ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/movies/archive/v02.n299

Internet Message Format | 2000-10-15 | 52KB

From: [e-mail] (movies-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: movies-digest V2 #299
Reply-To: movies-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


movies-digest         Monday, October 16 2000         Volume 02 : Number 299



FW: [MV] Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:55:29 -0400
FW: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
RE: FW: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
[MV] Remakes !
[MV] Slicin' and dicin' "Final destination" - 2000
Re: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films
[MV] Ladies Man
[MV] Ladies Man
[MV] Oldman claims "Contender" was butchered
Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Re: [MV] Ladies Man
Re: [MV] Ladies Man

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

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

> -----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]          ]

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

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

> -----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]          ]

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

Date: 11 Oct 00 13:53:16 +0100
From: RICHARD BENJAMIN <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: FW: [MV] Blair Witch Project & Good horror films

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]          ]

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

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

***** 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]          ]

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

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

** 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]          ]

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

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

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]          ]

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

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

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]          ]

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

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

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]          ]

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

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

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]          ]

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

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

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]          ]

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

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

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]          ]

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

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

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]          ]

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

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

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]          ]

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

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

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]          ]

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

End of movies-digest V2 #299
****************************

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