ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/movies/archive/v02.n302

Internet Message Format | 2000-11-03 | 51KB

From: [e-mail] (movies-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: movies-digest V2 #302
Reply-To: movies-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


movies-digest        Saturday, November 4 2000        Volume 02 : Number 302



[MV] Piranha - 1995, Those cheesy horror films !
[MV] RE: Piranha - 1995
[MV] Trevolting (Warning : Contains Offensive language !!)
Re: [MV] Trevolting (Warning : Contains Offensive language !!)
Re: [MV] cheesy horror films !
Re: [MV] cheesy horror films !
Re: [MV] cheesy horror films !
[none]
[MV] RE: Blair Witch Project
[MV] Re:Content, Quality and Hollywood (long)
Re: [MV] Re:Content, Quality and Hollywood (long)
[MV] book vs. movie
Re: [MV] book vs. movie
RE: [MV] book vs. movie
[MV] Western films
[MV] RE: Western films
Re: [MV] Re:Content, Quality and Hollywood (long)
[MV] 2001 : A space odyssey - 1968 - 3.5/5
Re: [MV] Re:Content, Quality and Hollywood (long)
Re: [MV] book vs. movie
[MV] Movies I've seen lately/short reviews/random thoughts
[MV] The 4th Floor - 1998
[MV] Barton Fink - Review
[MV] Emotional movies ...

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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 17:21:53 EST
From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Piranha - 1995, Those cheesy horror films !

Hi !

It's Halloween time so here is a lil' review of a B.H.F. (Bad Horror Film)
that can still be entertaining if you gather a group of mates and buy a few
beers along with the usual chips and dips !!  (Making fun of those cheesy
horror films is CRUCIAL of course because if you take them seriously you
can't possibly enjoy them !!)

I give the film only a 1.5/5 (Mind you I was watching
it sober !) but under the influence of a few PINTS of delicious imported
U.K. beer my rating would certainly go up !! ;o)  I was sorry actually
because in "The guide" it said ... "Piranha - 1978" ... so I was expecting
the cult film to be presented ... but no, it was the goofy 1995 remake
instead !

The plot is ludicrous of course and involves a MAD SCIENTIST who was
breeding nearly invincible piranha fishes able to live in extreme conditions
(Of course they are about 5 times bigger than the ordinary south american
ones !).  She was doing that for some kind of bizarre US government plan to
"get those Russians" ... good idea !! hehe !

When the cold war ended the government tried to destroy the poor lil'
creatures so the mad scientist ... well ... you know how it goes !!

It won't be a huge surprise when those deadly piranha fishes with razor
sharp teeth are **accidentally** released into a river and start killing
people (The twist here is they make a funny sound when they attack, kind of
cool !)  Also they seem to be STIFF AS BOARDS when we see them underwater
... I guess that's because they were made of WOOD ... oops !

The film even borrows material from other more quality films like JAWS for
example with scenes very similar, only the threat is not a shark but stiff
piranha fishes of course ...

There's even a greedy resort owner that doesn't want
to close the beach despite obvious signs of danger, an investigator
(Alexandra Paul from Baywatch !) trying to take the matters into her own
hands aided by a hunky mountain man whose daughter just happens to be in
grave danger at the resort, of course he calls the investigator "honey" by
the end of the film, big surprise !

The acting is pretty awful by everyone but who could "shine" reciting lousy
lines of dialogue like that.
I'm even surprised they kept a straight face all this time !  It was so bad
it actually became funny !

The only actress I thought was actually ok was the former child star
Soleil-Moon Frye (now retired from acting but she had to be desperate to
appear in such a low budget horror film !) who was playing Punky Brewster on
Tv about 15-16 years ago ... she is all grown up here and rather curveous as
well !!

She's a lovely young woman working in a summer camp near the "deadly" river
... She could still pass easily for a teenager even if she was almost 20
when she made this film (She is sitting around with girls around 12-13 years
old and is not so much taller than them, "petite" is the word ! At least she
was doing a pretty decent job considering the material she was working with
!)

The cinematography is awful and often it is hard to tell what is going on,
lousy underwater camera work during the attacks and above the water it is
not really better anyway ...

The director doesn't even attempt to show us the usual gory stuff, always
coping out and showing the faces of the witnesses instead of someone's
severed legs for example ... (At one point a man has both of his legs bitten
off by hundreds of piranha fishes and we don't even get to see the bloody
stumps ... frustrating !!)

Also some bizarre scenes, like the little 5 feet tall Solei-Moon Frye in the
bottom right corner of the screen talking to someone so tall that the head
of that person is in the top left corner almost out of the frame, and it
lasts quite a long time ... It was bizarre and I was laughing out loud !!
Why shoot them in extreme close-ups like that anyway if there is such a
height difference ??

So overall this was a pretty bad horror film but as I said under the "right"
circumstances it might work as a "comedy" ... guilty pleasure type of film !

1.5/5, even if it was really a bad film I can't go lower than that because
at least I was "entertained" ... it
was simply very stoopid, not boring !

Marc     ;o)

- ------------------------------------------------------
" Yes - officer - thank God. My name is Paul Hackett -
I'm in Soho - I don't know the exact location - I'm
being persecuted by a vigilante mob - I'm sure you
are aware of their actions - My life is in serious,
serious danger right now ..."

Griffin Dunne as "Paul Hackett"
"After hours" - 1985
- -----------------------------------------------------










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

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


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

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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:29:00 -0700
From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Piranha - 1995

Hey Marc...

I have nothing to add to your review, as I haven't seen this classic film (nor
the original 1978 version).  However, I have a recommendation for you: PIRANHA
2.  I haven't seen the film, but you might want to check it out as it's the
directorial debut of one James "King of the World" Cameron.  I think the fish
fly around in this one as well.

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

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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 22:51:34 EST
From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Trevolting (Warning : Contains Offensive language !!)

*****  Warning ... offensive language below !!  Uh oh !

Rolando ... why would you say such nasty things about John Travolta ??

I can understand you not liking him or his last two films (Battlefield Earth
& Lucky numbers) but your comments seem a bit extreme ...

There are maybe a half dozen actors I really hate ... example : Brendan
Fraser in the new "Bedazzled" ...
but I wouldn't say anything so harsh about him even if
I HATED all of the films I have seen where he was in the cast ...

Have a fine day anyway !

Marc  ;o)

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

Anyone catch the Charlie Rose segment with Travolta hyping his latest dud?
What an ego-fucking-maniac!  He talked about how Hanks got the role in THE
GREEN MILE after he turned it down and how A-list actors like him and Hanks
have the luxury of nabbing the best roles.  Wonder how the fucking bastard
feels now after the unlucky numbers of his last two films.
Rolando

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

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


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

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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 23:45:47 -0600
From: Diane Christy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Trevolting (Warning : Contains Offensive language !!)

At 10:51 PM -0500 10/30/00, Marc Desbiens wrote:
>There are maybe a half dozen actors I really hate ... example :
>Brendan Fraser in the new "Bedazzled" ...
>but I wouldn't say anything so harsh about him even if
>I HATED all of the films I have seen where he was in the cast ...

I thought he was very good in "Gods and Monsters."
- --
~~~~~
Diane Christy (Samantha and Joshua's Mom)
Jefferson, LA
http://www.geocities.com/diane507/
mailto:[e-mail]
ICQ #12904700  <dchristy10> on Instant AOL Messenger
~~~~~

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

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

Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 22:21:44 -0800
From: "David F. Nolan" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] cheesy horror films !

My all-time favorite cheesy horror film is "The Killer Shrews," an
unbelievably bad movie from 1959 that voters on the Internet Movie Data Base
actually rate lower than "Plan 9 From Outer Space."  This movie is SOOOOO
bad that you just sit there shaking your head in disbelief.  It chronicles
the exploits of a half-dozen hopeless feebs and drunks trapped on an island,
in a storm, while surrounded  by "giant mutant killer shrews" (actually,
dogs dressed up in shag carpet and mop-wigs).  The budget was apparently so
minuscule that they weren't gonna reshoot a scene no matter WHAT... which
led to such great lines as the female lead saying to one of the other actors
"Aren't you wondering about my strange accent?"   No matter how bad you
might think this movie is, it's actually worse. Really.  A "must see" for
connoisseurs of truly crappy movies!


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

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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 02:33:08 -0500
From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] cheesy horror films !

At 10.21 PM 30/10/2000 -0800, David F. Nolan wrote:
>My all-time favorite cheesy horror film is "The Killer Shrews," an
>unbelievably bad movie from 1959 that voters on the Internet Movie Data Base
>actually rate lower than "Plan 9 From Outer Space."
<SNIP>
>No matter how bad you
>might think this movie is, it's actually worse. Really.  A "must see" for
>connoisseurs of truly crappy movies!

I humbly present:

Manos, the Hands of Fate.

Don't even bother unless you get the MST3K version.  Otherwise, it will
simply be too painful:-)

Regards,

- --Mel


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

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


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

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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 08:59:24 -0800
From: FlickPicks <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] cheesy horror films !

on 10/30/00 11:33 PM, Mel Eperthener at [e-mail] wrote:

> I humbly present:
>
> Manos, the Hands of Fate.
>
> Don't even bother unless you get the MST3K version.  Otherwise, it will
> simply be too painful:-)

Well, I've heard that "Manos" is the worst movie ever -- THE bottom-rated
movie on IMDB, out of about 200,000 listed -- but from the comments there,
it doesn't sound like anything I'd want to watch.  The concept of taking bad
movies and trying to make them "funny" by adding comments (a la Elvira,
Mystery Science Theatre 3000, etc.) only goes so far, and apparently not
quite far enough in the case of "Manos."   I mean, there's intentionally
funny (IF),  unintentionally funny (UF), and just godawful bad GB).

IF movies include "A Bucket of Blood" and "Little Shop of Horrors" (the
original version). OK, maybe they're not all THAT funny, but Roger Corman's
intent was humorous. (BTW: Didja know that these two movies were filmed
back-to-back, on the same sets, with some of the same actors?)

Movies like "Killer Shrews" and "Horror of Party Beach" are UF.  I don't
think the people who made them were intending to make humorous movies, but
they (sorta) came out that way. And wry commentary can enhance that humor.

Not having seen it, I can't say for sure, but I'll bet that "Manos" is just
GB ... like "The Giant Spider Invasion."

I know, it's all relative, but when I'm in the mood for cheese, I'll stick
to the first two categories.

Anyone else got any nominees?


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

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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 14:45:30 EST
From: "Brett Buckley" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [none]

Hey everyone. Seems kind of tense today with the argument of what makes up a
good movie... sex, violence, marketing vs. high quality content. hmmmm.
wondering what you thought of American History X. Have to say I enjoyed it a
great deal. Very entertaining as well as something to think about. Was a
little generic at the end. Thought Edward Norton was incredible, which is
pretty standard for him I guess.

Unrelated ssubject... In an attempt to jump in the Blair Witch discussion, I
would have to agree that the whole thing left a lot to be desired. I didn't
think it was scary at all. And the plot was so flimsy. I know I'm talking
coulda-shoulda-woulda but seriously, what kind of moron goes into completely
unfamiliar woods w/ no compass? And if they had walked a little more and
argued a little less they would have been fine. I guess that really has
little to do with the concept of the movie but on the whole I found it to be
written, acted and expressed very poorly. The concept was good in theory but
didn't pan out. just my personal opinion...

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

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


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

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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:01:00 -0700
From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Blair Witch Project

> what kind of moron goes into completely
> unfamiliar woods w/ no compass?

They did have a compass.  But it did no good.  Remember, they walked due south
all day long and then found themselves back where they started?

> And if they had walked a little more and
> argued a little less they would have been fine.

See above.  It was obvious that they walked most of the time during the day.
Even if they had spent an additional few minutes and kept moving, it would
have made no difference.

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

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

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:39:05 -0800
From: Dexter Sy <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Re:Content, Quality and Hollywood (long)

Brett Buckley wrote:

> Hey everyone. Seems kind of tense today with the argument of what makes up a
> good movie... sex, violence, marketing vs. high quality content.

Actually, the debate on what constitutes a good movie has been an on-going one
with various sets of participants depending on which type of movies are being
discussed.  IÆd be upfront with you and say I generally come down on the
populist side of things, because of my political and social views, I tend to put
more faith in the people than most other critics would like to.

That said, IÆve had some time to reflect on this whole issue and I think it
really comes down to what your focus is, both are right.   Those who see film as
art, find it absolutely revolting to see what they consider to be crap,
especially crap from Hollywood, succeed at the box office.  On the other side,
there is dead silence (<<crickets chirping>>) Seriously though.  It should be
noted that the criticism is rather one sided, and almost all of it coming from
critics in favor of film as art and trashing Hollywood the way politicians in
the 1950s pointed to Russia, and the evil Soviet Empire for all of AmericaÆs
problems.  ItÆs a punching bag of sorts.  An undeclared rule that when in doubt,
always fall back on a scathing critique of Hollywood.

So what exactly is the criticism?  Usually, itÆs a leftist critique of the
hegemony the American film industry.  Of the worldÆs cultural markets as
HollywoodÆs stomping ground.   A lot of the concerns are genuine and should be
taken to heart.  These includes concerns that truly good films going unseen
(there is a lot of truth to this), local industries (like that of the French)
decimated by Hollywood despite generous government subsidies. Etc.

The key similarity across the board seems to be the general disdain for the idea
of hegemony.  Critics feels the oppressiveness of the dominant form have to be
counterbalanced by other differing forms. In short, they feel equal time should
be given to other points of views, something I agree with.   But others, more
radical, advocate nothing but the destruction of Hollywood, and its cultural
Imperialism altogether.  But I question that thought on several levels.
Historically speaking, there is a pattern that the most homogeneous/Dominant
works of the period, the stories that attracted populist audiences, whether it
be the Greek Tragedies that established the art of theatre, or ShakespeareÆs
plays, werenÆt revered in their times as works of art, or pinnacles of human
creation, but treated as rather mundane entertainment.  ShakespeareÆs plays for
example went unpublished and unread until after his death, when his friends
collected bits and pieces of his play and published them in a collection of his
work.  One of the greatest Greek plays, HomerÆs Odyssey, emerged from Greece as
a mystery.  It had been performed by actors for centuries in the Greek Empire
and entertained countless of illiterate populations, but no one thought anything
of it and little information about the originator of the story itself was saved
for future generations.  The result is that there is an incredible amount of
debate in Academic circles as to the true identity of Homer.  Was he perhaps
several people who contributed to the final story, was Homer actually a woman?
No one knows for sure.

Where IÆm getting at here is that perhaps in a thousand years, the basic themes
of Hollywood films would be looked up with reverence.  Star Wars as literature?
Not unlikely.  Sure, some of you may make choking sounds now, but ask an
Englishman in 16th century England whether MacBeth, Richard the III or Titus
will be remembered in 400 years and he would probably look at you funny and go
on his business.  Theatre after all was seen as a dirty immoral business during
those days. The puritans in England even tried, and succeed for a while, to shut
them down.  And let me remind you that ShakespeareÆs dominance of contemporary
theatre and literature wouldnÆt be so complete if England and its so-called
British Empire didnÆt have the economic, political, CULTURAL, and diplomatic
might to spread its culture into its colonies.  Therefore, I find criticisms of
the dominance of American films utterly self-serving. If the French had control,
would they cede it to the Americans or the English? The Japanese? Or any number
of its critics? Not bloody likely.

There is also the issue of relativism.  Yes, I know. Hollywood themes of the
small guy winning over the evil empire has been told countless times, and the
love stories the populist love so much has been told with equal frequency.   I
wonder sometimes, if we had lived in a different world, where the big guy always
wins, and love affairs end in disaster, and these types of films are the
dominant forms, would the segments of the population then break off and start
criticizing these films for being overly pessimistic? And point to HollywoodÆs
optimistic films as the fresh idea that the masses should accept?

One thing critics always conveniently sidestep is that the population, and often
times the populations of their own country in which they so fervently defends,
are voted en masse for Hollywood films.  Why is that?  IsnÆt Italian
Neo-realist, or French Realist cinema far more interesting and captivating?  The
easy explanation is that the population are dumb, they are easily swayed and
they will find whatever is on the theatres.  The French tried to attack this
problem directly by forcing French films directly on to Multiplexes nationwide
last summer.  This was to be the opening shots of their war against Hollywood,
the summer when Hollywood is given a trouncing.   But before the summer was
over, Hollywood won without a scratch.  Despite generous government subsidies
and aggressive marketing, the battlefield was left with so many corpses of
failed French films that I really believe the problem is far more complex than
the simple explanation given.

Without doing a Psychological study, my hypothesis is that quite simply,
Hollywood has struck a winning formula. The optimistic and the ideologically
simplistic film.  People like to be happy, but above all, they like to be
entertained. Cinema after all is an escape.  Yes, it has powers to excite
intellectually, but itÆs a form of entertainment, and people like to be
entertained most of the time, and when they feel like it, theyÆll take the
occasional, deep, intellectual film as kind of an exercise after a long summer
at the beach relaxing.   The eternally optimistic state of American cinema
reflects America itself.  What excites people today will likely excite people in
the future, and that said, barring a total destruction of film archives,
bookstores and video stores in the future, the legacy of American cinema will
influence the next generations to come.


- --
Dexter S.
Tendo Box - Nintendo e-zine
Http://www.tendobox.com



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

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

Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 02:33:20 -0500
From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Re:Content, Quality and Hollywood (long)

Just a couple of points:

At 09.39 PM 31/10/2000 -0800, Dexter Sy wrote:
>Where IÆm getting at here is that perhaps in a thousand years, the basic
themes
>of Hollywood films would be looked up with reverence.  Star Wars as
literature?
>Not unlikely.  Sure, some of you may make choking sounds now, but ask an
>Englishman in 16th century England whether MacBeth, Richard the III or Titus
>will be remembered in 400 years and he would probably look at you funny
and go
>on his business.

Star Wars is our literature.  This is why there is such a sub-culture
around it.  Will it survive in 400 years??  It might actually be too
popular for that, but I would still put my money on it.

As for Shakespeare, you have no idea how right you are.  The Bard was the
Arron Spelling of his day.   His plays were the soap operas of the 17th
Century.  They were not considered overly great, and pushed the same limits
that are being pushed against today.  (I am actually in the middle of a
discussion on a Rugby League board, of all things, about the decline of
culture).  Hell, even Citizen Kane and Casablanca (arguably two of the
greatest movies ever made) - even the Christmas classic It's A Wonderful
Life, for that matter - were NOT at all successful at the time.  They grew
into the roles they have today.

Therefore, I find criticisms of
>the dominance of American films utterly self-serving. If the French had
control,
>would they cede it to the Americans or the English? The Japanese? Or any
number
>of its critics? Not bloody likely.

The thing to consider is, if a "foreign" film makes it to these Fatal
Shores, it has gone thru a lot.  It is a given that a French or Italian or
even Chinese film that finds an audience here is the best of the bunch.  We
are seeing the American Beauties and Wonder Boys of the foreign cultures,
so they have an unfair advantage.  It's not like we get the French version
of Ernst Goes to School or (God forbit) Manos, Hands of Fate.  So, foreign
films have a rightful reason to feel superior to the general releases from
Hollywood.  However, this is apples and oranges.  A fair comparison would
be All About My Mother and Saving Private Ryan.  Not All About My Mother
and Blair Witch 2.

For someone like me to say that Hollywood has established a right to it's
reputation as King of the World, you know the arugment must be strong:-)

Regards,

- --Mel


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

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


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

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

Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:11:56 -0600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: [MV] book vs. movie

With the fall season in full force here in the Midwest I'm spending more
time at the library. I've put a hold on High Fidelity and I'm anxious to
read it. The movie was  pretty good but I've heard better things about the
book. I won't usually buy a book that was adapted into a movie if the front
cover looks like a movie poster, something about that turns me off.
Other books that made good movies.
Grapes of Wrath..(something left off the ending)
Sophie's Choice.
Anyone else recommend any?
Has anyone read Requiem for a Dream?
Julie



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

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

Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:37:58 -0500
From: Diane Christy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] book vs. movie

At 9:11 AM -0600 11/1/00, [e-mail] wrote:
>Grapes of Wrath..(something left off the ending)

I read this too.  The ending was the most amazing ending I've ever
read and really captured the state that these people were in.  It's a
shame that it was left out of the movie, although looking at when the
movie was made I don't see how they could have included it.
- --
~~~~~
Diane Christy (Samantha and Joshua's Mom)
Jefferson, LA
http://www.geocities.com/diane507/
mailto:[e-mail]
ICQ #12904700  <dchristy10> on Instant AOL Messenger
~~~~~

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

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

Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 08:07:41 -0800
From: "Martin, Jacqueline A" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [MV] book vs. movie

LA Confidential, which, had it been adapted verbatim from the book, would
have been a 10 hour  movie. All the good plots were kept, and the ones that
seemed to go off on some tangent (Exley's father and brother plot, or Jack
Vincennes marriage), were excised and the film is much tighter and fun.

Jackie

- -----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail]
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of
[e-mail]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 7:12 AM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: [MV] book vs. movie


With the fall season in full force here in the Midwest I'm spending more
time at the library. I've put a hold on High Fidelity and I'm anxious to
read it. The movie was  pretty good but I've heard better things about the
book. I won't usually buy a book that was adapted into a movie if the front
cover looks like a movie poster, something about that turns me off.
Other books that made good movies.
Grapes of Wrath..(something left off the ending)
Sophie's Choice.
Anyone else recommend any?
Has anyone read Requiem for a Dream?
Julie



[ 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]          ]

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

Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 17:19:06 +0000
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?El=EDn=20Kristbj=F6rg=20Gu=F0brandsd=F3ttir?=  <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Western films

Hi everybody.

I=B4m looking for information about if  John Wayne and John Ford ever
acted together in the same Western film. I=B4m a great fan of Westerns.

With best regards from Iceland
El=EDn Kristbj=F6rg Gu=F0brandsd=F3ttir


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

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

Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:31:00 -0700
From: ("Paul D  Richardson") <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] RE: Western films

> I=B4m looking for information about if  John Wayne and John Ford ever
> acted together in the same Western film. I=B4m a great fan of Westerns.

As far as I know, John Ford only worked as a director.  He did direct Joh=
n
Wayne in countless westerns, however.  My personal favorites are THE SEAR=
CHERS
and THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE.

For more information, check the Internet Movie Database at
http://www.imdb.com.  It will allow you to do a search using both John Fo=
rd
and John Wayne for a complete list of all films they did together, as wel=
l as
complete filmographies of both men.

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

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

Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 14:48:12 -0500
From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Re:Content, Quality and Hollywood (long)

At 02.33 AM 01/11/2000 -0500, I mistakenly wrote:
>Just a couple of points:
>
>At 09.39 PM 31/10/2000 -0800, Dexter Sy wrote:
>>Where IÆm getting at here is that perhaps in a thousand years, the basic
>themes
>>of Hollywood films would be looked up with reverence.  Star Wars as
>literature?
<SNIP>
>Star Wars is our literature.  This is why there is such a sub-culture
>around it.  Will it survive in 400 years??  It might actually be too
>popular for that, but I would still put my money on it.

Actually, what I meant to say is Star Wars is out mythology.  I think that
argument is much stronger.

Sorry for any confusion.  That's what I get for posting so late at night.

Regards,

- --Mel


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

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


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

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

Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 17:05:22 EST
From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] 2001 : A space odyssey - 1968 - 3.5/5

Ok, I was in the mood to watch this classic Stanley Kubrick film again ...

I had seen it only once like 8-9 years ago probably and at that time I
wasn't too impressed thinking it was slow and the ending too perplexing, but
this is the kind of film that you appreciate more as you get "older" perhaps
(not necessarely WISER though ... hehe !)

I still think it is a bit slow and perplexing today but now I can see what a
huge film this must have been in 1968 when it was released, certainly ground
breaking material right there ... impressive visuals, music, acting, sets,
special effects ... On a movie theater's big screen it must have been
something else ! (Although I read that when it was released in 1968 quite a
few people were walking out saying they didn't understand it ... frustrated
!!)

This is a movie that makes you think a lot afterwards which is great of
course !  Certainly well made and a lot of attention in the tiny details
along the way (Something I really appreciated this time around !)  I even
liked the last part with the "Star child" and the fancy and colorful
graphics as well something that had irritated me the first time around if I
recall ...  ;o)

I also was more impressed with the beginning of the film in prehistoric
times as well as when the astronauts are dealing with that supercomputer
that wants to run the show, the numerous special effects shots are really
great considering when they were made especially.

I still think it is over rated as a lot of people are saying it is one of
the best films of all times, etc.  but I had a very good time watching it
just now.  I was especially pleased because I didn't expect it to be that
good considering I was remembering it as being an average film from the last
time I saw it ...

The film simply feels too long for its own good ... I am not asking for an
action packed space adventure like Star Wars or Star Trek 2 (WRATH OF KHAN,
of course !) but I felt it was dragging a bit here and there often (even if
it looked REALLY nice !), still very good overall and maybe when I watch it
again in 10 years I'll go as high as 4/5.

3.5/5 for now.

Marc     ;o)

- ------------------------------------------------------
" Yes - officer - thank God. My name is Paul Hackett -
I'm in Soho - I don't know the exact location - I'm
being persecuted by a vigilante mob - I'm sure you
are aware of their actions - My life is in serious,
serious danger right now ..."

Griffin Dunne as "Paul Hackett"
"After hours" - 1985
- -----------------------------------------------------










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

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


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

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

Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 18:52:25 -0800
From: Dexter Sy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] Re:Content, Quality and Hollywood (long)

> Actually, what I meant to say is Star Wars is out mythology.  I think that
> argument is much stronger.
>
> Sorry for any confusion.  That's what I get for posting so late at night.

Hehe, No problem Mel.

With hindsight, it's probably a little too early to put a tag on Star Wars. I
personaly think literature is more fitting, but I know Mythology is often
attached to the films (have you seen Bill Moyer's special on PBS titled The
Mythology of Star Wars?)  but in the future, I'm pretty sure academics will
look at Star Wars not only as a peice of American cinema, but the window into
Pax Americana itself.
 The themes in Star Wars has so engrained itself in American political thought
that Star Wars already carries the double meaning of the missile defense
program and the movie itself.  The Evil Empire, popularized by Raegan's
referring to the Soviet Union, has been used by various causes as a stamp for
their opponents.  The leftist band, Rage Against the Machine, for example, had
a CD out called the " The Evil Empire" referring to the greed of corporate
America.

On another level, you could sort of read it as a window into the minds of the
citizens. The United States stands as the greatest Rupublic in history, and if
you look at Star Wars, you see a story pre-occupied with the re-enactment of
its birth.  Much like the Roman legend surrounding Romulus' murdering his
brother Remus and the founding of Rome. Evil Empire, as the British Empire?
The ragtag rebels as the American revolutionaries?  Lucas may not have intended
it that way but no one can claim that reading is a false one.

Many of its characters have also become metaphoric.  Various heads of state
have been cast in the role of  Darth Vader, which has become a metaphor for
Evil.  In fact, during the NATO bombings on Yugoslavia, state television
portrayed NATO as the Evil Empire  in their broadcasts, complete with Vader's
Imperial March as the soundtrack.    I think what makes Star Wars so versatile
and so easy to assimilate into the American Psyche is because it's themes has a
synergy that simply binded itself into the culture.  The film's black and white
reading of good and evil, long criticized as the core weakness of the film is
actually a representation of American politicial and social thought.  America
and its citizens, because its democracy is rooted very deeply in competition
between opposing factions, has always seen the world in largely those terms and
this transcends politicians into its citizens.  Civial rights groups villianize
the conservatives, gun owners spew hatred at the American government,
Environmentalists hate just about everybody.  Star Wars merely borrowed
American though for a galaxy far far away.





>
>
> Regards,
>
> --Mel

- --
Dexter S.
Tendo Box - Nintendo e-zine
Http://www.tendobox.com



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

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

Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 19:38:29 -0500
From: Mel Eperthener <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [MV] book vs. movie

At 09.11 AM 01/11/2000 -0600, [e-mail] wrote:
>I won't usually buy a book that was adapted into a movie if the front
>cover looks like a movie poster, something about that turns me off.

I know what you mean.  I actually looked far and wide to find a first
edition of the book listed below, simply so that I would not have the
actors that played the characters staring at me.

>Anyone else recommend any?

The Wonder Boys by Michael Chabon.  And the movie is supposed to be really
good, too.  Talking Oscar nominations here, and everything.  Also, it was
filmed right in this area.

Regards,

- --Mel


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

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


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

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

Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 13:12:10 -0600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: [MV] Movies I've seen lately/short reviews/random thoughts

WARNING/ I'm not a professional movie critic!

Snow Falling on Cedars-
A love story set in Washington state during the Japanese concentration camp
situation in the 40's. A  murder trial is in progress but the movie also
flashes back to a first-love relationship between a Japanese girl and a
Caucasian boy..Ethan Hawke. Fantastic scenery and the music is great but
twice in this movie irritating narration dialogue like a record
skipping...annoying. Good solid story and not a predictable happy ending.
B-

Amadeus-
What can I say! A wonderful experience. I had seen this movie many years
before but had forgotten how fantastic it is. It isn't a true story but
based on some parts of Mozart's life. I'm at loss for words here, so moving!
A

The Game-
I wanted to like this movie and I can't say I didn't, but like Marc ..eyes
were rolling back in many scenes. Michael Douglas and Sean Penn, would have
liked to see more Sean! The story is solid at first, a gift for a man who
has everything, a life game tailored for his personality. As you can expect
from the start things will go terribly wrong for this man. I thought halfway
through that I might have to ditch this one but I gave it a chance and the
ending was worth the agony I felt during some of it. C

The Tango-
Filmed in Argentina and in Spanish with subtitles. The story is a bit hard
to understand but if you love to watch the tango then it's worth a look.  B+




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

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

Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 23:27:56 EST
From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] The 4th Floor - 1998

****** Adding comments to yours, Sara.  .. with stars in front as usual.
Marc    ;o)

Has anyone seen The Fourth Floor (AKA, the 4th floor), with Juliette Lewis?

***** Yes, I have seen it, good film !  3/5 ... I was thinking 3.5/5 in part
but I don't like the last third so much so I have to penalize the film a
little ...

I thought it was pretty decent.

***** It was better than I expected actually, considering it was a low
budget thriller I had never heard of before ... direct-to-video film ...
etc.  It reminded me of "Pacific Heights" sometimes, the movie with Melanie
Griffith and Michael Keaton as the bad guy !

It's about a young woman who doesn't want
to move into her much older boyfriend's house with him, so she decides to
move into her deceased aunt's old apartment, because the aunt left it to her
dirt cheap.

So, against her boyfriend's wishes she moves in, and gets to meet a few of
her very strange neighbors, and after a while very strange things begin to
happen to her.  The neighbor below her, the only one she didn't get to meet,
a liitle old lady supposedly, starts to leave her very strange notes warning
her to keep quiet, but she doesn't and very bad things begin to happen to
her, and the apartment.  Infestations, slippery stairs, banging late at
night, and so on.

***** Yes, I loved it how the lil' ol' lady was banging on the ceiling so
hard when Juliette was just making a lil' bit of noise ... Incredible
behavior ! It was wild and scary ... too bad the last part of the film is
not as good and scary though ...

Not an Academy Award winner, but entertaining.  I found myself waiting to
see what this weird neighbor was going to do to the girl next.  Sara

***** I recommend it too especially if you like Juliette Lewis !   Marc
;o)

- -----------------------------------------------------
" I met this six-year-old child, with this blind,
pale, emotionless face and the blackest eyes ...
the DEVIL'S EYES ! I spent eight years trying to
reach him, and then another seven trying to keep
him locked up for I realized what was living behind
that boy's eyes was purely and simply ... EVIL ! "

Donald Pleasance as "Dr. Sam Loomis"
"Halloween" - 1978
- -----------------------------------------------------











_________________________________________________________________________
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, 04 Nov 2000 01:42:59 EST
From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Barton Fink - Review

***** Excellent review, Xingix (Iceman) !  I added comments below with stars
in front ... ******* Marc   ;o)

Barton Fink, starring John Turturro and John Goodman was on cable
last weekend as I was channel surfing with utter boredom. I decided
what the hey since Steve Buscemi plays a small cameo role as the
hotel's bellboy.

***** Yes, I have seen this film on numerous occasions as well, in fact I
own it !  Buscemi's role is really a memorable one, just love him in this
film !  That "CHET !"

Turturro plays a playwrite from New York who gets a
job in Los Angeles as a writer for the pictures.

***** You forgot the best part : He is a serious playwriter and now they
want him to write a silly "wrestling picture" ... hehe !  ;o)

Set in 1941, Barton
Fink moves a little slow at times, often with the viewer questionning
his/her real motive for sitting through the entire flick.

***** I didn't think that at all myself, I was entertained throughout !
Lots of interesting visuals in this film, amusing details like the wallpaper
in Turturro hotel room that doesn't seem to stick properly to the wall !
Plus John Goodman is hilarious as the bizarre neighbour!

Well, the
real excitement starts about three quarters through and from then on
you wonder how Turturro is going to get out of his pickle.

***** Yes, I do agree Turturro is in quite a mess and he slowly but surely
is getting deeper and deeper into trouble.  You feel for the guy who wants
to do his best but is having such a hard time !

Directed
by Ethon & Joel Coen of Fargo and Big Lebowski fame, Fink has a lot
going for it.

***** I like this film a lot but a few of the other Coen brothers films are
even better in my opinion .. I mainly have issues with the ending of Barton
Fink, when it goes into a completely wild mode near the end !  Fargo 5/5,
Raising Arizona : 4/5 ... The big Lebowski : 3.5/5 ("You want me to get you
a toe, man ??") etc.

Each actor has incredible character development,
especially Turturro, who appears to be neurotic and paranoid but
actually a sensitive and all around good guy just trying to make
an 'honest' living. Go out and rent this movie, worthwhile script 'n'
all. Barton Fink deserves my 10 because there is nothing wrong with
the script in my opinion and the story is completely original. Don't
forget, Steve Buscemi is in it!
Rating: 10/10  <--- very rare for my taste! Iceman

****** Yes, This film is worth seeing ... I passed on it for a few years but
when I finally saw it I was pleasantly surprised ... certainly worth seeing
... my rating is not as high as yours though ... 3.5/5  (7/10) ... still is
a very good film of course !

Marc     ;o)

- -----------------------------------------------------
" I met this six-year-old child, with this blind,
pale, emotionless face and the blackest eyes ...
the DEVIL'S EYES ! I spent eight years trying to
reach him, and then another seven trying to keep
him locked up for I realized what was living behind
that boy's eyes was purely and simply ... EVIL ! "

Donald Pleasance as "Dr. Sam Loomis"
"Halloween" - 1978
- -----------------------------------------------------











_________________________________________________________________________
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, 04 Nov 2000 18:29:16 EST
From: "Marc Desbiens" <[e-mail]>
Subject: [MV] Emotional movies ...

Ok, I'd like to know what movies touch you in a very special way ... maybe
even to the point of crying when you watch them ... I'll list my selections
below ...

I just watched Titanic (1997) again and I have to say this is my #1 choice
... I am close to crying 4 or 5 times during that movie (don't laugh !) ...
it just gets to me, especially near the end of course when they are all
dying in the icy water, but also the very last shot of the movie when we see
everyone on the boat and they are applauding ... oh man ... I was almost a
"snivelling" mess ... (Not a pretty sight !)   I didn't cry but I was
surprised how hard this film hits me, even if it was the third time I've
seen it ... I guess this is the sign of a powerful film.

My list, random order except for Titanic that is my #1 as I said ...

- - Titanic  (1997)

- - Leaving Las Vegas - 1995
- - Schindler's list - 1993
- - Dead man walking - 1995
- - One flew over the cuckoo's nest - 1975
- - The celebration - 1998

- - Apollo 13 - 1995
- - Rosetta - 1999
- - Braveheart - 1995
- - Breaking the waves - 1996
- - Boys don't cry - 1999

- - The sweet hereafter - 1997
- - This boy's life - 1993
- - Scent of a woman - 1992
- - The last detail - 1973
- - Angela's ashes - 1999

- - Midnight express - 1978
- - Awakenings - 1990
- - The bridges of Madison county - 1995
- - Alive - 1993
- - In the name of the father - 1993

- - Sophie's choice - 1982
- - Forrest gump - 1994
- - The war zone - 1999

snif !   :o*(

Have a fine day !

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

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


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

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

End of movies-digest V2 #302
****************************

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