home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
ftp.xmission.com
/
2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar
/
ftp.xmission.com
/
pub
/
lists
/
movies
/
archive
/
v02.n007
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1998-04-22
|
34KB
From: owner-movies-digest@lists.xmission.com (movies-digest)
To: movies-digest@lists.xmission.com
Subject: movies-digest V2 #7
Reply-To: movies-digest
Sender: owner-movies-digest@lists.xmission.com
Errors-To: owner-movies-digest@lists.xmission.com
Precedence: bulk
movies-digest Thursday, April 23 1998 Volume 02 : Number 007
RE: [MV] Broken Arrow/ Face-Off/ The Big HIt
RE: [MV] Broken Arrow/ Face-Off/ The Big HIt
RE: [MV] Broken Arrow/ Face-Off/ The Big HIt
[MV] Two Girls and a Guy, 0 stars (out of 4)
Re: [MV] New to List
Re: [MV] Two Girls and a Guy, 0 stars (out of 4)
[MV] hand guesture
[MV] Follies
[MV] John Woo
Re: [MV] Follies
[MV] Siskel/ Ebert review THE REPLACEMENT KILLERS
Re: [MV] Titanic Goofs !
Re: [MV] Cliffhanger!
Re: [MV] Two Girls and a Guy, 0 stars (out of 4)
Re: [MV] Titanic Goofs !
[MV] the ultimate goof site
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 07:07:41 -0500
From: "Richard J. Doyle" <rdoyle29@msn.com>
Subject: RE: [MV] Broken Arrow/ Face-Off/ The Big HIt
I heard that "Hard Target" got carved up a lot by the studio, which would
explain a lot. I really think that there is a good film hiding in there
somewhere and trying to get out. Portions of it, especially the last 20
minutes or so, are really quite good. I think, whether the studio or Woo is
to blame, the film is too restrained and ends up relying too much on its
plot (which is not interesting or original at all) and Van Damme's acting
(which, to put it delicately, he's not known for). For the type of film
that it is, its quite good (compare it to any other Van Damme film), but its
a disappointment as a Woo film.
Richard J. Doyle
- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-movies@lists.xmission.com
[mailto:owner-movies@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of LillianBeth
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 1998 12:41 AM
To: movies@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [MV] Broken Arrow/ Face-Off/ The Big HIt
Howdy all,
The Killer was one of the best movies I watched last year as part of a film
studies unit .... well it would have been if it was subtitled. We had the
misfortune to see a version with very, very, *very* bad english dubbing. I
mean this was horrid! One of the character's voices actually changed for
one scene. Seriously! I couldn't believe it. One minute we had the badly
dubbed voice always the same from the beginning, and then the next - hello!
If you didn't follow the story properly, you would think that it was a
completely different person. Needless to say, it ruined it for a lot of
us in the class, and so we just had to take the piss out of it for the rest
of hte film.
But back to Woo's US releases.... I'm assuming The Big Hit is his latest.
I heard of a film called The Kings Ransom (or something very similar)
sometime towards the end of last year, but haven't heard of anything since.
Does anyone know anything about htis?
L.
ps. I also agree with Richard.... Hard Boiled seemed to be a better
film.... it might have been because of hte dubbing though.... anyone game
to comment on Hard Target with Van Damme?
"I'm sorry about the attitude I need to give when I'm with you
But noone else would take this shit from me.
And I'm so terrified of noone else but me.
And I'm here all the time, I won't go away."
- Matchbox 20 "Long Day"
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 07:11:41 -0500
From: "Richard J. Doyle" <rdoyle29@msn.com>
Subject: RE: [MV] Broken Arrow/ Face-Off/ The Big HIt
The story I've heard is the Woo is directing Chow Yun Fat in a remake of the
film noir "King's Ransom". A lot of Woo's imagery, like the scene with the
dove, is explained by the fact that Woo is really a very sentimental and
deeply religious person. At heart, his movies are morality plays.
Richard J. Doyle
- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-movies@lists.xmission.com
[mailto:owner-movies@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Blacknight
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 1998 2:09 AM
To: movies@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [MV] Broken Arrow/ Face-Off/ The Big HIt
Jason Cormier wrote:
>
>
> (Just so you know where I stand - Broken Arrow was OK, Face/Off was
> amazing, Killer was great and Hard Boiled was fantastic!)
>
I haven't seen any other movies by John Woo other than FaceOff and it
was astounding. Woo kept injecting images and symbols into some of the
scenes. Although the story lagged during the end (the chase scene of
Travolta and Cage kept going and going and going....), I enjoyed it as a
whole. My favorite scene is when Nicolas Cage steps off his car and the
wind swirls his coat across his body. Although Cage was playing the bad
guy, he was oozing with sex appeal. Another scene that I remember is
inside the church where doves come out of nowhere and Cage is praying in
front of the altar and makes the sign of the cross.
Does anyone know Woo's next movie? I didn't watch Hard Target because I
don't like Van Damme.
blacknight
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 11:23:52 -0400
From: GARY ZEIG <mlz@nauticom.net>
Subject: RE: [MV] Broken Arrow/ Face-Off/ The Big HIt
>The story I've heard is the Woo is directing Chow Yun Fat in a remake of the
>film noir "King's Ransom". A lot of Woo's imagery, like the scene with the
>dove, is explained by the fact that Woo is really a very sentimental and
>deeply religious person. At heart, his movies are morality plays.
>
>Richard J. Doyle
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-movies@lists.xmission.com
>[mailto:owner-movies@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Blacknight
>Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 1998 2:09 AM
>To: movies@lists.xmission.com
>Subject: Re: [MV] Broken Arrow/ Face-Off/ The Big HIt
>
>Jason Cormier wrote:
>>
>>
>> (Just so you know where I stand - Broken Arrow was OK, Face/Off was
>> amazing, Killer was great and Hard Boiled was fantastic!)
>>
>
>I haven't seen any other movies by John Woo other than FaceOff and it
>was astounding. Woo kept injecting images and symbols into some of the
>scenes. Although the story lagged during the end (the chase scene of
>Travolta and Cage kept going and going and going....), I enjoyed it as a
>whole. My favorite scene is when Nicolas Cage steps off his car and the
>wind swirls his coat across his body. Although Cage was playing the bad
>guy, he was oozing with sex appeal. Another scene that I remember is
>inside the church where doves come out of nowhere and Cage is praying in
>front of the altar and makes the sign of the cross.
>
>Does anyone know Woo's next movie? I didn't watch Hard Target because I
>don't like Van Damme.
>
>
>blacknight
>
>[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
>[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
>
>
>
>[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
>[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
I liked Chow Yun Fat in " The Replacement Killers."
I'm glad these types of films are finally getting mainstream exposure in the US
GRZ
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 13:57:25 -0600 (MDT)
From: "Gregory A. Swarthout" <gregorys@xmission.com>
Subject: [MV] Two Girls and a Guy, 0 stars (out of 4)
By Gregory A. Swarthout
Stars: Robert Downey Jr., Heather Graham, Natasha Wagner. Written and
directed by James Toback. Rated R for a strong sex scene, strong
language and sexual dialogue, and for a violent image.
It had to happen sooner or later. My patience with a movie finally
ran out. "Two Girls and a Guy" marks the first time I have ever walked
out of a movie. If only I could have gotten back the hour I had already
spent on it. This film is complete and utter rubbish. ThereÆs not a
single positive thing I can say about it. But at least I am in a
position to save you from the travesty I experienced.
Carla (Heather Graham) and Lou (Natasha Wagner) discover that they
have a boyfriend (Robert Downey Jr.) in common. What they do about it
will leave you scratching your head in amazement of the stupidity of the
script.
"Two Girls and a Guy" is a talky, unnatural, self-conscious,
poorly-dubbed mess of a movie. It plays like a film school experiment
let loose on an unsuspecting public. ItÆs degrading to watch and I
object to its very existence. I donÆt think I can put a finer point on
it than that.
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 16:11:26 EDT
From: Robyhk 28 <Robyhk28@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [MV] New to List
Hi,
i am sorry. i did not want to say that meg ryan played in peggy sue. i just
wanted to say that i love meg ryan and she is one of the best actors at all.
this was an misunderstanding.sorry
roby
<< Thema: Re: [MV] New to List
Datum: 19.04.98 20:31:26 MEZ
From: GeminiJef@aol.com (GeminiJef)
Sender: owner-movies@lists.xmission.com
Reply-to: movies@lists.xmission.com
To: movies@lists.xmission.com
Best of Cage: "Vampire's Kiss" Hysterically brilliant performance in which
Cage's character believe's he's turned into a Vampire. Good Stuff. :-)
In other news, The new flick "City of Angels" gives Cage a creepy weird
stalker type persona which i'm not sure Nicholas himself new what to do with.
:-(
In a message dated 98-04-16 21:46:19 EDT, you write:
<< Cage is greatest at his campiest. "Peggy Sue Got Married"..."Raising
Arizona"...hysterical! >>
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <owner-movies@lists.xmission.com>
Received: from relay22.mx.aol.com (relay22.mail.aol.com [172.31.106.68]) by
air15.mail.aol.com (vx) with SMTP; Sun, 19 Apr 1998 15:31:26 -0400
Received: from lists.xmission.com (lists.xmission.com [198.60.22.7])
by relay22.mx.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with SMTP id PAA29850;
Sun, 19 Apr 1998 15:31:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from domo by lists.xmission.com with local (Exim 1.82 #1)
id 0yQzmO-0004c4-00; Sun, 19 Apr 1998 13:29:32 -0600
Received: from (imo11.mx.aol.com) [198.81.17.33]
by lists.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 1.82 #1)
id 0yQzmM-0004Yy-00; Sun, 19 Apr 1998 13:29:30 -0600
Received: from GeminiJef@aol.com
by imo11.mx.aol.com (IMOv14.1) id INRa018926
for <movies@lists.xmission.com>; Sun, 19 Apr 1998 15:28:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: GeminiJef <GeminiJef@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bc68ece4.353a504b@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 15:28:09 EDT
To: movies@lists.xmission.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [MV] New to List
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38
Sender: owner-movies@lists.xmission.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: movies@lists.xmission.com
>>
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 17:48:36 -0400
From: Chris Culligan <culligan@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MV] Two Girls and a Guy, 0 stars (out of 4)
Darn, you make it sound pretty good!!
At 01:57 PM 4/22/98 -0600, you wrote:
>By Gregory A. Swarthout
>
>Stars: Robert Downey Jr., Heather Graham, Natasha Wagner. Written and
>directed by James Toback. Rated R for a strong sex scene, strong
>language and sexual dialogue, and for a violent image.
>
> It had to happen sooner or later. My patience with a movie finally
>ran out. "Two Girls and a Guy" marks the first time I have ever walked
>out of a movie. If only I could have gotten back the hour I had already
>spent on it. This film is complete and utter rubbish. There=92s not a
>single positive thing I can say about it. But at least I am in a
>position to save you from the travesty I experienced.
>
> Carla (Heather Graham) and Lou (Natasha Wagner) discover that they
>have a boyfriend (Robert Downey Jr.) in common. What they do about it
>will leave you scratching your head in amazement of the stupidity of the
>script.
>
> "Two Girls and a Guy" is a talky, unnatural, self-conscious,
>poorly-dubbed mess of a movie. It plays like a film school experiment
>let loose on an unsuspecting public. It=92s degrading to watch and I
>object to its very existence. I don=92t think I can put a finer point o=
n
>it than that.
>
>[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies"=
]
>[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com =
]
>
>
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 17:46:08 -0500
From: jmenning@forbin.com (Janice Menning)
Subject: [MV] hand guesture
The hand guesture ws used as far back as the 1840's just to tell you.
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 16:13:14 -0700
From: "JRiley" <fargo-ja@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: [MV] Follies
Recently there has been a discussion on some of the follies that have been
found in Titanic, and I thought maybe there's room to bring more to light.
This isn't necessarily to put down the indicated movies, but to show what
the audience has picked up on. Anyway, one I remember and is fairly easy to
pick up is in the movie "Encino Man". It occurs in the scene where Brendan
Frasier and Pauly Shore are at the mini mart. Just as they go walking out
the door you'll notice Frasier's shirt is stained with slurpee juice, and
not a second later he comes back to the door to say his line and the shirt
is clean. Can we say "oops"! :-)
JRiley
Enjoy, Cheers!
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 10:46:05 +1000
From: LillianBeth <lepinatl@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: [MV] John Woo
Apparently, somewhere, floating around the US is a director's cut of Hard
Target, also a version sans background music. In one story I've heard, the
producers wanted to see if Woo could make $$$$ from US audiences with a
'mainstream' Hollywood flick. IMO what resulted was a watered down Woo
film. Sure some of his trademarks are there, but not to the extent of say,
The Killer, Hard Boiled or Face/Off.
Trademark John Woo: Keep an eye out for 2 guns, sliding across
benches/floors with guns blazing, seeing the enemy/other in a reflection
(done to perfection in Face/Off), birds (or things that fly - such as
butterflies in Broken Arrow), 'honesty amonst theives', knowing your enemy,
which leads to a sort of brother against brother stand off, the typical
guns in the face stand off (don't get me started about phallic symbolism
and homoerotica, please!).
Tidbits about Woo: He was born in China, but his family moved to Hong Kong
when he was very young. He was raised in a religious, but poor family, and
had support from a US family through church connections. Worked in a few
well known HK film studios, and as assistant to a HK director famed for
swordplay films (Woo has been quoted as seeing his own films as swordplay
with guns). Started out directing comedies (ie: The Inspector wears a
skirt), but after that started failing, went into action.
Tidbit about Chow Yun-Fat: Started out as a romantic television actor (I'm
assuming a HK soapie star).
At 07:07 22/04/98 -0500, you wrote:
>I heard that "Hard Target" got carved up a lot by the studio, which would
>explain a lot. I really think that there is a good film hiding in there
>somewhere and trying to get out. Portions of it, especially the last 20
>minutes or so, are really quite good. I think, whether the studio or Woo is
>to blame, the film is too restrained and ends up relying too much on its
>plot (which is not interesting or original at all) and Van Damme's acting
>(which, to put it delicately, he's not known for). For the type of film
>that it is, its quite good (compare it to any other Van Damme film), but its
>a disappointment as a Woo film.
>
>Richard J. Doyle
"I'm sorry about the attitude I need to give when I'm with you
But noone else would take this shit from me.
And I'm so terrified of noone else but me.
And I'm here all the time, I won't go away."
- Matchbox 20 "Long Day"
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 19:39:59 -0600 (MDT)
From: mea culpa <jericho@dimensional.com>
Subject: Re: [MV] Follies
> the audience has picked up on. Anyway, one I remember and is fairly easy to
> pick up is in the movie "Encino Man". It occurs in the scene where Brendan
> Frasier and Pauly Shore are at the mini mart. Just as they go walking out
> the door you'll notice Frasier's shirt is stained with slurpee juice, and
> not a second later he comes back to the door to say his line and the shirt
> is clean. Can we say "oops"! :-)
I have a few pages of notes from various movies where I noticed goofs or
whatnot. I have been sending them to the IMDB this past week. Everyone
should submit them there to be shared :)
mail adds@imdb.com
GOOF
# move name (year)
It will look for that or other keywords. The system is fairly intelligent
with replying "i couldn't find it, here are some titles close to yours".
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 00:38:53 -0400
From: GARY ZEIG <mlz@nauticom.net>
Subject: [MV] Siskel/ Ebert review THE REPLACEMENT KILLERS
GS-
If you could post Siskel or Ebert's review of THE REPLACEMENT KILLERS
I'd appreciate it.
grz
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 02:28:35 +0100
From: Graeme MacKeachie <bran@rainbow.net.au>
Subject: Re: [MV] Titanic Goofs !
Craig Chamberlin wrote:
> It (the gesture) predates the real Titanic by a century or more... <snip!>
Thanks, Craig, and all the others who shared their knowledge with me... ya learn
something every day!
And Craig, I agree with you -- except for the one anguished squeal from Kate's
character when she launched waist-deep into the water for the first time, there was
virtually nothing to indicate how cold the water was -- with it being cold enough to
cause hypothermic death within a very few minutes (in real life), and with all the
time they spent waist-deep (and more!) in the water, Kate and Leonardo should
certainly have been showing the effects of the cold long before it was convenient to
the plot-line to dwell on it.
And with the number of large chunks of flotsam seen floating about in various camera
angles post-sinking, I also didn't understand why Leonardo didn't make any sort of
effort to get himself out of the water also, especially as he gave every indication of
knowing he wouldn't survive long where he was. It stopped his death from being moving
to me -- I just thought "what a drip!"
(Oh, and I didn't much care about his wet shirt!!)
- -- Graeme
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 02:43:33 +0100
From: Graeme MacKeachie <bran@rainbow.net.au>
Subject: Re: [MV] Cliffhanger!
GARY ZEIG wrote:
> If you seriously haven't seen this movie, Rich, you should.
> It's an action adventure. I really liked the beautiful scenery. I wouldn't
> call it one of Sly's best, but it was a fun movie to watch.
*AND* it had one of the best yet of Hollywood's currently-obligatory
nothing-to-do-with-the-main-story-but-full-of-character-exposition opening
sequences. Mountaineer friends of mine scoff mightily ("that just couldn't
happen!!", they say), but I found the opening gripping and terrifying.
- --Graeme
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 03:03:07 +0100
From: Graeme MacKeachie <bran@rainbow.net.au>
Subject: Re: [MV] Two Girls and a Guy, 0 stars (out of 4)
Wow, Gregory, this must be the week for it! This was also the week where I,
too, walked out of a movie for the first time ever.
The one you bailed out of hasn't opened over this side of the water (in fact,
I hadn't even heard of it). One that has just opened here in Sydney is Woody
Allen's "Deconstructing Harry", and that's what I walked out of. I used to be
such a big Woody Allen fan! But "DH" was just too ugly and unpleasant -- I
kept trying to see it as witty and sardonic, but finally decided it was really
just embarrassing and self-deluded.
Anyone else have thoughts on this?
- -- Graeme
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 09:24:07 -0700
From: Craig Chamberlin <ccubed@hevanet.com>
Subject: Re: [MV] Titanic Goofs !
Graeme,
Thank you...I needed that...what with all the TITANIC MANIA, which I just=
don't get, and
the flaws in the story...and KW/LD bored me to tears, and well, basically=
, I didn't care.
But,
=B0
am
=B0
concerned
=B0
because
=B0
I
=B0
have
=B0
begun =
=B0
to =
=B0
have =B0
this =B0
sinking =B0
feeling =B0
that =B0
no =B0
one =B0
else =B0
gets =B0
it []:>>>>))))
Craig
.
Graeme MacKeachie wrote:
> Craig Chamberlin wrote:
>
> > It (the gesture) predates the real Titanic by a century or more... <=
snip!>
>
> Thanks, Craig, and all the others who shared their knowledge with me...=
ya learn
> something every day!
>
> And Craig, I agree with you -- except for the one anguished squeal from=
Kate's
> character when she launched waist-deep into the water for the first tim=
e, there was
> virtually nothing to indicate how cold the water was -- with it being c=
old enough to
> cause hypothermic death within a very few minutes (in real life), and w=
ith all the
> time they spent waist-deep (and more!) in the water, Kate and Leonardo =
should
> certainly have been showing the effects of the cold long before it was =
convenient to
> the plot-line to dwell on it.
>
> And with the number of large chunks of flotsam seen floating about in v=
arious camera
> angles post-sinking, I also didn't understand why Leonardo didn't make =
any sort of
> effort to get himself out of the water also, especially as he gave ever=
y indication of
> knowing he wouldn't survive long where he was. It stopped his death fr=
om being moving
> to me -- I just thought "what a drip!"
>
> (Oh, and I didn't much care about his wet shirt!!)
>
> -- Graeme
>
> [ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies=
" ]
> [ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com =
]
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 17:29:20 cet
From: "greuel" <greuel@main.eifel-net.net>
Subject: [MV] the ultimate goof site
people,
I found a nice site that lists all sorts of goofs from all sorts of
films.
it's called
The BIG list of movie mistakes
and here's the URL:
http://www.redcourt.demon.co.uk/
and because I am such a nice guy I give you the entry for our alltime
favourite.
enjoy,
thomas
Titanic
There's a scene where a woman from steerage takes her 2 kids to
their room as the boat is sinking and tells them a happily-ever-after
story which we assume means they're giving up hope of escaping
and planning to go down with the boat. Also, in the same sequence,
an old couple clutches each others' hands as water wells up next to
their bed. Later, after we've all cried over the death of the woman
and 2 kids, they are in a large scene in the background hopping on a
lifeboat.
In the scene where Jack and his friend are standing on the bow
looking at the dolphins swimming ahead of the ship, the dolphins
are clearly Pacific white-sides, not any Atlantic species.
How come everyone dies so suddenly of hypothermia when they
get off the ship and into the ocean, but suffer no apparent ill-effects
when the same ocean water comes into the ship? Especially our
hero and heroine, who run through it neck-deep, swim in it, etc. for
more than an hour before finally escaping onto the deck, where
again they give no indication of suffering the slightest bit from the
cold.
Though this is not a blooper, it is interesting. The wreckage in the
movie is really the actual Titanic wreck, not any special effects.
Director James Cameron cried when he went down to see it.
If you look real hard, Arnold Schwarzenegger supposedly makes a
cameo in a dance scene.
When the ship is sinking, where are all the dogs? In the beginning
they showed at least twenty dogs, but you never see them while the
ship is sinking.
The lake that Jack told Rose he went ice fishing on when she was
threatening to jump is a man-made lake in Wisconsin near
Chippewa Falls (where Jack grew up). The lake was filled in 1917,
5 years after Titanic sank. That means Jack must've been roughly
10 years old or younger when he said he went ice fishing and fell in
to the cold water, yet the lake never existed before 1917.
When Jack comes to the first class dinner, Molly asks him if he'd
care to escort her to dinner (Rose is already on his other arm). He
says certainly and they link arms - Rose-Jack-Molly. Then the
camera cuts to focus on Cal who's walking ahead of the group.
When you look behind Cal, Molly is walking all by herself with no
sign of Jack or Rose.
When does Rose find the time to put a life-vest on?
I've heard a few times about the turn to port/turn to starboard
confusion - the explanation for why a turn to starboard is ordered
but the ship turns to port. The reason for the difference is that in
1912 directions were still given in relation to rudder directions -
rudders are pushed in the opposite direction to the way they want
the ship to go, so directions were given in reverse.
How could they haul the safe from the wreck? The robot has to
meander through several doorways and rooms to find it. Even if the
robots could be manipulated to harness a net around the safe, the
prospect of dragging it back through all those obstacles to finally
lift it to the surface seems patently impossible.
When Rose is trying to rescue Jack she spies a fire axe. Smashing all
the glass out from the holder she grabs the axe and turns round.
The next camera shot shows Rose standing in front of the case with
almost all of its glass intact.
(Apparently you can see some bloke running down the deck of the
ship as in he was running and they tilted the camera to make it look
like he was falling, but that's unconfirmed).
In the scene where Rose is threatening to jump, she has a tattoo on
her left arm. [Apparently not - it's a piece of the dress].
When Leonardo DiCaprio says "sit on the bed....I mean the couch",
it says in the script "sit on the couch" - Leo really made that
mistake.
During the whole scene where Kate Winslet is floating around in
the freezing water, she realises that even though her man has died,
she must go on. So she proceeds to grab a METAL whistle to alert
help. Now if you've ever stuck your tongue on a cold metal object,
you know that it will stick, so how can we be expected to believe
that it doesn't stick to hers?
Kate Winslet is running around in water for over half the movie
and still has perfect make-up on. I don't really think that
water-proof mascara was around at that time.
When the Titanic has gone down, one of the boats comes back to
pick up survivors, the man on the boat shouts: "Can anybody hear
me?" and a clear echo answers him. But how? There's nothing
around to create the echo.....
Rose is eluding her bodyguard, who she gives the middle finger as
the elevator taking her and her lover lowers out of sight and out of
reach. The finger salute HAD to be an anachronism of the most
blatant variety - surely it wasn't in use in 1912?
Early in the movie old Rose states that she only wore the diamond
necklace "this once" (when Jack draws her picture).
Later in the movie Cal is shown helping her put it on when giving it
to her. That's twice.
When the ships sinks and the back is rising, you see no people
swim under the ship. When the ship breaks and falls down, the sea
is crowded with people, who get crushed under the ship.
Jack and Rose are running around in the water for half the film
without getting too cold.
The two butlers are looking for Rose with a torch, down below
with the cars - torches didn't exist in 1912.
If you listen carefully, the sound of the ocean during deck scenes is
the actual sound of the breakers on the beach, not the sound of a
ship's wake.
In the scene on deck where Kate is checking out Leo's portfolio,
and Leo is teaching her to spit, for a split second you can see the
breakers rolling in to shore through the ship's railing. Also in this
scene, the angle of the shadows changes constantly, indicating the
scene was shot several times throughout the afternoon and then
spliced together. And if you really think of it, if the Titanic was
travelling east to west, the late afternoon sun would not be hitting
the SIDE of the ship at all.
Young Rose has green eyes, but Old Rose has blue eyes.
One sent in from my friend Paul - I think he's joking: In one scene
of Titanic, Rose is this ageing, half-dead, wrinkly old lady. If you
look carefully just after it though, you can see when the body
double comes in, and instead the old lady looks like Kate Winslet
from the film Heavenly Creatures!
When Jack hands Rose the note at the dinner table the paper is
yellow. Later when the note is read the paper is white.
In the beginning, and throughout the movie Titanic, 'The
Water-lilies,' by Claude Monet, is pictured. There are many
paintings that Monet did in his lifetime that included waterliles, but
I believe this painting wasn't completed until the year 1923, in
Orangerie, Paris. The painting was begun in 1916. So then how can
a completed rendering be on the ship in 1912?
The Statue of Liberty's crown and torch weren't lit in the 50's, so
it's unlikely that it was lit when the Titanic's survivors arrived
there.
When Jack goes up to first class on a Sunday morning, the group is
singing the Navy Hymn "Eternal Father". What is impossible is
that they are singing the last two lines of the verse written for
Naval Aviators. The verse starts "Lord guard and guide the men
who fly". They are singing the last two lines, "Oh, hear us when we
lift our prayer, For those in peril in the air." The Wright Brothers
flew about 8 years before, and I don't believe that this verse was
even added until the 1930's.
Why was it that Jack, a 3rd class passenger, could pass SO easily
from 3rd class to 1st class throughout the movie, and then at the
end when he REALLY needed to get there, he couldn't get out?
During the scene where Jack and Rose are enjoying their "flying"
with a beautiful sunset as a background, the ship is going the wrong
way! If as the scene was shot, the sunset was off the port (left) of
the ship, it would have to be steaming north, not east as would be
expected of any ship heading to New York from Britain.
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/8911/ - abomiNation
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
End of movies-digest V2 #7
**************************
[ To quit the movies-digest mailing list (big mistake), send the message ]
[ "unsubscribe movies-digest" (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]