To: movies@lists.xmission.com <movies@lists.xmission.com>
Date: Friday, June 05, 1998 1:11 PM
Subject: [MV] Re: Bladerunner
>Hello,
>
>Bladerunner is really a great movie, but there are not only the normal
>version and the director's cut: it is said that they shot all the
>scenes, and then produced about 17 different versions of the film, each
>a little bit different. At this point, they wanted to throw it all over,
>but finally, they made this version with Harrison Ford as a "narrator".
>Well, I like it anyway.
>
>Jakob
>
Now I don't want to offend anyone, but I've never understood the hype over
Blade Runner. I'm a huge Harrison Ford fan and a huge Sci-Fi fan, but this
film has never done it for me. I've even tried watching it several times
over the years because I keep hearing everyone say how great it is. It has
never gotten any better. I'm not saying it's a bad movie. But for me it's
always been kind of a disapointment.
So I'm curious, what is it exactly that everyone finds so great about Blade
Runner.
Phoenix
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:52:42 -0700
From: Jason Cormier <movieman@netcom.ca>
Subject: [MV] Truman Show review
A great film. Yeah - I know - you've seen the ads - you've heard the hype "Here comes another Jim Carrey movie!" Just give this one a chance if you're not a fan of the rubberband man. If you are a fan then I do believe you will also not be disappointed (no talking through ass though). The concept for this film needs to be applauded, I think, and Peter Wier needs an applause for making it work. Very easily could this have turned into a "just-for-laughs" gag-fest - but as Wier has done in the past with Robin Williams (Dead Poets Society) he makes an actor out of Jim. "I'm a doctor, not an actor Jim" (sorry). This is also a film that makes you think about things and talk about "what-ifs" after the show. Go and see the Truman Show - I give it a 93%. Best movie of the year (so far!)
Wanna see a movie? Get all the facts on all the FLIX...
www.netcom.ca/~movieman
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 11:07:19 +0100
From: "Toni S." <tonis@dircon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [MV] DEEP IMPACT is not so good movie ? -Reply -Reply
> >My point is that a good storyteller can reinvent an old concept and
> >make it worth retelling. I am not defending the same old crap that
> >Hollywood spews out but trying to point out the need for talent
> >beyond the concept.
> >A great story has plenty of room for retelling and reinterpretation
> >but a bad story should never be filmed in the first place.
> Bruce-
>
> I can appreciate what you are saying. However, I still would prefer that
> the great directors like Scorcese,
> De Palma, Tarantino, and Almodovar spend their time, talent and energy on
> original projects. Not Hamlet remakes, not Godzilla remakes, and not Die
> Hard remakes. I thought the coolest thing was Pulp Fiction. A great
> director directing a great original concept. We need more like this, don't
> you agree!
> Good Will Hunting is another original concept that turned into a good movie.
> The Crying Game (Although not a Hollywood concept) was another.
> These are the types of movies that ABSOLUTELY INSPIRE AND AMAZE ME.
>
> But that's just my too cents. In my eyes, NO potential remake ( Not even
> REAR WINDOW) compares.
> What I'm looking for is movie greatness. I'm not seeing much of it these
> days. And that's a shame.
> Because I can't remember a time in recent history when we've had more
> talent in the movie business than we do now. The actors/actresses are
> fighting for the roles, but the roles just aren't measuring up.
> I'm talking talent in acting, directing, producing, even FX. It's there.
> Where are the great movies?
> Let's hope The Truman Show fills the Bill.
>
> Gary
Gary, I can hardly think of less 'original' stories than Pulp Fiction - a
conglomeration of very 'familiar' plots thrown together with a great soundtrack
and a pleasantly irreverant director; or Good Will Hunting ('who is different
among us??'). Stories will always be familiar because the good ones are about
the emotions we all feel - the only 'originality' in evidence will be the
director's vision about how to tell them - which is why, as Bruce points out,
Star Wars was a hit, and so was 'Alien', 'Blade Runner' and so on. Don't get me
wrong, I love Pulp Fiction and delighted in its attitudes and scenes, but it
wasn't - oh wow this is the most original thing I've ever seen. If you can
predict what's going to happen, it ain't original.
I'm kind of against remakes myself given the pretty poor track record in recent
film history, but I tend to find films that hype themselves as 'original' aren't
exactly that either. Either way the worst thing any film can do is use a lot of
'interesting' camera angles, filters and other rubbish to try and present a
different 'vision' - which generally results in confusing the plot, making the
actors look like idiots and wasting time & money.
Mind you, my taste in films is pretty conservative. I found 'City of Lost
Children' for example, to be numbingly unoriginal - and if Hollywood had made it
and used such a taffy-sweet ending, the audience would have been groaning from
every corner of the globe, but because it was French, it was okay. Sorry but I
don't see it that way!
Anyway, here endeth the babble ...
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 08:55:48 -0400
From: GARY ZEIG <mlz@nauticom.net>
Subject: Re: [MV] DEEP IMPACT is not so good movie ? -Reply -Reply
>> >My point is that a good storyteller can reinvent an old concept and
>> >make it worth retelling. I am not defending the same old crap that
>> >Hollywood spews out but trying to point out the need for talent
>> >beyond the concept.
>> >A great story has plenty of room for retelling and reinterpretation
>> >but a bad story should never be filmed in the first place.
>> Bruce-
>>
>> I can appreciate what you are saying. However, I still would prefer that
>> the great directors like Scorcese,
>> De Palma, Tarantino, and Almodovar spend their time, talent and energy on
>> original projects. Not Hamlet remakes, not Godzilla remakes, and not Die
>> Hard remakes. I thought the coolest thing was Pulp Fiction. A great
>> director directing a great original concept. We need more like this, don't
>> you agree!
>> Good Will Hunting is another original concept that turned into a good movie.
>> The Crying Game (Although not a Hollywood concept) was another.
>> These are the types of movies that ABSOLUTELY INSPIRE AND AMAZE ME.
>>
>> But that's just my too cents. In my eyes, NO potential remake ( Not even
>> REAR WINDOW) compares.
>> What I'm looking for is movie greatness. I'm not seeing much of it these
>> days. And that's a shame.
>> Because I can't remember a time in recent history when we've had more
>> talent in the movie business than we do now. The actors/actresses are
>> fighting for the roles, but the roles just aren't measuring up.
>> I'm talking talent in acting, directing, producing, even FX. It's there.
>> Where are the great movies?
>> Let's hope The Truman Show fills the Bill.
>>
>> Gary
>
>Gary, I can hardly think of less 'original' stories than Pulp Fiction - a
>conglomeration of very 'familiar' plots thrown together with a great
>soundtrack
>and a pleasantly irreverant director; or Good Will Hunting ('who is different
>among us??'). Stories will always be familiar because the good ones are about
>the emotions we all feel - the only 'originality' in evidence will be the
>director's vision about how to tell them - which is why, as Bruce points out,
>Star Wars was a hit, and so was 'Alien', 'Blade Runner' and so on. Don't
>get me
>wrong, I love Pulp Fiction and delighted in its attitudes and scenes, but it
>wasn't - oh wow this is the most original thing I've ever seen. If you can
>predict what's going to happen, it ain't original.
>I'm kind of against remakes myself given the pretty poor track record in
>recent
>film history, but I tend to find films that hype themselves as 'original'
>aren't
>exactly that either. Either way the worst thing any film can do is use a
>lot of
>'interesting' camera angles, filters and other rubbish to try and present a
>different 'vision' - which generally results in confusing the plot, making the
>actors look like idiots and wasting time & money.
>Mind you, my taste in films is pretty conservative. I found 'City of Lost
>Children' for example, to be numbingly unoriginal - and if Hollywood had
>made it
>and used such a taffy-sweet ending, the audience would have been groaning from
>every corner of the globe, but because it was French, it was okay. Sorry but I
>don't see it that way!
>Anyway, here endeth the babble ...
>
>
>[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
>[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
Toni:
I still feel Pulp Fiction and Good Will Hunting were original concepts. No
One has done them quite this way before.
Maybe my definition of original is different from yours. To bring a collage
of familiar storylines together a la Pulp Fiction was brilliant(and
original in its own way), I thought. My main point was that I would prefer
new ideas and concepts over remakes and rehashes of old scripts. No one had
done Pulp Fiction before. That's why I consider it an original script. How
many versions of Hamlet are there? It doesn't take any creativity (well,
very little) to do another one. You or I could attempt it. We wouldn't even
have to hire a scriptwriter. For the script word for word is already
written. One things for sure: If you like a certain story , yes you'll
probably like the remake, but I certainly won't consider it to be a great
movie. For me, a great movie is something new, undiscovered territory. A la
the Truman Show.
Gary
Gary
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 10:47:16 -0400
From: Chris Culligan <culligan@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MV] Re: Bladerunner
The big draw of "Blade Runner", and the reason, I believe, that it is
considered such classic Sci-Fi fair today, was the SFX, and the vision of
the future it potrayed. You can see this type of "look and feel" in sci-fi
movies even today (ex. The Fifth Element). Even now, when I watch it (and
it requires viewing on the big screen for maximum impact) I marvel at the
effects. And the atmosphere of the movie still takes my breath away.
Your's may be a case of viewing too many imitators, which makes the
original less of a treat. For example, the first time I saw ET, I thought
it was a great movie (still do). But there were so many bad movies based
on the same premise as ET (Batteries Not Included, The Last Starfighter,
The stupid movie with Aly Sheedy and the Robot, etc. etc) that now, when
you view the original, it simply does not have the same impact as when it
was first released.
CHRIS
>
>Now I don't want to offend anyone, but I've never understood the hype over
>Blade Runner. I'm a huge Harrison Ford fan and a huge Sci-Fi fan, but this
>film has never done it for me. I've even tried watching it several times
>over the years because I keep hearing everyone say how great it is. It has
>never gotten any better. I'm not saying it's a bad movie. But for me it's
>always been kind of a disapointment.
>
>So I'm curious, what is it exactly that everyone finds so great about Blade
>Runner.
>
>Phoenix
>
>
>[ 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: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 10:57:36 -0400
From: GARY ZEIG <mlz@nauticom.net>
Subject: Re: [MV] Re: Bladerunner
>The big draw of "Blade Runner", and the reason, I believe, that it is
>considered such classic Sci-Fi fair today, was the SFX, and the vision of
>the future it potrayed. You can see this type of "look and feel" in sci-fi
>movies even today (ex. The Fifth Element). Even now, when I watch it (and
>it requires viewing on the big screen for maximum impact) I marvel at the
>effects. And the atmosphere of the movie still takes my breath away.
>
>Your's may be a case of viewing too many imitators, which makes the
>original less of a treat. For example, the first time I saw ET, I thought
>it was a great movie (still do). But there were so many bad movies based
>on the same premise as ET (Batteries Not Included, The Last Starfighter,
>The stupid movie with Aly Sheedy and the Robot, etc. etc) that now, when
>you view the original, it simply does not have the same impact as when it
>was first released.
>
>CHRIS
>
>>
>>Now I don't want to offend anyone, but I've never understood the hype over
>>Blade Runner. I'm a huge Harrison Ford fan and a huge Sci-Fi fan, but this
>>film has never done it for me. I've even tried watching it several times
>>over the years because I keep hearing everyone say how great it is. It has
>>never gotten any better. I'm not saying it's a bad movie. But for me it's
>>always been kind of a disapointment.
>>
>>So I'm curious, what is it exactly that everyone finds so great about Blade
>>Runner.
>>
>>Phoenix
>>
>>
>>[ 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 ]
Thank you Chris!
Probably without knowing it, you have just verified what I've been saying
recently in my posts about remakes.
If the original movie is good or great, the remakes are almost always
disappointing. This is because
you can't beat the original idea! Titanic is a perfect example of this.
Should someone try to do another Titanic movie
(I know it wouldn't make sense to do this, but bear with me here) it would
never match the first one.
Because it's already been seen, witnessed and experienced. Yes I know
camera angles, point of view, etc etc can vary and movies can be redone
differently, but the originals are almost always the best. Now I'll get off
my soap box and just enjoy the new releases, which seem promising. Anybody
seen A Perfect Murder yet? Any reviews???
GRZ
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 18:22:41 -0400
From: Chris Culligan <culligan@hotmail.com>
Subject: [MV] The Truman Show
I just got back from seeing this movie. As you've all probably heard, it
is good. And Jim Carrey is good. But what I liked most about it was the
way it makes you wonder.
Why are we here?? Who's controlling it all?? Is the universe designed in
such a way that we can never reach the edge?? Our world is what we were
born into, just like Truman's. We can't help but try to figure out the
meaning of it all. I hope that some time in the distant future we get to
the edge (before we get over-run by the wave).
The other thing I thought about while watching this movie is whether
someone would be able to film my life. Is my life so routine that anyone
watching it would be able to stage it for me?? Would they know were to
place the camaras?? Would they be able to guess what my reactions would
be?? If I acted a little more spontaniously, would I perhaps come closer
to finding the meaning of my life??
Some people are going to be disappointed. This movie is not a comedy. If
you want to see Jim Carrey as a comedian, don't go to this movie, rent Ace
Ventura instead. There isn't a whole lot of laughs here. But a good movie,
like a good book, teaches you something about the human condition. This
was a good movie. And to top it off, it was entertaining as well. I feel
that a finnally got my $6.00 worth this summer.
CHRIS
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:43:24 -0700
From: "Bradley Toy" <brad@nb.net>
Subject: Re: [MV] The Truman Show
> I just got back from seeing this movie. As you've all probably heard, it
> is good. And Jim Carrey is good. But what I liked most about it was the
> way it makes you wonder.
>
> Why are we here?? Who's controlling it all?? Is the universe designed
in
> such a way that we can never reach the edge?? Our world is what we were
> born into, just like Truman's. We can't help but try to figure out the
> meaning of it all. I hope that some time in the distant future we get to
> the edge (before we get over-run by the wave).
>
> The other thing I thought about while watching this movie is whether
> someone would be able to film my life. Is my life so routine that anyone
> watching it would be able to stage it for me?? Would they know were to
> place the camaras?? Would they be able to guess what my reactions would
> be?? If I acted a little more spontaniously, would I perhaps come closer
> to finding the meaning of my life??
>
> Some people are going to be disappointed. This movie is not a comedy.
If
> you want to see Jim Carrey as a comedian, don't go to this movie, rent
Ace
> Ventura instead. There isn't a whole lot of laughs here. But a good
movie,
> like a good book, teaches you something about the human condition. This
> was a good movie. And to top it off, it was entertaining as well. I
feel
> that a finnally got my $6.00 worth this summer.
>
> CHRIS
I agree with you Chris. I loved this movie. I usually only goto the
movies to see comedies. Because I loved Jim Carrey in all of his other
movies, I decided to go see this movie. I didn't think it would be a
comedy, and it wasn't. But it was much much better than any of his other
movies. I LOVED IT! It was probally the best movie that I've ever seen.
And The Truman Show does make you wonder why you are here, and if your
whole world was fake. I don't know what I would do if I discovered that my
entire life was just an "act", and everyone that I loved, and cared for was
just acting like they loved me. I would probally end my life.
I felt that this movie was really good, but kinda sad. Because Truman
discovered that his entire universe was fake, and all an act.
The only thing that I didn't like about this movie was the ending. I mean
it was a good ending, and it lets you use your imagination at the end. But
in a way I didn't like it, I wanted to see how Truman would react to the
creator of the show, and if he would fall in love with the other lady (whom
I believe remains nameless).
I give this film an eleven out of ten. I recommend everyone to go see it.
Thanks,
Brad Toy
http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/9808
[ To quit the movies mailing list, send the message "unsubscribe movies" ]
[ (without the quotes) to majordomo@xmission.com ]
