com with smtp (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13jIfe-0001Ok-00
>    for [e-mail]; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 03:59:35 -0600
>Received: (qmail 1267 invoked from network); 11 Oct 2000 10:00:18 -0000
>Received: from relay5.force9.net (HELO autoturn.plus.net.uk)
(195.166.128.22)
>  by mayfly.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 11 Oct 2000 10:00:18 -0000
>Received: (qmail 18571 invoked from network); 11 Oct 2000 09:54:24 -0000
>Received: from zippack.force9.co.uk (HELO SERVERA.ZIPPACK.CO.UK)
>(195.166.136.140)
>  by relay5.force9.net with SMTP; 11 Oct 2000 09:54:24 -0000
>Received: by SERVERA with Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3)
>    id <TZD771MV>; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 11:08:32 +0100
>Message-ID: <8177A6A8FD17D21182BE0080C8470DA70710D6@SERVERA>
>From: MARK <[e-mail]>
>To: "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
>Subject: FW: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 11:08:32 +0100
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3)
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>    charset="iso-8859-1"
>Sender: [e-mail]
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Remakes !
Date: 13 Oct 2000 03:08:52 EDT



***** Sorry about the delay responding to this message, Allen .. I shall add
comments below ... certainly an intriguing subject matter though ... those
REMAKES !
Marc   ;o)

 >
 >Out of general curiosity Marc, what is your opinion of
 >remakes?  Personally, I don't like them.

***** I have to disagree as most of the time I like remakes, especially if I
liked the original film .. Examples : 12 angry men (1990's-1950's)   Cape
fear (1990's-1950's)  Diabolique (1990's-1950's)  If a story was good in the
original film I think it is a good idea to "remake" them later, maybe
changing some lil' details about the story ... ;o)

 >  Think about it, do you think the Mona Lisa should be repainted?

***** Not the same ... this implied the painting would be "copied" exactly
which can't happen for a film obviously ... a lil' bit like Gus Van Sant did
when he "copied" Psycho in 1998 ... Of course it was still a good film but I
would have preferred if some slight changes would have been made here and
there at least ... I saw both films back to back litterally ... The "new"
version on a saturday and the "old" version the very next day and they are
identical basically (95% plus !) .. dialogues, scenes ... of course the
actors are different and it's in color plus some lil' thingss added to
"modernize" the film ... Julianne Moore with a walk-man if I recall but I
think if you decide to remake a film you shouldn't copy it like that ... try
to at least do things a lil' differently ... or write a totally different
story inspired by a film or more, like Brian De Palma and his Hitchcock
fetish (Dressed to kill, Body Double, etc.)

 >
 >Now I realize that films are animate and all of the other classics are
 >inanimate, so there is some room for compromise of opinion. But if a film
 >is made well the first time, there should be no need to ' remake'
 >it.

***** It makes the movie available for the new generation who might not be
interested in watching the older films ... like "A perfect murder - 1998"
4/5 and "Dial "M" for murder - 1950's" .. 4/5 as well .. if a film is good
then I don't see why they can't remake it later on so that the new
generation can enjoy it ... Let's face it, they wouldn't have released "Dial
"M" for murder again in movie theaters obviously .. how many young people
these days are really interested in going to see such a film ??  I know it's
a shame because it is a damn good film but the movie theaters would
certainly not be sold out ... unfortunately ...

**** Even newer films that are re-released like "Bloodsimple" - 1984 from
the Coen Brothers .. that one was in-and-out of the movie theaters here so
fast .. and I think it was only presented on one or 2 screens anyway ... so
a very old film would be squashed from the get go.

Most of the time, the remake is made for one of four reasons:
 >
 >(1) As a showcase for the ' hunk' or ' big tits'  beauty of the day.  Very
 >often, these people don't have
 >      the talent of the cast or stars of the original.

***** Agreeing ... But for example ... Gwyneth Paltrow in "A perfect murder"
and "Anne Heche" in "Psycho" ... I don't think they were AWFUL (and their
tits aren't so
big either !)  ;o)

 >
 >(2) The chance to exploit some prurient aspect that the society in the
 >earlier times of the original
 >      wouldn't tolerate.  And I've seen damn few films made as remakes
 >where the sight of naked
 >      bodies, or exposed parts of bodies, or the over use of foul language
 >improved it over the original.

***** I don't mind this so much ... if a film is remade, it has to be
"modernized" too ... part of the slight changes in the dialogues and story
that I feel are appropriate to make an effective remake.

 >
 >(3) They can include lots of car chases (and crashes) and explosions that,
 >for some reason, the
 >      original didn't require.

**** Well, some action scenes can be added or modified (I imagine if they
remade North by Northwest, that opening "car chase" would look a bit
different, good !)
 >

 >(4)  All of the above plus they can make it in color if the original was
in
 >Black and White: mainly
 >       because, most young viewers refuse to watch Black and White films.

***** Yes, one of the reasons some "older" films would fail if they were
re-released again .. no matter how good they are .. Example : Double
indemnity - 1944 ...
 >

 >Now, sometimes, damn few times, they do work..And they work best if done
as
 >a completely new facet of the original.  When they are done as such, and
 >done well, they actually do not in any way or form detract or over shadow
 >the original.  A few examples are as follows:
 >
 >"The Thing"  - 1951- Black and White.
 >
 >"The Thing"  -  1982    - Color

***** I haven't seen the original 1951 film .. but the 1982 version is
available ... see .. this is another problem .. the "older" films are VERY
HARD to find ... go in any video stores .. you ask for "Classics" and they
only have a very limited selection in most cases, you simply can't find
those old films from the 50's and 60's most of the times  ... The remakes
are easier to find, good thing !


 >"DOA"   -  1950        -  Black and White
 >
 >"DOA"   -  1988       -  Color

***** I liked the 1988 version better .. 3.5/5 .. over the older one ...
2.5/5.
 >
 >
 >
 >Ironically, the author of the classic Science fiction story from which the
 >Original "Thing" (actually titled "The Thing From Another Planet")  John W
 >.Campbell  Jr. never liked the film and thought it a complete abomination
 >of his original story.  Despite his recriminations of the production, the
 >film went on to great success.  It is very possible that he would have
 >liked John carpenter's version in 1982 far better (were it not for the
 >gratuitous violence and unnecessary gore),


**** Yessss ... I also thought it was too gory for its own good, possibly I
would like the older version better !



because it was, indeed, much
 >closer to the story he'd written in 1949.  Either way, both productions
 >have merit.
 >
 >I like both productions of "DOA" though I am partial to the original
 >version in black and white.  The reason being, black and white will
forever
 >be able to capture the nightmare aspect of  situation over color (it is
 >also well established by the scientific community that even though we
dream
 >in color, our nightmares are in black and white- a telling factor).


**** Intriguing point, I didn't know that about the dreams and the
nightmares ... ;o)

 >
 >The 1988 film was good, because as I stated, it looked at the same idea
 >from a different facet (or angle if you please).  What it lacked, was the
 >original's star, Edmond O'Brians ' absolutely chilling' nightmarish run
 >through the streets after he has been told his fate.  He managed to
capture
 >the common man's reaction to such a shock.  Both films, on different
 >levels, worked for me.


**** I liked the remake of DOA more than the original so I was happy that
they "modernized" that one !

 >
 >Let me know what you think of remakes.  I'd be very much interested.
 >Allen

**** Thanks again even if we disagree ... once more !
hehe !   Marc ;o)





_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Slicin' and dicin' "Final destination" - 2000
Date: 13 Oct 2000 12:04:06 EDT



** Some Spoilers **

Hi !

Well, I was very disappointed by this film.  Not that I was expecting a
MASTERPIECE ... I was expecting between 2.5 and 3.5/5 actually from reading
rather positive reviews including a surprising 3/4 from Roger Ebert ...
I will NEVER understand him giving 3/4 to this film, NEVER !

At least James Berardinelli says 1/4 and trashes the film in a very
appropriate way ... phew !! The relief !!  As for myself I am thinking
1.5/5.

"Final Destination" starts off with an intriguing concept, the first 15
minutes are actually good and
made me believe that the film would be worth watching .. but then it
degenerated into a complete mess rather quickly ... in fact I am thinking it
would have been better if all the students had died in the plane crash
at the beginning ...

Then maybe we could have seen "The GRIM REAPER" sitting at a table in the
airport's coffee shop for 90 minutes ... relaxing ... making small talk with
the waitress ... doing a crossword puzzle ... eating a piece of apple pie
with his 2nd cup of coffee ... contemplating life and DEATH ... now I would
have liked that better and I'm not kidding !

Unfortunately this doesn't happen and it goes from bad to worse after that
pretty good start ... I read they shot 3 different endings for this film,
and then of course the "test audiences" were brought in to pick the one that
was the most predictable and boring ... big surprise !

Ok, the story is simple enough so that teenie boppers who are most likely to
appreciate this "movie" will not be too confused with big words or actually
be required to "think" too much which would be a TRAGEDY !

The concept was good at least, a group of 7 teens have cheated Death's plan
by getting off a plane that was supposed to blow up ... One of the teens had
a sort of "premonition" that it would happen so while he is freaking out
before the plane takes off yelling "We're all going to diiiiiieeee ... he is
asked by the pilot to leave the aircraft at once along with several other
people (I guess so many people are thrown out so that
the movie would last more than 30 minutes !)

Instead of making this a typical and predictable horror film, teens being
killed one by one by one until the end, wouldn't it have been better had
only the main character and a teacher for example had been thrown out ... I
think it would have but this would have required ore effort from the
writer(s) so they took the easy way out.

Of course most of the characters are rude and annoying ... getting into
fights over "nothing" ... they all look like models too, I've never seen so
many big breasted girls in a horror film since "I know what you did last
summer" probably ... in fact IKWYDLS was on my mind the whole time while
watching this ... which is
NOT a good sign since it was an awful film !)

Even the teacher who gets off the plane with the disturbed boy and the
others looks like a swimsuit
model ... the other teacher was an old man who insisted on speaking french
to the perplexed students, plus he didn't look like a model so it was pretty
apparent he
was going to blow up in the plane .. as if the pretty brunette could have
been killed so early !

So now Death is mad, and looking for revenge against the people who escaped
miraculously. Trying to "correct" the situation and looking for the
survivors basically to get them one by one by one and killing them in
ludicrous and goofy ways almost like they would do in the cartoons ... Wile
E. Coyote style !  Example : The teacher is hit in the throat by a piece of
glass after an explosion ... then she falls down ... a knife falls on her as
she's pulling on a rag to stop the bleeding ... then a chair falls on top of
her empaling her on the knife ...

I mean this is almost like in "The naked gun", remember when OJ Simpson was
hurt badly at the beginning ??
I couldn't believe it !! I was waiting for Frank Drebbin
to show up (From the files of POLICE SQUAD !!) ... Unfortunately, this was
NOT a comedy !

Of course the silly boy who stumbles on the scene grabs the knife to make
sure his prints are all over the place ... people this stupid should not be
allowed to live,
I was rooting for "THE GRIM REAPER" by that point !!
It's a shame that an intriguing concept like this one turns out to be almost
a waste of celluloid mainly because the execution is terrible.

Predictable and formulaic, lots of clichΘs ... Laughable dialogue such as :
"Please, I don't want to die before the Jets win the Superbowl again ... "
Geeeeesh ... who wrote this ??  Terrible acting too, the boy in the lead
simply can't carry this film with his limited acting skills, sorry !

Characters who are alone in a room talking out loud to themselves on
numerous occasions to explain what they are doing ...  Oh yeah I do that all
the time ... NOT !!  Guess they wanted to make sure even a lil' 103 years
old granny waaaaaaay in the back would not be lost and understand all those
CRUCIAL twists in this story ...  The film is also needlessly loud and the
special
effects are not very impressive either.

The only good element of suspense was in what order will they each die ..
and I could predict who would remain there by the end too ... so obvious !
Even this little bit of suspense was ruined by the fact that half way
through the movie, the main character discovers Death's plan, and states
quite clearly, who the audience will
see die next. It's embarassing.

Tony Todd has a cameo as an undertaker and appears in one perplexing scene
during the middle of the movie.  He seems to know everything that is
happening to the main characters even if he has just met them, and for some
reason we never hear or see from him again.  He doesn't even complain about
the fact the two teens broke into the place at 3am anyway ... He could have
least said **something** ... ;o)

The mindset of the film, which is "Were making a cheesy horror movie, not a
good movie" is basically summed up in one scene where one of the teens is
actually decapitated at a rail road in front of three of his friends.  Their
reaction to seeing this ?? They don't care, they don't even look at him for
2 seconds ... they are HAPPY and EXCITED because they have found out Death's
plan.

1.5/5, only a few good scary moments save this one from and even worse
disaster ... so it goes in the graveyard with many other "Bad horror movies"
produced in recent years such as :

Halloween H20 : 2/5
Urban legends : 2/5
I know what you did last summer : 1.5/5
The haunting : 2/5

Marc     ;o)

"The maple syrup is supposed to be on the table
before the pancakes ..."

Dustin Hoffman as "Raymond"
"Rain man" - 1988 - 4/5












_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Gene Ehrich <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 14 Oct 2000 08:42:40 -0400

At 06:51 PM 10/9/00 -0600, you wrote:
>YEAH THE "BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" WAS THE DUMBEST MOVIE THAT WAS ADVERTISED
>TO THE FULLEST IN ORDER TO TRICK EVERYONE INTO SEEING THAT STUPID MOVIE!!!!!

It was without a doubt the absolute worst movie that was ever made.
Actually calling it a movie was an insult to the word movie. When I saw it
we had to wait in line to get our money back. It was not a short line.

Terrible, terrible, terrible.

The only thing scary about it was the rip-off pulled on the public.





[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jason Pun" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 22:38:38 GMT

hey guys...

as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

jason
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jason Pun" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 22:38:13 GMT

hey guys...

as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

jason
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Oldman claims "Contender" was butchered
Date: 15 Oct 2000 16:57:20 -0700

Actor Gary Oldman is accusing Hollywood studio heads of turning
his latest film, "The Contender," into a pro-Gore "'piece of
propaganda' on par with that produced by Nazi propagandist Joseph
Goebbels."  "The Contender" is about a female political candidate who
gets smeared by opponents for her allegedly racy sexual past.  Oldman
says it was a relatively balanced film until studio heads started
editing it.  More on this:
http://mrshowbiz.go.com/news/Todays_Stories/1012/oldmanripscontender101200.h
tml.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 17:27:47 -0700

on 10/15/2000 3:38 PM, Jason Pun at [e-mail] wrote:

> as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
> the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
> anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

I haven't seen it, but 'most everybody says it sucks.  Those who rated it on
IMDB gave it an overall rating of 4.9/10   (almost no movie ever gets behow
a 4);  FlickPicks participants rate it 37th of 40 current movies.  As Oz
would say, this is a movie for morons!


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 17:27:47 -0700

on 10/15/2000 3:38 PM, Jason Pun at [e-mail] wrote:

> as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
> the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
> anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

I haven't seen it, but 'most everybody says it sucks.  Those who rated it on
IMDB gave it an overall rating of 4.9/10   (almost no movie ever gets behow
a 4);  FlickPicks participants rate it 37th of 40 current movies.  As Oz
would say, this is a movie for morons!


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 22:52:06 EDT

In a message dated 10/15/2000 3:39:05 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
 the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
 anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

 jason >>

I haven't seen it and don't plan on it.  The only good SNL movie I've seen
was Wayne's World.  Judging by all the bad reviews it's getting, I don't
think it'll be worth it.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 16 Oct 2000 00:40:35 -0400

At 10.38 PM 15/10/2000 GMT, Jason Pun wrote:
>as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
>the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
>anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing

Don't waste your time.

RUN, RUN, DON'T WALK away from any theatre you can find showing it.  Look
for a nice theatre showing Meet the Parents instead.  Hell, settle for a
blank screen, it will have more chance of holding your interest than this
DOG!!!

Regards,

--Mel


--Mel Eperthener
president, Gowanna Multi-media Pty

Please support the endeavour
of a friend and fellow Australian.

Political Corrections by Michael Jaymes Cassidy
http://www.angelfire.com/ma/politicalmusings

______________________________________________
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death,
your right to say it. -Voltaire (1694-1778)
---


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 16 Oct 2000 00:40:35 -0400

At 10.38 PM 15/10/2000 GMT, Jason Pun wrote:
>as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
>the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
>anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing

Don't waste your time.

RUN, RUN, DON'T WALK away from any theatre you can find showing it.  Look
for a nice theatre showing Meet the Parents instead.  Hell, settle for a
blank screen, it will have more chance of holding your interest than this
DOG!!!

Regards,

--Mel


--Mel Eperthener
president, Gowanna Multi-media Pty

Please support the endeavour
of a friend and fellow Australian.

Political Corrections by Michael Jaymes Cassidy
http://www.angelfire.com/ma/politicalmusings

______________________________________________
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death,
your right to say it. -Voltaire (1694-1778)
---


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: RICHARD BENJAMIN <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 16 Oct 2000 14:19:19 +0100

One word - sucker!

Gene Ehrich wrote:
>At 06:51 PM 10/9/00 -0600, you wrote:
>>YEAH THE "BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" WAS THE DUMBEST MOVIE THAT WAS
ADVERTISED
>>TO THE FULLEST IN ORDER TO TRICK EVERYONE INTO SEEING THAT STUPID
MOVIE!!!!!
>
>It was without a doubt the absolute worst movie that was ever made.
>Actually calling it a movie was an insult to the word movie. When I saw
it
>we had to wait in line to get our money back. It was not a short line.
>
>Terrible, terrible, terrible.
>
>The only thing scary about it was the rip-off pulled on the public.
>
>
>
>
>
>[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
>
>RFC822 header
>-----------------------------------
>
>RECEIVED: from SF_Database by POP_Mailbox_-1240416110 ; 16 OCT 00
14:26:26 UT
>Received: from LISTS.XMISSION.COM by mail.sourcedesign.co.uk
>     with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for MacOS 1.1.2); 16-Oct-2000
14:26:22
>+0000
>Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13kQeD-0004rf-00
>    for [e-mail]; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 06:42:45 -0600
>Received: from [24.92.1.13] (helo=smtp-server.tampabay.rr.com)
>    by lists.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13kQeB-0004ra-00
>    for [e-mail]; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 06:42:43 -0600
>Received: from cg875084-a.tampabay.rr.com (241642hfc27.tampabay.rr.com
>[24.164.2.27])
>    by smtp-server.tampabay.rr.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA10398
>    for <[e-mail]>; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 08:42:41 -0400 (EDT)
>Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001014083905.00b14100@pop-server>
>X-Sender: gehrich@pop-server
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
>Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 08:42:40 -0400
>To: [e-mail]
>From: Gene Ehrich <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
>In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>Sender: [e-mail]
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 22:52:06 EDT

In a message dated 10/15/2000 3:39:05 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
 the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
 anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

 jason >>

I haven't seen it and don't plan on it.  The only good SNL movie I've seen
was Wayne's World.  Judging by all the bad reviews it's getting, I don't
think it'll be worth it.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 17:27:47 -0700

on 10/15/2000 3:38 PM, Jason Pun at [e-mail] wrote:

> as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
> the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
> anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

I haven't seen it, but 'most everybody says it sucks.  Those who rated it on
IMDB gave it an overall rating of 4.9/10   (almost no movie ever gets behow
a 4);  FlickPicks participants rate it 37th of 40 current movies.  As Oz
would say, this is a movie for morons!


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jason Pun" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 22:38:13 GMT

hey guys...

as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

jason
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 17:27:47 -0700

on 10/15/2000 3:38 PM, Jason Pun at [e-mail] wrote:

> as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
> the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
> anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

I haven't seen it, but 'most everybody says it sucks.  Those who rated it on
IMDB gave it an overall rating of 4.9/10   (almost no movie ever gets behow
a 4);  FlickPicks participants rate it 37th of 40 current movies.  As Oz
would say, this is a movie for morons!


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jason Pun" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 22:38:38 GMT

hey guys...

as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

jason
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 17:27:47 -0700

on 10/15/2000 3:38 PM, Jason Pun at [e-mail] wrote:

> as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
> the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
> anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

I haven't seen it, but 'most everybody says it sucks.  Those who rated it on
IMDB gave it an overall rating of 4.9/10   (almost no movie ever gets behow
a 4);  FlickPicks participants rate it 37th of 40 current movies.  As Oz
would say, this is a movie for morons!


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 15 Oct 2000 17:27:47 -0700

on 10/15/2000 3:38 PM, Jason Pun at [e-mail] wrote:

> as you guys know, this past friday, Ladies Man came out.  i have not seen
> the movie but from seeing the previews it looks like a good comedy. did
> anyone see that movie over the weekend and let me know if it's worth seeing.

I haven't seen it, but 'most everybody says it sucks.  Those who rated it on
IMDB gave it an overall rating of 4.9/10   (almost no movie ever gets behow
a 4);  FlickPicks participants rate it 37th of 40 current movies.  As Oz
would say, this is a movie for morons!


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Oldman claims "Contender" was butchered
Date: 15 Oct 2000 16:57:20 -0700

Actor Gary Oldman is accusing Hollywood studio heads of turning
his latest film, "The Contender," into a pro-Gore "'piece of
propaganda' on par with that produced by Nazi propagandist Joseph
Goebbels."  "The Contender" is about a female political candidate who
gets smeared by opponents for her allegedly racy sexual past.  Oldman
says it was a relatively balanced film until studio heads started
editing it.  More on this:
http://mrshowbiz.go.com/news/Todays_Stories/1012/oldmanripscontender101200.h
tml.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: FINAL DESTINATION *SPOILERS*
Date: 16 Oct 2000 09:06:00 -0600

I saw this film last night, and pretty much agree with Marc's review.  I
thought the premise was interesting, but the execution was clumsy.  I think it
would have worked much better with adult characters, rather than by turning it
into a "dead teenager" film.

> Unfortunately this doesn't happen and it goes from bad to worse
> after that pretty good start ... I read they shot 3 different
> endings for this film, and then of course the "test audiences"
> were brought in to pick the one that was the most predictable
> and boring ... big surprise !

One of the alternate endings (actually, it's an entire alternate plot line) is
on the DVD.  Here's what is different:

1) The beach scene between Alex (the main guy) and the main girl (whose name I
forget) goes a little bit longer and turns into a love scene.

2) In a later scene, the main girl discovers she is pregnant.

3) At the end, when Alex grabs the electric cable he catches fire and dies.
Cut to months later when the main girl is having a baby who she names
(surprise) Alex!  It is implied that Alex's ghost visits her regularly.  The
film ends at the memorial for the students, which now includes the additional
names.  She exchanges some dialogue with the "bully leather jacket" guy (some
of which is exactly the same as the dialogue in the "French cafe" scene in the
theatrical ending).  They have cheated death, and won.  The final shot is a
direct rip-off of FORREST GUMP, as we watch a leaf blowing downwards.

I am always skeptical of a film that has more than one ending shot.  I think
that in a good film, the ending should be inevitable, with all events and
scenes leading up to that point in time.  If just any ending can be put on the
end, it means that the rest of the film has to be as generic as possible in
order to accommodate any possible outcome.

> Tony Todd has a cameo as an undertaker and appears in one
> perplexing scene during the middle of the movie.  He seems
> to know everything that is happening to the main characters
> even if he has just met them, and for some reason we never
> hear or see from him again.  He doesn't even complain about
> the fact the two teens broke into the place at 3am anyway ...
> He could have least said **something** ... ;o)

I'm surprised that you didn't get that scene: the Tony Todd character is
obviously the personification of Death.  Interestingly, the German word for
death is "Tod."  (Tod is also the name of the guy who slips in the shower).

Did anybody else notice that all of the last names in the film were last names
of classic figures in cinema horror?  (Chaney, Hitchcock, Murnau, Browning,
Schrek, Lewton, etc).  It would have been a nice touch, if it were original:
John Landis did the same thing in AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Chiaroscuro - 2000 - 4/5 (SHORT film !)
Date: 16 Oct 2000 11:42:46 EDT


Hi !

Ok, I was able to see this very short film that
I downloaded from the "Prestige films" website
(You will find the address at the bottom of this message).

You can do the same in just a few minutes so I encourage you to do it.
Several other short films are also available there and since I was genuinely
impressed by "Chiaroscuro" I will certainly see all thse other short films
as well.

This movie is the shortest one I have ever seen probably because it consists
of only one scene and lasts around 1 minute 45 seconds including the opening
and ending credits.  It is not easy to tell a story in such a short amount
of time but I think this one succeeds in doing that (Of course it's not as
detailled as "The Godfather, part. II !!)

I thought it was excellent myself and rate it at 4/5.
It is not easy to rate a movie that is so short, hard to be precise but it
was definately worth seeing, and more than once ...

I saw it 4 or 5 times and liked it more and more each time I saw it,
noticing little details here and there that might be overlooked with only
one viewing.  I say 4/5 but if the movie was "expanded" to 30 ... 60 ... 90
minutes ... that doesn't mean my rating would still be at 4/5 ... maybe it
would go down to 1/5 ... or to 5/5, who knows !  All I know is I really
enjoyed that 1 minute 45 seconds !

The story is simple yet effective and since the movie is really short there
is not a whole lot of character development anyway as you can imagine so no
need to write "Spoilers" anywhere as saying 5 words about this film would be
a spoiler from the get go !

We see a young man entering a building late at night, followed by a
mysterious "shape" or "shadow" that is apparently in hot pursuit and
carrying what appears to be a butcher knife (Wow .. I have "Final
destination" flashbacks !) ... will he escape the place alive ??

Is this mysterious "shadow" all in his wild imagination or is it real ?? (We
see some kind of weird visual effect near the beginning that made me wonder
if this was real or not ... maybe the boy had been partying all night and
then he got paranoid, or started hallucinating and entered this building
after hours thinking someone was after him ??) I also wondered what the hell
happened at the end .. several possibillities could be plausible ...  All
questions raised by this short but intriguing movie !

I think it would look "ace" on a big movie screen actually ... I once went
to this local art house theater where they were presenting quite a few of
these very short films (All between 5 and 15 minutes though, not 2 minutes
!) and I like those ... Going straight to the point since they don't have a
lot of time, it was fun and most of these short movies were good but
"Chiaroscuro" (What does that word mean ??) would have been better than
almost all of those films probably ... so it would have been the shortest
and best film I would have seen that night !

http://website.lineone.net/~tongue2k/

I like the "style" of that movie ... Shot at night in this empty building
... good use of the shadows, shot in black-and-white and video-surveillance
cameras are also used in very appropriate ways (I really like this hand held
shot where we see the boy walking in an empty corridor and approaching a
door .. he reaches for the door knob and is scared to death, wondering what
is on the other side ... could it be ... THE GRIM REAPER !??! Arghhhh !

It's "experimental" yet indeed well made and scary ...
I also liked the contrast between night and day ...

It was an excellent short film in my opinion,  I would have liked it to have
been longer, that's my only complaint !  At least ... 3 minutes longer ! ;o)

The acting was good although since the movie is so short and there are no
dialogues (A nasty hard rock song can be heard throughout the film !) it is
hard to tell but I thought the young man was doing his best to look
"frightened" !  (Sean O'Keefe)

It is a mix of a few different films ... or at least I was thinking of those
films while watching it :

"The Blair witch project"  33%
"Halloween 2"  33%
"The last broadcast"  33%
"The Rocky Horror picture show"  1%  !!!

Good use of the credits as well ... definately making you feel a bit
uncomfortable, dark screen, letters all "slanted" in a strange way ...

Budget for this movie :  0.00$
Time required to make it : 3 weeks
Running time : 1 minute 45 seconds.
My rating : 4/5

... This is for people who like very experimental material though ... not a
mainstream audience probably !

Marc     ;o)

" (...) So Mr. Orange ... you're telling me that this
very good friend of mine ... who did 4 years in jail
for my father ... who did 4 years and never made a
deal no matter what they dangled in front of him.

You're telling me that now that this man is free ...
and we are making good on our commitment to him ...
HE'S JUST GONNA DECIDE ... OUT OF THE F***IN' BLUE,
TO RIP US OFF !?!  Why don't you tell me what
REALLY happened ?"

Chris Penn as "Nice guy Eddie"
Reservoir dogs - 1992










_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: FINAL DESTINATION *SPOILERS*
Date: 16 Oct 2000 15:50:25 EDT


I saw this film last night, and pretty much agree with Marc's review.

**** Oh wow ... Mr. Paul D. agreeing with me ... must mark the date on the
calendar !  ;o)

I thought the premise was interesting, but the execution was clumsy.

**** Yes, 100% correct !

I think it
would have worked much better with adult characters, rather than by turning
it
into a "dead teenager" film.

***** Yes, I read somewhere that the movie was originally supposed to have
adult characters and not teens ... that would certainly have improved the
film ... making it
"more serious" ...


I am always skeptical of a film that has more than one ending shot.

**** Yes, true.  Take a movie like "Fatal attraction" for example ... the
ending that made it in the film is ok but not very original, the alternate
ending I saw on the director's cut was darker and more appropriate, making
more sense with the rest of the film so I would have preferred that one.


I'm surprised that you didn't get that scene: the Tony Todd character is
obviously the personification of Death.  Interestingly, the German word for
death is "Tod."  (Tod is also the name of the guy who slips in the shower).

**** Yeah, it didn't "click" for me right away that he was DEATH incarnated,
so this is why he was making that looooooooong speech to the 2 teens at 3am
in the funeral home instead of being at home in bed like a "normal"
undertaker.  ;o)   Bye !   Marc  ;o)


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Chris Parry <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Date: 17 Oct 2000 10:53:52 -0700

Following up on Dave's words, the users of
http://hollywoodbitchslap.com have given The Ladies Man a whopping
2.11 out of 5 average, most saying it just wasn't funny.

Morons? Not even..

OZ

"David F. Nolan" wrote:
> I haven't seen it, but 'most everybody says it sucks.  Those who rated it on
> IMDB gave it an overall rating of 4.9/10   (almost no movie ever gets behow
> a 4);  FlickPicks participants rate it 37th of 40 current movies.  As Oz
> would say, this is a movie for morons!

http://www.efilmcritic.com
http://www.mymovies.com.au
http://www.tribe.com
http://www.if.com.au
http://ifmagazine.ifctv.com
http://www.sain.com.au

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 16 Oct 2000 23:00:18 EDT

As I read in the newspaper, famous player theaters in Canada are rising
there prices to $12.00 for adults each movie, this means that a night out
could make out to $75.00(If you have kids) not including the popcorn and
drinks.

-Jed
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Aurora" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 17 Oct 2000 00:18:34 -0300




> As I read in the newspaper, famous player theaters in Canada are rising
> there prices to $12.00 for adults each movie, this means that a night out
> could make out to $75.00(If you have kids) not including the popcorn and
> drinks.


That only applies to weekends and it is only at their huge theater complexes
that feature crap like arcades and stadium seating. For their regular
theaters, it is $8 on weekends and $6 for the rest of the week. I don't know
how they figure that anybody in their right mind will pay $12 for the
privledge of going to a theater that allows you to play a few video games
(at an additional cost) before the movie. No wonder so many theater chains
are having financial problems in North America.

JPC


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 16 Oct 2000 23:23:20 EDT


That only applies to weekends and it is only at their huge theater complexes
that feature crap like arcades and stadium seating. For their regular
theaters, it is $8 on weekends and $6 for the rest of the week. I don't know
how they figure that anybody in their right mind will pay $12 for the
privledge of going to a theater that allows you to play a few video games
(at an additional cost) before the movie. No wonder so many theater chains
are having financial problems in North America.

JPC

I don't know which theatre it is, but I think it is cineplex odeon maybe or
something. On tuesdays, they offer $2.75 per person, but the movies are
several months old or already released on video.

-Jed
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 16 Oct 2000 23:53:17 EDT

In a message dated 10/16/2000 8:17:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< I don't know
 how they figure that anybody in their right mind will pay $12 for the
 privledge of going to a theater that allows you to play a few video games
 (at an additional cost) before the movie. >>

Well, I had to wait two hours to see The World is Not Enough.  Gotta do
something to keep myself entertained before the movie.  Of course, the prices
at my theater are pretty reasonable, so it didn't matter.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 16 Oct 2000 23:55:23 EDT

In a message dated 10/16/2000 8:23:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[e-mail] writes:

<< I don't know which theatre it is, but I think it is cineplex odeon maybe
or
 something. On tuesdays, they offer $2.75 per person, but the movies are
 several months old or already released on video.

 -Jed >>

I have a place around here that does that.  Old movies showing for $1 (US) a
person.  Better to just pay the higher prices for a new release, unless you
didn't get around to seeing the movie until months later.
-Eric-

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MARK <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 17 Oct 2000 10:19:23 +0100

I think I may have mentioned this before, but there is a cinema chain
here in the UK called UGC, and they do a "Pass Scheme".  Basically we
pay =A39.99/month (approx $14.00) and you can go as many times as you
like, any time of day or week you like.

For someone like me who goes at least twice a week to the cinema, it's
an immense saving.  I was paying =A35.00 ($7.00)  a visit, multiply =
that
by twice a week and then 52 weeks a year, it means that I was paying
=A3520.00 ($730.00) a year (plus an equal amount for my girlfriend),  =
now
we pay only =A3120 ($170) a year each, which is a massive saving of
=A3400.00 ($560.00) each.

Maybe you guys in the States should lobby your multiplexes to offer a
similar scheme.

MARK

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    Jed Cross [SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent:    17 October 2000 04:00
> To:    [e-mail]
> Subject:    [MV] movie prices rise
>=20
> As I read in the newspaper, famous player theaters in Canada are
> rising=20
> there prices to $12.00 for adults each movie, this means that a night
> out=20
> could make out to $75.00(If you have kids) not including the popcorn
> and=20
> drinks.
>=20
> -Jed
> =
______________________________________________________________________
> ___
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> http://www.hotmail.com.
>=20
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at=20
> http://profiles.msn.com.
>=20
>=20
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 17 Oct 2000 09:13:00 -0600

> As I read in the newspaper, famous player theaters in Canada are rising
> there prices to $12.00 for adults each movie, this means that a night out
> could make out to $75.00(If you have kids) not including the popcorn and
> drinks.

I don't understand your math.  Even if all your kids were paying adult price,
it would take more than six people (2 parents and 4 kids) to reach the $75 you
mention.  Do most people in Canada have 4 kids who are paying full price to
see films?

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 17 Oct 2000 09:15:00 -0600


> I don't know how they figure that anybody in
> their right mind will pay $12 for the privledge
> of going to a theater that allows you to play a
> few video games(at an additional cost) before the
> movie. No wonder so many theater chains
> are having financial problems in North America.

Actually, the reason theater chains are having financial problems is not lack
of attendance, it's expanding too much too quickly.  Building several
state-of-the-art megaplexes all over the place isn't cheap, and with the low
profit margins in the business it's going to take a long time for earnings to
pay for it.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Chris Parry <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 18 Oct 2000 02:28:16 -0700

Not to mention that since the Candian dollar is losing value daily
to the yankee buck, a $12 ticket in canuckland is pretty much in
comparison to what Americans pay. Though last time I was in
Vancouver I regularly enjoyed a cinema that offered 3 films for
$3.99, so if you're prepared to wait a week or two, you could be
taking your family of 8 to the movies for under $25 canuckymoney.

OZ

"(Paul D Richardson)" wrote:
>
> > As I read in the newspaper, famous player theaters in Canada are rising
> > there prices to $12.00 for adults each movie, this means that a night out
> > could make out to $75.00(If you have kids) not including the popcorn and
> > drinks.
>
> I don't understand your math.  Even if all your kids were paying adult price,
> it would take more than six people (2 parents and 4 kids) to reach the $75 you
> mention.  Do most people in Canada have 4 kids who are paying full price to
> see films?
>
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]

http://www.efilmcritic.com
http://www.mymovies.com.au
http://www.tribe.com
http://www.if.com.au
http://ifmagazine.ifctv.com
http://www.sain.com.au

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 17 Oct 2000 13:23:02 EDT


Not to mention that since the Candian dollar is losing value daily
to the yankee buck, a $12 ticket in canuckland is pretty much in
comparison to what Americans pay. Though last time I was in
Vancouver I regularly enjoyed a cinema that offered 3 films for
$3.99, so if you're prepared to wait a week or two, you could be
taking your family of 8 to the movies for under $25 canuckymoney.

OZ

The Canadian dollar is doing well now though compared with the US, it's
about 68 cents, it was 63 cents a while ago:(

-Jed
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Nathan Lemrick <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 17 Oct 2000 10:39:43 -0700 (PDT)

That sounds like a great idea.  I do wish that would catch on here in the s=
tates.  I may not go to the movies twice a week butI would probably go more=
 times if I only had to pay one lump sum a month.  Right now I can't afford=
 to go more than once every three to four weeks. The only problem is that i=
n my town there is about 3 different threatre chains so I would have to pic=
k which chain to get this pass.  I doubt all of them would share in the pro=
fits and use the same tickets.  But the idea has possibilites.

Nathan
=20
>I think I may have mentioned this before, but there is a cinema chain>here=
 in the UK called UGC, and they do a "Pass Scheme".  Basically we
>pay =A39.99/month (approx $14.00) and you can go as many times as you
>like, any time of day or week you like.
>
>For someone like me who goes at least twice a week to the cinema, it's
>an immense saving.  I was paying =A35.00 ($7.00)  a visit, multiply that
>by twice a week and then 52 weeks a year, it means that I was paying
>=A3520.00 ($730.00) a year (plus an equal amount for my girlfriend),  now
>we pay only =A3120 ($170) a year each, which is a massive saving of
>=A3400.00 ($560.00) each.
>
>Maybe you guys in the States should lobby your multiplexes to offer a
>similar scheme.
>
>MARK
>


___________________________________________________
GO.com Mail                                   =20
Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.com



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Chris Parry <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 18 Oct 2000 10:46:10 -0700

Jed Cross wrote:
>
> The Canadian dollar is doing well now though compared with the US, it's
> about 68 cents, it was 63 cents a while ago:(

Ergo, $12 Canadian doesn't amount to too far away from $8 American.

OZ

http://www.efilmcritic.com
http://www.mymovies.com.au
http://www.tribe.com
http://www.if.com.au
http://ifmagazine.ifctv.com
http://www.sain.com.au

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 17 Oct 2000 20:12:08 -0400

At 09.13 AM 17/10/2000 -0600, Paul D  Richardson wrote:
>I don't understand your math.  Even if all your kids were paying adult price,
>it would take more than six people (2 parents and 4 kids) to reach the $75
you
>mention.  Do most people in Canada have 4 kids who are paying full price to
>see films

You mean you can go to the movies, and not buy popcorn and a drink??  Man,
I admire your willpower.

It's close to US$25 whenever my wife and I go out.  We went with a friend
to see Titanic.  Him, his girlfriend, his daughter, and her boyfriend (long
story:-) set him back US$50.  So, yes, I can easily see someone paying
C$75, especially when the tickets are C$12.

Regards,

--Mel


--Mel Eperthener
president, Gowanna Multi-media Pty     http://www.webz.com/gowanna
mailto:[e-mail]                  mailto:[e-mail]

419 Butler Street
PO Box 95184
Pittsburgh, PA 15223-0184
[phone]                                    [phone]
1-888-45-GOWANNA -- TOLL FREE     (1-888-454-6926)
____________________________________________
"Wow! So that is what all that extra space on the movie screen is
 for!" reaction to  "Gladiator"
______________________________________________


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Aurora" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 18 Oct 2000 01:38:52 -0300


>
> It's close to US$25 whenever my wife and I go out.  We went with a friend
> to see Titanic.  Him, his girlfriend, his daughter, and her boyfriend
(long
> story:-) set him back US$50.  So, yes, I can easily see someone paying
> C$75, especially when the tickets are C$12.
>

But nobody does. A $12 ticket is a rarity here in Canada. And it is only on
weekend evenings at a few theaters. Most families with young kids would go
to a cheaper theater and would undoubtedly also go to a cheaper matinee
showing, where tickets are only C$5/per person. So I would say C$40 is the
most a family would actually be paying - $20 for tickets & $20 for food
(most theater snack bars have really cheap kids combos). I'm sure there are
those that do pay full price, but they are in the minority.

JPC


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: RICHARD BENJAMIN <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 18 Oct 2000 10:27:52 +0100

May i also just add that the cinema chain you mention is not just some =
backstreet fleapit, but one of the better multiplex chains in the country. =
The site in Sheffield particularly is probably the best cinema i have been =
to in the UK and has one of the biggest screens in Europe - all for =A39.=
99 a month!

Don't stand for it folks, fight the powers that be!

MARK wrote:
>I think I may have mentioned this before, but there is a cinema chain
>here in the UK called UGC, and they do a "Pass Scheme".  Basically we
>pay =A39.99/month (approx $14.00) and you can go as many times as you
>like, any time of day or week you like.
>
>For someone like me who goes at least twice a week to the cinema, it's
>an immense saving.  I was paying =A35.00 ($7.00)  a visit, multiply that
>by twice a week and then 52 weeks a year, it means that I was paying
>=A3520.00 ($730.00) a year (plus an equal amount for my girlfriend),  now
>we pay only =A3120 ($170) a year each, which is a massive saving of
>=A3400.00 ($560.00) each.
>
>Maybe you guys in the States should lobby your multiplexes to offer a
>similar scheme.
>
>MARK
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:    Jed Cross [SMTP:[e-mail]]
>> Sent:    17 October 2000 04:00
>> To:    [e-mail]
>> Subject:    [MV] movie prices rise
>> =
>> As I read in the newspaper, famous player theaters in Canada are
>> rising =
>> there prices to $12.00 for adults each movie, this means that a night
>> out =
>> could make out to $75.00(If you have kids) not including the popcorn
>> and =
>> drinks.
>> =
>> -Jed
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> ___
>> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
>> http://www.hotmail.com.
>> =
>> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at =
>> http://profiles.msn.com.
>> =
>> =
>> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
>[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
>
>RFC822 header
>-----------------------------------
>
>RECEIVED: from SF_Database by POP_Mailbox_-1240344607 ; 17 OCT 00 10:18:=
09 UT
>Received: from LISTS.XMISSION.COM by mail.sourcedesign.co.uk
>     with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for MacOS 1.1.2); 17-Oct-2000 10:18:=
07 =
>+0000
>Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13lSja-0005dA-00
>    for [e-mail]; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 03:08:34 -0600
>Received: from [195.166.128.28] (helo=3Dmayfly.force9.net)
>    by lists.xmission.com with smtp (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13lSjX-0005cb-00
>    for [e-mail]; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 03:08:31 -0600
>Received: (qmail 26733 invoked from network); 17 Oct 2000 09:09:53 -0000
>Received: from relay5.force9.net (HELO autoturn.plus.net.uk) (195.166.128.=
22)
>  by mayfly.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 17 Oct 2000 09:09:53 -0000
>Received: (qmail 18602 invoked from network); 17 Oct 2000 09:03:48 -0000
>Received: from zippack.force9.co.uk (HELO SERVERA.ZIPPACK.CO.UK) =
>(195.166.136.140)
>  by relay5.force9.net with SMTP; 17 Oct 2000 09:03:48 -0000
>Received: by SERVERA with Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3)
>    id <TZD771S6>; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:19:25 +0100
>Message-ID: <8177A6A8FD17D21182BE0080C8470DA70710ED@SERVERA>
>From: MARK <[e-mail]>
>To: "'[e-mail]'" <[e-mail]>
>Subject: RE: [MV] movie prices rise
>Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:19:23 +0100
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3)
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>    charset=3D"iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>Sender: [e-mail]
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 18 Oct 2000 08:15:00 -0600

> You mean you can go to the movies, and not buy popcorn and a drink??

I wasn't talking about popcorn and drinks.  Jed's original post said that
adult tickets were now $12 in Canada, and that going to the movies with kids
would somehow cost $75 BEFORE popcorn and drinks.  I was just wondering where
he got that figure from.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Enraged moviegoer destroys the movie !
Date: 18 Oct 2000 10:33:04 EDT


Hi !

Something really bizarre happened here yesterday.

A man was enraged because the movie he had seen was AWFUL in his opinion so
instead of going home quietly or even asking for a refund, he simply stole
and destroyed the film itself ... here's the article !

Marc   ;o)


"A weirdo destroys Baise-moi"

(Note : "Baise-moi" means "F**k me" in french but this is NOT a pornographic
film, it is a nasty film that contains a lot of nudity, bad language ...
etc.  It is a film that was made in France but that was only presented there
a few times because it was banned right away !)


"Don't try to find Baise-moi at the Parisien theater.
An enraged moviegoer completely destroyed the film that
was presented in theater #3 late saturday night.  He also caused damages to
the projection booth before leaving on his bicycle warning he would plant a
bomb at the theater if this particular movie was presented there again."

"It was around 10:55pm, only a few minutes before the movie was about to end
when a man in the audience got up and started screaming that this was the
worst film he had ever seen.  It looked like "Baise-moi" had enraged him for
this reason.  Furious, the man exited the room quickly and went straight to
the projection booth ..."

"There, after causing damages totalling around 1000$ to the projector and
the projection booth he took off with the actual film under his arm.  While
exiting the place he screamed that he would come back and plant a bomb if
this movie was ever presented there again. He was then seen leaving on a
bicycle."

"Curiously, as he was making his getaway on his bike, the man was letting
more and more of the stolen film out of its case and was letting it drag on
the road beside him.  It was finally recovered in a nearby parking lot later
but was so damaged that it simply can't be played ever again.  A copy of
such a film costs around 2000$ and the theater doesn't plan on replacing it
since it was about to take the movie off the screen in a few days anyway."

"It's the first time that such an incident happens in
one of our movie theaters said a spokesman for Famous players, the chain
that owns the Parisien theater.
The decision to take the movie off the screen was not motivated by the man's
threat according to her."

"Famous players announced that Theater #3 at the Parisian will be
temporarely closed while repairs to the projector and the projection booth
are made."

"Baise-moi" was called "mediocre" by many critics and
it is still banned in France where it created a lot of controversy. During
its 4 weeks run here, it made around 175,000$ at the Box office."

Marc  ;o)
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 18 Oct 2000 13:17:16 EDT


But nobody does. A $12 ticket is a rarity here in Canada. And it is only on
weekend evenings at a few theaters. Most families with young kids would go
to a cheaper theater and would undoubtedly also go to a cheaper matinee
showing, where tickets are only C$5/per person. So I would say C$40 is the
most a family would actually be paying - $20 for tickets & $20 for food
(most theater snack bars have really cheap kids combos). I'm sure there are
those that do pay full price, but they are in the minority.

JPC

THE ONLY theater that is close to me is a famous player, then i would have
to go further for the other theaters and with rising fuel prices, it's
probably cheaper to go with the more expensive one, as about $45.00 CDN
fills my tank up.

-Jed
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 18 Oct 2000 13:20:02 EDT


I wasn't talking about popcorn and drinks.  Jed's original post said that
adult tickets were now $12 in Canada, and that going to the movies with kids
would somehow cost $75 BEFORE popcorn and drinks.  I was just wondering
where
he got that figure from.


I got it from the Ottawa Citizen.

-JEd
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jed Cross" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 18 Oct 2000 13:17:16 EDT


But nobody does. A $12 ticket is a rarity here in Canada. And it is only on
weekend evenings at a few theaters. Most families with young kids would go
to a cheaper theater and would undoubtedly also go to a cheaper matinee
showing, where tickets are only C$5/per person. So I would say C$40 is the
most a family would actually be paying - $20 for tickets & $20 for food
(most theater snack bars have really cheap kids combos). I'm sure there are
those that do pay full price, but they are in the minority.

JPC

THE ONLY theater that is close to me is a famous player, then i would have
to go further for the other theaters and with rising fuel prices, it's
probably cheaper to go with the more expensive one, as about $45.00 CDN
fills my tank up.

-Jed
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 18 Oct 2000 12:16:00 -0700

Give it up!  Who CARES about movie prices in Canada?
Can we talk about MOVIES for a change?


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Garrett Winters <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 18 Oct 2000 23:34:34 +0100

on 10/10/2000 1:51, zachary rivera at [e-mail] wrote:

> YEAH THE "BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" WAS THE DUMBEST MOVIE THAT WAS ADVERTISED TO
> THE FULLEST IN ORDER TO TRICK EVERYONE INTO SEEING THAT STUPID MOVIE!!!!!

sounds to me like someone actually was fooled by the prerelease hype, I
agree with Marc in that I enjoyed it and was able to identify with the
characters and the situation. people who get up and start ranting about how
bad the film was really don't understand the world of movies and the
motivations behind making them, each movie is meant to be a singular vision
which is crafted by the director and performed by the cast and crew of the
film. BWP was unique and thus qualifies completely as being a good movie.
Garrett


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Gene Ehrich <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 18 Oct 2000 21:54:30 -0400

At 11:34 PM 10/18/00 +0100, you wrote:
>BWP was unique and thus qualifies completely as being a good movie

If it was then there never was a bad one because it certainly was the worst
one ever made.



[e-mail]
[e-mail]
P.O. Box 3365   Spring Hill Florida   34611-3365

http://www.voicenet.com/~generic
Computer & Video Game Garage Sale






[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:  "Paul D. Richardson <[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 19 Oct 2000 13:50:33 -0600

> You mean you can go to the movies, and not buy popcorn and a drink??

I wasn't talking about popcorn and drinks.  Jed's original post said that
adult tickets were now $12 in Canada, and that going to the movies with kids
would somehow cost $75 BEFORE popcorn and drinks.  I was just wondering where
he got that figure from.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Short film : Earthworm in a quilt of strawberries - 2000 - 4/5
Date: 19 Oct 2000 16:22:42 EDT


**Minor spoilers**  (Although since the film lasts
1 minute 5 seconds, it's not a big deal !)

Ok, I downloaded and viewed this short film about 10 times just now ... my
score : 4/5 !  The link is at the bottom of the page for those who are sick
of the typical "Hollywood" films in general and want to see something
different.  ;o)

I am very perplexed by this film actually, I have seen it over and over and
over just now and I really don't know what the HELL is happening in that one
! ;O)

So if I judged it on the STORY alone I would have to
say ... 1.5/5 or less since I don't get it, maybe it's because there is
nothing to "get" ... Simply
a glimpse into someone's TWISTED MIND !  ;o)

Luckily the other aspects of the film are intriguing.
The story is only a part of any movie (Big part, but not everything !) ...
then there's the acting, the cinematography, the sound, the music, the
special
effects ... etc.  All those elements are well made and interesting ...
Definately a film that makes you think, which is of course a PLUS, for me at
least !

I could describe this film as a succession of interesting images because I
like those images and how they are presented. It is a dark, grim, disturbing
ride ...

I was thinking this looked a bit like a mix of four films  ..

- Natural Born Killers :  60%

- Dark City : 30%

- The Blair Witch Project : 9%  (Close up of part of a face near the
beginning !)

- The Rocky Horror Picture Show : 1%   ;o)

I had a hard time trying to guess what those characters were all about ...

At one point we see a young boy, about 6 years old, and then a guy eating an
apple ... for some reason I was thinking the apple represented the boy in
some way ... like a symbol ... I don't know ... ;o)  The good apple turning
into a bad (or rotten one !) as it can be seen later on ...

Then it gets a bit nutz and we see all sorts of weird and devilish images
like in Natural Born Killers perhaps ... flashes, a lot of quick images,
like something really awful had happened to this boy (Perhaps in a bath tub
since one is presented repeatedly while weird had rock music is playing ...)
  Good use of the light too as a light bulb can be seen swinging back and
forth a bit like at the beginning of DARK CITY when the guy is in the tub
... Rufus Sewell ??

I was thinking maybe the boy had been abused or killed ... or he had seen
someone killed or someone that had commited suicide in that tub ... maybe
that later turned him into a killer himself ??

That film was like N.B.K. all the way, definately has to be an influence,
weird images, subliminal ones added for good measure, hard rock blasting in
the speakers !

It was very interesting though, even if I am not sure what it all means ...
I was impressed again !  It looks really good, definately a talented
director behind this ... although he possibly is a TWISTED FREAK (!??!) for
imagining weird material like that but I was curious to see where it was
going and how it would get there ...

Of course this is not going to appeal to most people which is good ... it's
"specialized" and not for mass consumption but I did like to see that one
and it goes
in my archives of course so I can "meditate" on it a bit more !

I was intrigued by this film, trying to understand what was happening ...
lots of intercutting images (going subliminal !)  What's that clown from
"It" doing,
he doesn't belong THERE but he does make a very short appearance  ;o)

Cool visual effects as well : a guy is seen screaming like a mad man and
then his face is transformed into a skull after a few seconds, I thought
this was possibly the boy from the beginning that had been transformed into
this obviously DISTURBED individual !!  Also a head splitting in halves can
be seen, computer generated of course, no worries !

4/5  (Boy it's hard to give a rating to a 1 minute and 5 seconds movie ...
usually I have more time to make up my mind, damn it !)

This short film can be downloaded in a couple of minutes at the following
website :

http://website.lineone.net/~tongue2k/

Marc     ;o)

" (...) So Mr. Orange ... you're telling me that this
very good friend of mine ... who did 4 years in jail
for my father ... who did 4 years and never made a
deal no matter what they dangled in front of him.

You're telling me that now that this man is free ...
and we are making good on our commitment to him ...
HE'S JUST GONNA DECIDE ... OUT OF THE F***IN' BLUE,
TO RIP US OFF !?!  Why don't you tell me what
REALLY happened ?"

Chris Penn as "Nice guy Eddie"
Reservoir dogs - 1992











_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dexter Sy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 19 Oct 2000 15:09:13 -0700

>
> I wasn't talking about popcorn and drinks.  Jed's original post said that
> adult tickets were now $12 in Canada, and that going to the movies with kids
> would somehow cost $75 BEFORE popcorn and drinks.  I was just wondering where
> he got that figure from.

The $12 figure is correct.  But his statements are misleading.  The price
increase was initiated by Famous Players Canada (a subsidiary of Viacom)   and
they own several mega 20 theatre complexes accross Canada called Silver City.

Howevers, Sony's Cineplex Odeon, have not matched the price increase, and in
fact, many of the older smaller multiplexes are keeping prices low (in the
neighborhood of $6 for adults) to keep customers and compete with the mega
complexes.




--
Dexter S.
Tendo Box - Nintendo e-zine
Http://www.tendobox.com



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Chris Culligan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 19 Oct 2000 18:17:09 -0400

I think I've finally figured out how to categorize those that liked the
Blair Witch and those that didn't (In my day I've never seen a movie that
has aroused so much emotion on either side).

From were I sit those that liked the move generally like (and/or appreciate)
independent films.  Those that disliked Blair Witch were not generally great
fans of the independent film or have never been exposed too much independent
filmmaking.  The reason the Blair Witch is so inimitable is that very few,
if any, independent films ever achieve the cross over success that Blair
Witch did.

Speaking of Blair Witch, what's the buzz on the sequel "Blair Witch Book of
Shadows"??  Should I go see it??

CHRIS

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Garrett Winters
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 6:35 PM

on 10/10/2000 1:51, zachary rivera at [e-mail] wrote:

> YEAH THE "BLAIR WITCH PROJECT" WAS THE DUMBEST MOVIE THAT WAS ADVERTISED
TO
> THE FULLEST IN ORDER TO TRICK EVERYONE INTO SEEING THAT STUPID MOVIE!!!!!

sounds to me like someone actually was fooled by the prerelease hype, I
agree with Marc in that I enjoyed it and was able to identify with the
characters and the situation. people who get up and start ranting about how
bad the film was really don't understand the world of movies and the
motivations behind making them, each movie is meant to be a singular vision
which is crafted by the director and performed by the cast and crew of the
film. BWP was unique and thus qualifies completely as being a good movie.
Garrett


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Warren Woodward <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 19 Oct 2000 16:25:21 -0600

On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 06:17:09PM -0400, Chris Culligan wrote:
> Speaking of Blair Witch, what's the buzz on the sequel "Blair Witch Book of
> Shadows"??  Should I go see it??
>
> CHRIS



http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/display.cgi?id=7198


I had no plans on seeing it until Harry wrote this review.


-w

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Garrett Winters <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 19 Oct 2000 23:57:46 +0100

on 19/10/2000 2:54, Gene Ehrich at [e-mail] wrote:

> At 11:34 PM 10/18/00 +0100, you wrote:
>> BWP was unique and thus qualifies completely as being a good movie
>
> If it was then there never was a bad one because it certainly was the worst
> one ever made.


If you feel that way you really don't see enough movies. there are some
terrible terrible films out there with little or no redeeming value. have
you seen "Camp Blood", "the New Rose Hotel", "Aliens in the Wild West",
another film masquerading as Predator 3 and countless others that I have in
my attic and just can't think of their names. seek out the "camp Blood" one
as it is just dire with a capital "D".
Granted a film made on a shoestring budget can't look as good as a hollywood
blockbuster but if the material is presented well it can be a classic (
Halloween anyone?).
Garrett


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Garrett Winters <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 20 Oct 2000 00:01:06 +0100

on 19/10/2000 23:17, Chris Culligan at [e-mail] wrote:

> I think I've finally figured out how to categorize those that liked the
> Blair Witch and those that didn't (In my day I've never seen a movie that
> has aroused so much emotion on either side).
>
> From were I sit those that liked the move generally like (and/or appreciate)
> independent films.  Those that disliked Blair Witch were not generally great
> fans of the independent film or have never been exposed too much independent
> filmmaking.  The reason the Blair Witch is so inimitable is that very few,
> if any, independent films ever achieve the cross over success that Blair
> Witch did.


I agree with you on your thinking but you miss a third category of
moviegoer, those like myself that likes both independent and mainstream
equally.
Garrett


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dexter Sy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 19 Oct 2000 17:02:46 -0700



>
> I wasn't talking about popcorn and drinks.  Jed's original post said that
> adult tickets were now $12 in Canada, and that going to the movies with kids
> would somehow cost $75 BEFORE popcorn and drinks.  I was just wondering where
> he got that figure from.
>

The $12 figure is correct.  But his statements are misleading as it is not the
same for all vendors.  The price increase was initiated by Famous Players Canada
(a subsidiary of Viacom) and they own several 20 theatre complexes accross Canada
called Silver City.

However, Sony's Cineplex Odeon, have not matched the price increase, and
in fact, many of the older smaller multiplexes are keeping prices low (in the
neighborhood of $6 for adults) to keep customers and compete with the mega
complexes. And I'm not referring to the second run cinemas, which are even
cheapter at $2 to $3


--
Dexter S.
Tendo Box - Nintendo e-zine
Http://www.tendobox.com



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Ralph Utbult" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 20 Oct 2000 09:11:37 +0200

Hi!
This is my first attempt at this list...

> >From were I sit those that liked the move generally like (and/or =
appreciate)
> independent films.  Those that disliked Blair Witch were not generally =
great
> fans of the independent film or have never been exposed too much =
independent
> filmmaking.  The reason the Blair Witch is so inimitable is that very =
few,
> if any, independent films ever achieve the cross over success that =
Blair
> Witch did.

I have a different idea - what about age? I=B4m 43 and I don=B4t like =
BWP, mainly because I cannot relate to the individuals (who is between =
20 and 25?), but also because I don=B4t get any horror feelings (no hair =
raising on my neck!).=20


Ralph Utbult
Sweden


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: RICHARD BENJAMIN <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
Date: 20 Oct 2000 14:05:19 +0100

SHUT UP ABOUT GODDAMN PRICES - AGGGHHHHHH!

please.

Dexter Sy wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I wasn't talking about popcorn and drinks.  Jed's original post said
that
>> adult tickets were now $12 in Canada, and that going to the movies
with kids
>> would somehow cost $75 BEFORE popcorn and drinks.  I was just
wondering where
>> he got that figure from.
>>
>
>The $12 figure is correct.  But his statements are misleading as it is
not the
>same for all vendors.  The price increase was initiated by Famous
Players Canada
>(a subsidiary of Viacom) and they own several 20 theatre complexes
accross
>Canada
>called Silver City.
>
>However, Sony's Cineplex Odeon, have not matched the price increase, and
>in fact, many of the older smaller multiplexes are keeping prices low
(in the
>neighborhood of $6 for adults) to keep customers and compete with the
mega
>complexes. And I'm not referring to the second run cinemas, which are
even
>cheapter at $2 to $3
>
>
>--
>Dexter S.
>Tendo Box - Nintendo e-zine
>Http://www.tendobox.com
>
>
>
>[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
>[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]
>
>
>RFC822 header
>-----------------------------------
>
>RECEIVED: from SF_Database by POP_Mailbox_-1240079110 ; 20 OCT 00
12:03:06 UT
>Received: from LISTS.XMISSION.COM by mail.sourcedesign.co.uk
>     with SMTP (QuickMail Pro Server for MacOS 1.1.2); 20-Oct-2000
12:03:05
>+0000
>Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13mPS6-0004Xg-00
>    for [e-mail]; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:50:26 -0600
>Received: from [24.2.10.84] (helo=mail1.rdc2.bc.home.com)
>    by lists.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2)
>    id 13mPS4-0004Xb-00
>    for [e-mail]; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:50:24 -0600
>Received: from home.com ([24.115.13.70]) by mail1.rdc2.bc.home.com
>          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with ESMTP
>          id <[e-mail]>
>          for <[e-mail]>; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:50:20
-0700
>Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
>Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:02:46 -0700
>From: Dexter Sy <[e-mail]>
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U)
>X-Accept-Language: ja,en
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: [MV] movie prices rise
>References: <[e-mail]>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Sender: [e-mail]
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Gene Ehrich <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
Date: 20 Oct 2000 11:22:04 -0400

At 11:57 PM 10/19/00 +0100, you wrote:
>Granted a film made on a shoestring budget can't look as good as a hollywood
>blockbuster but if the material is presented well it can be a classic (
>Halloween anyone?).

Yes but BWP had no material at all and did a horrible job of presenting it.
I have seen
lots of films with low budgets that were great films and some that were
only fair. BWP
was the worst I have ever seen. It had no real plot, story or substance to
it all. I truly
believe that those who say they liked it are putting us all on. Cannot
imagine anybody
liking it. Every time I see a discussion on this film(?) it brings back
memories of
pure boredom. There were a lot of people in the theater hollering out "when
does the
movie began?".




[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Blair Witch Project
Date: 20 Oct 2000 09:01:00 -0600

> From were I sit those that liked the move generally like
> (and/or appreciate) independent films.

Not really true, since I know several people who didn't like BLAIR WITCH but
liked HALLOWEEN (another indie in the horror genre).  I have also encountered
folks who were fans of independent cinema but didn't like BLAIR WITCH simply
because it was a financial success.

There's even a line in CECIL B DEMENTED about how an independent film cannot
be any good unless it doesn't make money.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Chris Culligan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] RE: Blair Witch Project
Date: 20 Oct 2000 23:34:10 -0400

Yes, Halloween does come to mind as another independent film that had great
success at the box office.   I would submit that there is a difference.
Halloween was an independent movie that aspired to box office success from
the beginning.  I don't think The Blair Witch aspired to do anything but
scare some moviegoers at the Sundance.  I am sure that the creators of Blair
Witch were as surprised (pleasantly) as Gene Ehrich (not so pleasantly) that
it did so well as a general release.

I, for one, was glad that it was successful because it gave me the chance to
see it at a local cinema even though I don't live in New York.

Has anyone else noticed the abundance of TV programming this Halloween that
use the same effects as the Blair Witch to evoke fear from the viewer?
MTV's "Fear" is one that comes to mind.  I must say, after watching the Fear
episode in the abandoned prison, that they use the technique to good effect.
I plan on watching the Oct. 27th episode when they go into the abandoned
hospital.  It ought to provide a good Halloween fright.

CHRIS

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of "Paul D Richardson"
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 11:01 AM

> From were I sit those that liked the move generally like
> (and/or appreciate) independent films.

Not really true, since I know several people who didn't like BLAIR WITCH but
liked HALLOWEEN (another indie in the horror genre).  I have also
encountered
folks who were fans of independent cinema but didn't like BLAIR WITCH simply
because it was a financial success.

There's even a line in CECIL B DEMENTED about how an independent film cannot
be any good unless it doesn't make money.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Investigation of a citizen above suspicion - 1970
Date: 22 Oct 2000 13:06:28 EDT


** Minor spoilers **

Hi !

I watched this classic italian film the other night ...
I saw the version that was dubbed in french and it wasn't horribly dubbed
actually ! Rather effective !

The english title is : "Investigation of a citizen above suspicion" but is
also known as "Investigation of a private citizen" ... This movie won the
Oscar for "Best foreign film" in early 1971 and also won all sorts of other
awards.

I really liked it .. it was excellent and original ...
I was reminded of American psycho in part actually ... only without the
graphic violence of course !

It's the story of an italian police chief, he has just been promoted in fact
... He is around 35 years old and has a girlfriend (He doesn't live with
her, only goes over there when he wants to have sex basically and they are
both weird because they like to recreate murder
scenes and take pictures ... the woman acts as the "victim" and he is taking
the pics of her as she pretends to be dead, quite gruesome !)

At first they are happy and everything is alright.
They both seem to be twisted freaks, enjoying these
sick games they are playing. Soon though, the woman
meets another man who lives right upstairs and she falls in love with him so
she wants to break up with the
police chief ...

He is not too happy about that especially since she starts calling him
names.  She is telling him he is so INCOMPETENT in bed and worthless as a
cop, among other nasty things !

So the man plans to murder her, he flips out, goes berzerk ... It's pretty
obvious he has some kind of mental illness actually.  The movie begins with
the murder and then is mostly told in interesting
flashbacks !

The police chief is insane and he wants to get caught
for killing this woman so he leaves a lot of clues in her apartment : his
fingerprints, his bloody shoe prints, all sorts of clues that would lead
directly to him if the investigators did their jobs properly ... He even
calls the coppers from there without even disguising his voice to tell them
a woman has just been killed !

The problem is when the cops get there and they start the investigation,
they can't believe that their beloved police chief could be the killer so
they have an answer for all the clues that he left.  They think it is
impossible that he killed her even if everythng points towards him ... he is
ABOVE SUSPICION as the title says ...

The chief is annoyed and he really wants to get caught but doesn't want to
confess.  He wants for the investigators to arrest him based on their police
work, so he makes anonymous phone calls, sends the investigators clues
through the mail, confesses
his crime to a man on the street and tells him to take a good look at him
because he murdered that woman so he should go to the police station to tell
them about it (and then of course he shows up and acts like he has never
seen that man before, making him look like a "psycho" ... LOVING IT !!)

I thought it was excellent, especially the ending !
I loved it how he was frustrated that no one would believe he could be the
killer despite all the evidence. He wanted this to be a huge scandal.
Newspaper headlines saying "Police chief arrested for murder !" but the "top
brass" wasn't too fond of this idea !

The leading actor (Gian Maria Volonte) is great and
his girlfriend too (Florinda Bolkan) !  Excellent performances !  Good
dialogues and I liked how the actor in the lead was making speeches and
bullying his staff saying they were all idiots for not even realizing he was
"playing them" all along ...

It's in color and doesn't look too dated actually even if it's a film that
was made in 1970 .... certainly worth a look !  4/5

Marc     ;o)

" (...) So Mr. Orange ... you're telling me that this
very good friend of mine ... who did 4 years in jail
for my father ... who did 4 years and never made a
deal no matter what they dangled in front of him.

You're telling me that now that this man is free ...
and we are making good on our commitment to him ...
HE'S JUST GONNA DECIDE ... OUT OF THE F***IN' BLUE,
TO RIP US OFF !?!  Why don't you tell me what
REALLY happened ?"

Chris Penn as "Nice guy Eddie"
Reservoir dogs - 1992











_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Jason Pun" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Get Carter
Date: 23 Oct 2000 05:50:02 GMT

so now that the movie "get carter" has been out for awhile, the previews
look pretty intense.  now is it a good action movie to see or is it one of
those movies that all the action there is was seen in the previews already?

jay
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MV] Get Carter
Date: 23 Oct 2000 02:43:24 EDT

In a message dated 10/22/2000 10:51:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time,=20
[e-mail] writes:

<< so now that the movie "get carter" has been out for awhile, the previews=20
 look pretty intense.  now is it a good action movie to see or is it one of=20
 those movies that all the action there is was seen in the previews already?
=20
 jay >>

I don't know.  I wasn't very impressed by the trailers.  Stalone's=20
performance didn't look very good.  Not only that, but the producers wouldn'=
t=20
let most critics see it.  If they don't even have faith in their movie, that=
=20
tells me something already.
-Eric-

You keep on walking, where will you go?
Walk again, in the company of the wind
March with confidence until you get to where you=E2=80=99re going
Until you finally grab that dream.

=E2=80=9CKaze to Issho ni=E2=80=9D  My=C3=BBts=C3=BB no Gyakush=C3=BB

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Chris Parry <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Get Carter
Date: 23 Oct 2000 23:05:21 -0700

it's one of those movies that should never have been made and should
be avoided like syphillis. Go rent the Michael Caine original, which
is a cracker of a film, and give the remake as wide a birth as you
can possibly get.

OZ

Jason Pun wrote:
>
> so now that the movie "get carter" has been out for awhile, the previews
> look pretty intense.  now is it a good action movie to see or is it one of
> those movies that all the action there is was seen in the previews already?
>
> jay
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.
>
> [ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
> [ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


http://www.efilmcritic.com
http://www.mymovies.com.au
http://www.tribe.com
http://www.if.com.au
http://ifmagazine.ifctv.com
http://www.sain.com.au

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Nathan Lemrick <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Meet the Parents
Date: 23 Oct 2000 12:07:21 -0700 (PDT)

I went and saw this film last saturday and wanted to get others feelings.  I had seen that it was on top for two weeks so it could be that bad, could it.  I am not a big Ben Stiller fan but I a big DeNiro fan.  I thought DeNiro played the father great.  I thought he stole ever scene that he played in.  I watched him more than anyone else.I also thought this was one of the funniest films I have seen in awhile.  So I was presently surpised when I walked out of the theatre. But what do others think if you have seen it?

Nathan

___________________________________________________
GO.com Mail
Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.com



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Short films : Urban chillers
Date: 24 Oct 2000 01:47:52 EDT


Hi !

Ok, since I am getting more into those short films now (although I still
watch "regular" movies of course !) I'll send a link sometimes whenever I
stumble on a short film that is indeed WORTHY ... in my opinion !!

The title of the message will start with ... "Short film ..." so if you are
not interested in seeing any short films (Even if some are excellent and
they don't cost you a DIME to see !) you can delete the message without even
opening it ... simple enough ??

Ok, I found these three that should please people who like to be scared ...
What's your favorite scary movie ?? ...

They are based on urban legends and are very effective and scary ... plus
they only last between 3 and 5 minutes each.   Also no need to "download"
them ... you click on the link that brings you to the website and then you
follow the simple instructions, one selection to make ... takes seconds !

To view these film you need to have a "Windows Real audio media player"
installed on your pc ... that can be downloaded on the site for free as well
... if you don't have it already of course !  Once it is installed you are
set and can see all the short movies !


Urban chiller : The apartment

http://www.atomfilms.com/default.asp?film_id=1178

A woman is stalked by a lunatic late at night ... he is looking at her from
outside her apartment through the windows ... will he get in ??  My rating :
4/5


Urban chiller : The Dorm
-------------------------

http://www.atomfilms.com/default?film_id=1177

A student in a dorm room is awoken in the middle of the night ... someone is
trying to get into his room, shaking the door knob and banging on the door
... My rating : 4/5


Urban chiller : Rearview mirror

http://www.atomfilms.com/default?film_id=1176

A young asian woman is followed late at night as she is driving ... a man is
after her, flashing his lights and driving like a maniac, almost causing an
accident ...
my rating : 4/5


Let me know what you thought if you see those short films ... they are worth
watching ... the acting is surprisingly good, and they look amazing as well
... quality stuff and best of all ... they are
absolutely FREE !

Marc     ;o)

" (...) So Mr. Orange ... you're telling me that this
very good friend of mine ... who did 4 years in jail
for my father ... who did 4 years and never made a
deal no matter what they dangled in front of him.

You're telling me that now that this man is free ...
and we are making good on our commitment to him ...
HE'S JUST GONNA DECIDE ... OUT OF THE F***IN' BLUE,
TO RIP US OFF !?!  Why don't you tell me what
REALLY happened ?"

Chris Penn as "Nice guy Eddie"
Reservoir dogs - 1992










_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Short films : Correction, last 2 links, sorry !
Date: 24 Oct 2000 02:01:42 EDT


Correction on the last 2 links ... sorry !
These should work !


Urban chiller : The apartment

http://www.atomfilms.com/default.asp?film_id=1178


Urban chiller : The Dorm
-------------------------

http://www.atomfilms.com/default.asp?film_id=1177


Urban chiller : Rearview mirror

http://www.atomfilms.com/default.asp?film_id=1176


Marc     ;o)




_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Short films : The Blair witch project, what REALLY happened ...
Date: 28 Oct 2000 00:59:15 EDT


Hi !

Were you lost watching the original "Blair witch project" ?? Did you wonder
who the Blair witch was, or even if there was a witch at all ??  Did you ask
yourself : "What the hell was that guy doing standing in the corner ?? Damn
it, I never understand those twisted endings so I have to ask my friends in
the parking lot again !!"

Just look at those hilarious short films to find out !!
Yay !!  I was laughing out loud even if they are making fun of a film I
loved so it has to be funny !  ;o)

Side note : You should try "experimenting" with the different players and
options available ... as for myself I did and I know with the connection I
have the Windows media player, 56k, provides the best picture and sound
quality ... ;o)

Here are the links to those funny short films :

- "The Blair witch project project"  (That's right !  BWPP !) is a
documentary about the documentary about the Blair witch project ... I mean
a documentary about the directors and the actors involved in making a
documentary about a witch in a forrest ... I mean ... oh well .. if you see
it you'll understand !!

http://www.atomfilms.com/default.asp?film_id=278

- "The truth"  Now this one reveals who the REAL Blair witch is  ... and I
wasn't so surprised actually ... this is a natural ! I had a hunch that this
EVIL character
was mixed in this somehow but now I am ABSOLUTELY sure ... the relief !!

http://www.atomfilms.com/default.asp?film_id=157

BTW, The reviews I have read so far are quite mean towards Blair witch 2 ..
even James berardinelli who is among my favorite critics trashes the film
(1/4) and like me he had loved the first one ... (3.5/4) ... uh oh ...
Getting scared !!

Have a fine day !

Marc     ;o)

" Yes - officer - thank God. My name is Paul Hackett -
I'm in Soho - I don't know the exact location - I'm
being persecuted by a vigilante mob - I'm sure you
are aware of their actions - My life is in serious,
serious danger right now ..."

Griffin Dunne as "Paul Hackett"
"After hours" - 1985










_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] The acid house - 1998
Date: 28 Oct 2000 10:58:22 EDT


*** Minor spoilers ***

Ok, I watched this film the other night and was really impressed.  This film
is TWISTED though so I can see how someone would actually HATE it with a
passion ... as for myself I thought it was excellent, original, funny, so I
give it a 4/5.

"The Acid House" is composed of three short stories.

They were written by Irvine Welsh who also wrote "Trainspotting" so my guess
is if you liked that other film you would like "The acid house" as well
because they have some similarities.  I gave 5/5 to "trainspotting by the
way so I had high hopes for "The acid house".  All the short stories seem to
be inspired by some bad acid trips because they are very WEIRD and would not
appeal to everyone, so this means I am even more interested from the get go.

I was really happy to find this film because it was certainly not available
everywhere, only MOVIE FREAKS would rent this when all those more mainstream
Hollywood movies are available.  I was also aware that it would probably not
be as good as Trainspotting since 5/5 films are few and far between (Once or
twice per year usually, among 1999 films, only "American beauty" made it to
5/5 for me). "The acid house" wasn't such a masterpiece but still was an
excellent movie of course.

The characters talk in english just like in "Trainspotting" but in this film
their accent is
even more difficult to understand in part ... so it
was good that about 90% of the film is subtitled, the relief !

The first story is about a 23 year old young man who is having a REALLY bad
day ... He is a soccer player who is kicked off the team by his mates who
think he is awful, gets kicked out of his parents house so they can
fornicate at will (no kidding, sounds like a good reason !), is dumped by
his pretty girlfriend with whom he had been for 5 years, and gets fired from
his job ...  all in the space of a few hours.

After all this, he "meets God" incarnated in a middle aged man who is
hanging out in a pub of course (Might be offensive if you are the religious
type !)... but God doesn't seem to be fond of him either so he punishes him
even more in a way that is hard to imagine !  This was my favorite among the
three stories  (4/5 high, close to 4.5/5 for that part.)   ;o)

The second story concerns a young couple with a newborn baby and their crazy
neighbor who moves into the flat right above them as the story begins. That
new neighbour is rude and annoying but the lady downstairs doesn't seem to
mind that too much as she swiftly gets involved in an affair with him
without even trying to hide from her husband who is downstairs taking care
of the lil' baby girl (the woman is very "vocal" too while having sex with
the neighbour so the man hears everything that is going on in the flat over
his head !! So cruel !!) ... I thought this part was excellent too but a bit
over-the-top as the man downstairs was enduring so much abuse from his wife
and neighbour without even saying anything, the humiliation, it was too much
! ... a bit hard to swallow in part !   Still good for a 4/5 because it was
so NASTY !

The third story is very good as well, but a bit too silly for my taste,
although I have read comments and most people who liked this film mentioned
this 3rd story as their favorite ...

It involves a young man who is struck by lightning after taking a hit of
acid and his soul is transfered into the body of a newborn baby.  This baby
was being delivered in an ambulance nearby at the same time he was out in
the rain.  So we now "hear" the baby thinking and talking like a grown up
and the young man seems to be in a vegetative state but that's only because
he is now the baby "inside" him so he doesn't talk or anything ...

Some funny bits in there involving the toddler and his parents especially
(Of course the baby boy is rather happy to have his "mother" breast feed
him, among other things !)  The mother thinks her son is a genius because he
can talk after only 3 days ... hehe !  ;o) 3.5/5 for that last story that is
also connected to the first one along the way.

Again, this might offend people ... in fact all 3 stories are offensive so
you've been warned !  ;o)  Those are very
strange stories that you won't forget soon !  Memorable !

Excellent dialogues, acting, stories, make this film a 4/5 overall and it is
a bizarre mind boggling experience  ... this goes in the books as one of the
weirdest films
I have seen for sure !

Have a fine day !

Marc     ;o)

" Yes - officer - thank God. My name is Paul Hackett -
I'm in Soho - I don't know the exact location - I'm
being persecuted by a vigilante mob - I'm sure you
are aware of their actions - My life is in serious,
serious danger right now ..."

Griffin Dunne as "Paul Hackett"
"After hours" - 1985










_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Blair Witch - original ?
Date: 29 Oct 2000 03:06:30 EST



****** Adding comments.    Marc   ;o)


About the marketing of "BWP" -- I just found a very intruiging article
focusing on "The Blair Witch Project" and the very similar "The Last
Broadcast" (released in 1998, BEFORE "BWP").  There are some startling
parallels between the two films, including the way they were marketed and
the
design of their websites.  But the question is, Who ripped off who?  Or is
it
just a coincidence?
Here's a link to this great article (it's kinda
long...several pages):

http://www.the11thhour.com/archives/091999/features/factandfiction1.html

Mike S.


****** I read the article Mike, interesting stuff, especially since I saw
both of these films ... thanks for the link !

- BWP : 4.5/5
- TLB : 3.5/5

It's true that they have a lot of similarities between them but I personally
don't care so much who ripped off who or if it was just a coincidence ...
They both are good films dealing with a subject matter that is rather
similar  ... people going into the woods with a video camera to investigate
a devil in one case and a witch in the other ... and then weird s**t happens
and they come back with the footage revealing what happened  ... it's the
basic mix but there are a lot of differences as
well ...

I'm sure there are numerous similarities between 101 different films out
there too ... when I watch a movie I am reminded of other ones sometimes ...
just the other day I saw an australian comedy called "Cosi" and I listed
about 6 or 7 other films I was thinking of while watching that one ...

How can you make something COMPLETELY different and original these days ??
I find it hard to believe that the BWP people saw the other movie and worked
on their film for years and years, making slight modifications so they could
release it ...

If the people behind TLB aren't happy it's because their movie made less
money not necessarely because they were "ripped off" but maybe also because
their movie isn't as good and interesting as BWP no matter what they say ...
although I still liked it a lot don't get me wrong ...

Why not have released it back in movie thetares perhaps ??  I'm sure a lot
of people who liked BWP would be likely to like TLB as well ... they could
have made a lot of money that way instead of relying on video sales ... not
sure if it was possible to do that, but anyway ...

Have a fine day !

Marc
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Blair Witch - original ?
Date: 30 Oct 2000 00:49:43 -0500

At 03.06 AM 29/10/2000 EST, Marc Desbiens wrote:
>About the marketing of "BWP" -- I just found a very intruiging article
>focusing on "The Blair Witch Project" and the very similar "The Last
>Broadcast" (released in 1998, BEFORE "BWP").  There are some startling
>parallels between the two films, including the way they were marketed and
>the
>design of their websites.  But the question is, Who ripped off who?  Or is
>it
>just a coincidence?
<SNIP>
>Why not have released it back in movie thetares perhaps ??  I'm sure a lot
>of people who liked BWP would be likely to like TLB as well ... they could
>have made a lot of money that way instead of relying on video sales ... not
>sure if it was possible to do that, but anyway ...

Last Broadcast was made first.  I have it on good authority that neither
party (filmmaker) was aware of what the other was doing.  Last Broadcast is
based on the Jersey Devil urban legend..... Blair Witch is adapted from a
similar character from somewhere in Tennessee.

Just to give you an idea of how "good" Last Broadcast is... or at least is
perceived to be....  even tho it was "in the can" and shopped around for
years before BWP, it was not until BWP became a big hit that Last Broadcase
was able to get ANY type of distribution.

They were lucky to get it on video.  And I doubt anyone has any interest in
trying to get it into the theatres.... which is why it never made it, even
into the arthouses.

Regards,

--Mel


--Mel Eperthener
president, Gowanna Multi-media Pty     http://www.webz.com/gowanna
mailto:[e-mail]                  mailto:[e-mail]

419 Butler Street
PO Box 95184
Pittsburgh, PA 15223-0184
[phone]                                    [phone]
1-888-45-GOWANNA -- TOLL FREE     (1-888-454-6926)
____________________________________________
"Wow! So that is what all that extra space on the movie screen is
 for!" reaction to  "Gladiator"
______________________________________________


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Blair Witch - original ?
Date: 30 Oct 2000 09:27:00 -0700

> How can you make something COMPLETELY different and original
> these days ??

It seems that nobody is trying very hard.  99.9% of all films are fairly
unoriginal.  Occasionally, a film like BEING JOHN MALKOVICH comes along and
tries to up the ante, but the film industry generally makes things that are
already "tried and true."  Originality is simply not a value in filmmaking
(and it never really has been).

As for BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, it may not be "original," but it is different than
most of the films out there...and that is saying something.  In fact, the
predicted on-slaught of "Blair Witch" take-offs is still yet to come, except
in the form of parody shorts.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Piranha - 1995, Those cheesy horror films !
Date: 30 Oct 2000 17:21:53 EST

Hi !

It's Halloween time so here is a lil' review of a B.H.F. (Bad Horror Film)
that can still be entertaining if you gather a group of mates and buy a few
beers along with the usual chips and dips !!  (Making fun of those cheesy
horror films is CRUCIAL of course because if you take them seriously you
can't possibly enjoy them !!)

I give the film only a 1.5/5 (Mind you I was watching
it sober !) but under the influence of a few PINTS of delicious imported
U.K. beer my rating would certainly go up !! ;o)  I was sorry actually
because in "The guide" it said ... "Piranha - 1978" ... so I was expecting
the cult film to be presented ... but no, it was the goofy 1995 remake
instead !

The plot is ludicrous of course and involves a MAD SCIENTIST who was
breeding nearly invincible piranha fishes able to live in extreme conditions
(Of course they are about 5 times bigger than the ordinary south american
ones !).  She was doing that for some kind of bizarre US government plan to
"get those Russians" ... good idea !! hehe !

When the cold war ended the government tried to destroy the poor lil'
creatures so the mad scientist ... well ... you know how it goes !!

It won't be a huge surprise when those deadly piranha fishes with razor
sharp teeth are **accidentally** released into a river and start killing
people (The twist here is they make a funny sound when they attack, kind of
cool !)  Also they seem to be STIFF AS BOARDS when we see them underwater
... I guess that's because they were made of WOOD ... oops !

The film even borrows material from other more quality films like JAWS for
example with scenes very similar, only the threat is not a shark but stiff
piranha fishes of course ...

There's even a greedy resort owner that doesn't want
to close the beach despite obvious signs of danger, an investigator
(Alexandra Paul from Baywatch !) trying to take the matters into her own
hands aided by a hunky mountain man whose daughter just happens to be in
grave danger at the resort, of course he calls the investigator "honey" by
the end of the film, big surprise !

The acting is pretty awful by everyone but who could "shine" reciting lousy
lines of dialogue like that.
I'm even surprised they kept a straight face all this time !  It was so bad
it actually became funny !

The only actress I thought was actually ok was the former child star
Soleil-Moon Frye (now retired from acting but she had to be desperate to
appear in such a low budget horror film !) who was playing Punky Brewster on
Tv about 15-16 years ago ... she is all grown up here and rather curveous as
well !!

She's a lovely young woman working in a summer camp near the "deadly" river
... She could still pass easily for a teenager even if she was almost 20
when she made this film (She is sitting around with girls around 12-13 years
old and is not so much taller than them, "petite" is the word ! At least she
was doing a pretty decent job considering the material she was working with
!)

The cinematography is awful and often it is hard to tell what is going on,
lousy underwater camera work during the attacks and above the water it is
not really better anyway ...

The director doesn't even attempt to show us the usual gory stuff, always
coping out and showing the faces of the witnesses instead of someone's
severed legs for example ... (At one point a man has both of his legs bitten
off by hundreds of piranha fishes and we don't even get to see the bloody
stumps ... frustrating !!)

Also some bizarre scenes, like the little 5 feet tall Solei-Moon Frye in the
bottom right corner of the screen talking to someone so tall that the head
of that person is in the top left corner almost out of the frame, and it
lasts quite a long time ... It was bizarre and I was laughing out loud !!
Why shoot them in extreme close-ups like that anyway if there is such a
height difference ??

So overall this was a pretty bad horror film but as I said under the "right"
circumstances it might work as a "comedy" ... guilty pleasure type of film !

1.5/5, even if it was really a bad film I can't go lower than that because
at least I was "entertained" ... it
was simply very stoopid, not boring !

Marc     ;o)

" Yes - officer - thank God. My name is Paul Hackett -
I'm in Soho - I don't know the exact location - I'm
being persecuted by a vigilante mob - I'm sure you
are aware of their actions - My life is in serious,
serious danger right now ..."

Griffin Dunne as "Paul Hackett"
"After hours" - 1985










_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Piranha - 1995
Date: 30 Oct 2000 15:29:00 -0700

Hey Marc...

I have nothing to add to your review, as I haven't seen this classic film (nor
the original 1978 version).  However, I have a recommendation for you: PIRANHA
2.  I haven't seen the film, but you might want to check it out as it's the
directorial debut of one James "King of the World" Cameron.  I think the fish
fly around in this one as well.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Trevolting (Warning : Contains Offensive language !!)
Date: 30 Oct 2000 22:51:34 EST



*****  Warning ... offensive language below !!  Uh oh !

Rolando ... why would you say such nasty things about John Travolta ??

I can understand you not liking him or his last two films (Battlefield Earth
& Lucky numbers) but your comments seem a bit extreme ...

There are maybe a half dozen actors I really hate ... example : Brendan
Fraser in the new "Bedazzled" ...
but I wouldn't say anything so harsh about him even if
I HATED all of the films I have seen where he was in the cast ...

Have a fine day anyway !

Marc  ;o)


Anyone catch the Charlie Rose segment with Travolta hyping his latest dud?
What an ego-fucking-maniac!  He talked about how Hanks got the role in THE
GREEN MILE after he turned it down and how A-list actors like him and Hanks
have the luxury of nabbing the best roles.  Wonder how the fucking bastard
feels now after the unlucky numbers of his last two films.
Rolando

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Diane Christy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Trevolting (Warning : Contains Offensive language !!)
Date: 30 Oct 2000 23:45:47 -0600

At 10:51 PM -0500 10/30/00, Marc Desbiens wrote:
>There are maybe a half dozen actors I really hate ... example :
>Brendan Fraser in the new "Bedazzled" ...
>but I wouldn't say anything so harsh about him even if
>I HATED all of the films I have seen where he was in the cast ...

I thought he was very good in "Gods and Monsters."
--
~~~~~
Diane Christy (Samantha and Joshua's Mom)
Jefferson, LA
http://www.geocities.com/diane507/
mailto:[e-mail]
ICQ #12904700  <dchristy10> on Instant AOL Messenger
~~~~~

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] cheesy horror films !
Date: 30 Oct 2000 22:21:44 -0800

My all-time favorite cheesy horror film is "The Killer Shrews," an
unbelievably bad movie from 1959 that voters on the Internet Movie Data Base
actually rate lower than "Plan 9 From Outer Space."  This movie is SOOOOO
bad that you just sit there shaking your head in disbelief.  It chronicles
the exploits of a half-dozen hopeless feebs and drunks trapped on an island,
in a storm, while surrounded  by "giant mutant killer shrews" (actually,
dogs dressed up in shag carpet and mop-wigs).  The budget was apparently so
minuscule that they weren't gonna reshoot a scene no matter WHAT... which
led to such great lines as the female lead saying to one of the other actors
"Aren't you wondering about my strange accent?"   No matter how bad you
might think this movie is, it's actually worse. Really.  A "must see" for
connoisseurs of truly crappy movies!


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] cheesy horror films !
Date: 31 Oct 2000 02:33:08 -0500

At 10.21 PM 30/10/2000 -0800, David F. Nolan wrote:
>My all-time favorite cheesy horror film is "The Killer Shrews," an
>unbelievably bad movie from 1959 that voters on the Internet Movie Data Base
>actually rate lower than "Plan 9 From Outer Space."
<SNIP>
>No matter how bad you
>might think this movie is, it's actually worse. Really.  A "must see" for
>connoisseurs of truly crappy movies!

I humbly present:

Manos, the Hands of Fate.

Don't even bother unless you get the MST3K version.  Otherwise, it will
simply be too painful:-)

Regards,

--Mel


--Mel Eperthener
president, Gowanna Multi-media Pty     http://www.webz.com/gowanna
mailto:[e-mail]                  mailto:[e-mail]

419 Butler Street
PO Box 95184
Pittsburgh, PA 15223-0184
[phone]                                    [phone]
1-888-45-GOWANNA -- TOLL FREE     (1-888-454-6926)
____________________________________________
"Wow! So that is what all that extra space on the movie screen is
 for!" reaction to  "Gladiator"
______________________________________________


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: FlickPicks <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] cheesy horror films !
Date: 31 Oct 2000 08:59:24 -0800

on 10/30/00 11:33 PM, Mel Eperthener at [e-mail] wrote:

> I humbly present:
>
> Manos, the Hands of Fate.
>
> Don't even bother unless you get the MST3K version.  Otherwise, it will
> simply be too painful:-)

Well, I've heard that "Manos" is the worst movie ever -- THE bottom-rated
movie on IMDB, out of about 200,000 listed -- but from the comments there,
it doesn't sound like anything I'd want to watch.  The concept of taking bad
movies and trying to make them "funny" by adding comments (a la Elvira,
Mystery Science Theatre 3000, etc.) only goes so far, and apparently not
quite far enough in the case of "Manos."   I mean, there's intentionally
funny (IF),  unintentionally funny (UF), and just godawful bad GB).

IF movies include "A Bucket of Blood" and "Little Shop of Horrors" (the
original version). OK, maybe they're not all THAT funny, but Roger Corman's
intent was humorous. (BTW: Didja know that these two movies were filmed
back-to-back, on the same sets, with some of the same actors?)

Movies like "Killer Shrews" and "Horror of Party Beach" are UF.  I don't
think the people who made them were intending to make humorous movies, but
they (sorta) came out that way. And wry commentary can enhance that humor.

Not having seen it, I can't say for sure, but I'll bet that "Manos" is just
GB ... like "The Giant Spider Invasion."

I know, it's all relative, but when I'm in the mood for cheese, I'll stick
to the first two categories.

Anyone else got any nominees?


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Brett Buckley" <[e-mail]>
Date: 31 Oct 2000 14:45:30 EST

Hey everyone. Seems kind of tense today with the argument of what makes up a
good movie... sex, violence, marketing vs. high quality content. hmmmm.
wondering what you thought of American History X. Have to say I enjoyed it a
great deal. Very entertaining as well as something to think about. Was a
little generic at the end. Thought Edward Norton was incredible, which is
pretty standard for him I guess.

Unrelated ssubject... In an attempt to jump in the Blair Witch discussion, I
would have to agree that the whole thing left a lot to be desired. I didn't
think it was scary at all. And the plot was so flimsy. I know I'm talking
coulda-shoulda-woulda but seriously, what kind of moron goes into completely
unfamiliar woods w/ no compass? And if they had walked a little more and
argued a little less they would have been fine. I guess that really has
little to do with the concept of the movie but on the whole I found it to be
written, acted and expressed very poorly. The concept was good in theory but
didn't pan out. just my personal opinion...

Brett
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.


[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Blair Witch Project
Date: 31 Oct 2000 13:01:00 -0700

> what kind of moron goes into completely
> unfamiliar woods w/ no compass?

They did have a compass.  But it did no good.  Remember, they walked due south
all day long and then found themselves back where they started?

> And if they had walked a little more and
> argued a little less they would have been fine.

See above.  It was obvious that they walked most of the time during the day.
Even if they had spent an additional few minutes and kept moving, it would
have made no difference.

[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dexter Sy <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Re:Content, Quality and Hollywood (long)
Date: 31 Oct 2000 21:39:05 -0800



Brett Buckley wrote:

> Hey everyone. Seems kind of tense today with the argument of what makes up a
> good movie... sex, violence, marketing vs. high quality content.

Actually, the debate on what constitutes a good movie has been an on-going one
with various sets of participants depending on which type of movies are being
discussed.  IÆd be upfront with you and say I generally come down on the
populist side of things, because of my political and social views, I tend to put
more faith in the people than most other critics would like to.

That said, IÆve had some time to reflect on this whole issue and I think it
really comes down to what your focus is, both are right.   Those who see film as
art, find it absolutely revolting to see what they consider to be crap,
especially crap from Hollywood, succeed at the box office.  On the other side,
there is dead silence (<<crickets chirping>>) Seriously though.  It should be
noted that the criticism is rather one sided, and almost all of it coming from
critics in favor of film as art and trashing Hollywood the way politicians in
the 1950s pointed to Russia, and the evil Soviet Empire for all of AmericaÆs
problems.  ItÆs a punching bag of sorts.  An undeclared rule that when in doubt,
always fall back on a scathing critique of Hollywood.

So what exactly is the criticism?  Usually, itÆs a leftist critique of the
hegemony the American film industry.  Of the worldÆs cultural markets as
HollywoodÆs stomping ground.   A lot of the concerns are genuine and should be
taken to heart.  These includes concerns that truly good films going unseen
(there is a lot of truth to this), local industries (like that of the French)
decimated by Hollywood despite generous government subsidies. Etc.

The key similarity across the board seems to be the general disdain for the idea
of hegemony.  Critics feels the oppressiveness of the dominant form have to be
counterbalanced by other differing forms. In short, they feel equal time should
be given to other points of views, something I agree with.   But others, more
radical, advocate nothing but the destruction of Hollywood, and its cultural
Imperialism altogether.  But I question that thought on several levels.
Historically speaking, there is a pattern that the most homogeneous/Dominant
works of the period, the stories that attracted populist audiences, whether it
be the Greek Tragedies that established the art of theatre, or ShakespeareÆs
plays, werenÆt revered in their times as works of art, or pinnacles of human
creation, but treated as rather mundane entertainment.  ShakespeareÆs plays for
example went unpublished and unread until after his death, when his friends
collected bits and pieces of his play and published them in a collection of his
work.  One of the greatest Greek plays, HomerÆs Odyssey, emerged from Greece as
a mystery.  It had been performed by actors for centuries in the Greek Empire
and entertained countless of illiterate populations, but no one thought anything
of it and little information about the originator of the story itself was saved
for future generations.  The result is that there is an incredible amount of
debate in Academic circles as to the true identity of Homer.  Was he perhaps
several people who contributed to the final story, was Homer actually a woman?
No one knows for sure.

Where IÆm getting at here is that perhaps in a thousand years, the basic themes
of Hollywood films would be looked up with reverence.  Star Wars as literature?
Not unlikely.  Sure, some of you may make choking sounds now, but ask an
Englishman in 16th century England whether MacBeth, Richard the III or Titus
will be remembered in 400 years and he would probably look at you funny and go
on his business.  Theatre after all was seen as a dirty immoral business during
those days. The puritans in England even tried, and succeed for a while, to shut
them down.  And let me remind you that ShakespeareÆs dominance of contemporary
theatre and literature wouldnÆt be so complete if England and its so-called
British Empire didnÆt have the economic, political, CULTURAL, and diplomatic
might to spread its culture into its colonies.  Therefore, I find criticisms of
the dominance of American films utterly self-serving. If the French had control,
would they cede it to the Americans or the English? The Japanese? Or any number
of its critics? Not bloody likely.

There is also the issue of relativism.  Yes, I know. Hollywood themes of the
small guy winning over the evil empire has been told countless times, and the
love stories the populist love so much has been told with equal frequency.   I
wonder sometimes, if we had lived in a different world, where the big guy always
wins, and love affairs end in disaster, and these types of films are the
dominant forms, would the segments of the population then break off and start
criticizing these films for being overly pessimistic? And point to HollywoodÆs
optimistic films as the fresh idea that the masses should accept?

One thing critics always conveniently sidestep is that the population, and often
times the populations of their own country in which they so fervently defends,
are voted en masse for Hollywood films.  Why is that?  IsnÆt Italian
Neo-realist, or French Realist cinema far more interesting and captivating?  The
easy explanation is that the population are dumb, they are easily swayed and
they will find whatever is on the theatres.  The French tried to attack this
problem directly by forcing French films directly on to Multiplexes nationwide
last summer.  This was to be the opening shots of their war against Hollywood,
the summer when Hollywood is given a trouncing.   But before the summer was
over, Hollywood won without a scratch.  Despite generous government subsidies
and aggressive marketing, the battlefield was left with so many corpses of
failed French films that I really believe the problem is far more complex than
the simple explanation given.

Without doing a Psychological study, my hypothesis is that quite simply,
Hollywood has struck a winning formula. The optimistic and the ideologically
simplistic film.  People like to be happy, but above all, they like to be
entertained. Cinema after all is an escape.  Yes, it has powers to excite
intellectually, but itÆs a form of entertainment, and people like to be
entertained most of the time, and when they feel like it, theyÆll take the
occasional, deep, intellectual film as kind of an exercise after a long summer
at the beach relaxing.   The eternally optimistic state of American cinema
reflects America itself.  What excites people today will likely excite people in
the future, and that said, barring a total destruction of film archives,
bookstores and video stores in the future, the legacy of American cinema will
influence the next generations to come.


--
Dexter S.
Tendo Box - Nintendo e-zine
Http://www.tendobox.com



[ To leave the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe ]
[ movies" (without the quotes) to [e-mail]          ]