<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.blogger.com/styles/atom.css" type="text/css"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films</id>
  <title type="text">rec.arts.movies.past-films Google Group</title>
  <subtitle type="text">
  Past movies.
  </subtitle>
  <link href="/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/feed/atom_v1_0_msgs.xml" rel="self" title="rec.arts.movies.past-films feed"/>
  <updated>2010-01-07T13:25:02Z</updated>
  <generator uri="http://groups.google.com" version="1.99">Google Groups</generator>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Stephen Cooke</name>
  <email>am...@chebucto.ns.ca</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T13:25:02Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/d52b6fc851c1c4df/d5cfc85eeb4cf6fe?show_docid=d5cfc85eeb4cf6fe</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/d52b6fc851c1c4df/d5cfc85eeb4cf6fe?show_docid=d5cfc85eeb4cf6fe"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Great films they never finished</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  The film was finished, Harry Shearer got to see it and wrote an essay &lt;br&gt; about it. I don&#39;t have a link, but some appropriate Googling might turn it &lt;br&gt; up. &lt;br&gt; *s*
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Stephen Cooke</name>
  <email>am...@chebucto.ns.ca</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T13:22:30Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/820bb7a3d090e5a8/c9d8566475cf85e1?show_docid=c9d8566475cf85e1</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/820bb7a3d090e5a8/c9d8566475cf85e1?show_docid=c9d8566475cf85e1"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Good source for hard to find DVDs?</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Weird, even the old laserdisc (released as a double feature with Silent &lt;br&gt; Running) was released in a letterbox format with the original Panavision &lt;br&gt; aspect ratio. So it&#39;s not like they didn&#39;t have a widescreen transfer to &lt;br&gt; go with. Even a non-anamorphic transfer would be preferable to P&amp;amp;S. &lt;br&gt; *s*
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Taylor</name>
  <email>lukebenw...@gmail.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T12:35:46Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/9967c59811923315/294bda30bc1e3879?show_docid=294bda30bc1e3879</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/9967c59811923315/294bda30bc1e3879?show_docid=294bda30bc1e3879"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Netflix to delay renting Warner Bros. latest DVDs</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  On Jan 6, 8:29 pm, &amp;quot;Mr. Hole the Magnificent&amp;quot; &lt;br&gt; Are they trying to discourage people from RENTING (and I think this &lt;br&gt; *could* be extended to kiosk like Redbox, too) and make them want to &lt;br&gt; BUY (like at Walmart) first? &lt;br&gt; Sure you could just rent it from bigbox places like Blockbuster; &lt;br&gt; though Blockbuster is a falling star, not rising (Netflix IS the
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Ubiquitous</name>
  <email>web...@polaris.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T10:22:48Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/6dbc494ae0b0c167/8a362c6b93a58823?show_docid=8a362c6b93a58823</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/6dbc494ae0b0c167/8a362c6b93a58823?show_docid=8a362c6b93a58823"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Sean Penn returns to &#39;Three Stooges&#39; film?</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Ad hominem noted. Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Stephen Cooke</name>
  <email>am...@chebucto.ns.ca</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T12:24:43Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/1359e274f41afe21/98c69577feac6d27?show_docid=98c69577feac6d27</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/1359e274f41afe21/98c69577feac6d27?show_docid=98c69577feac6d27"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Best movie cars</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Barbara Bel Geddes&#39; Karman Ghia in Vertigo
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Taylor</name>
  <email>lukebenw...@gmail.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T12:23:36Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/429b01dd192bb421/d31124baebb08333?show_docid=d31124baebb08333</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/429b01dd192bb421/d31124baebb08333?show_docid=d31124baebb08333"/>
  <title type="text">Self-hating Jew? Natalie Portmant doesn&#39;t like to play Jewish women, girlfriends (how about the aging college fratboy look?)</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Natalie Portman Doesn&#39;t Like To Play Jewish Women, Girlfriends &lt;br&gt; First Posted: 01- 6-10 09:07 AM | Updated: 01- 6-10 01:53 PM &lt;br&gt; NTVLand (NTV Land) &lt;br&gt; Read More: Judaism, Natalie Portman, Natalie Portman Jewish, Natalie &lt;br&gt; Portman UK Elle, Religion, UK Elle, Entertainment News &lt;br&gt; Natalie Portman covers February&#39;s Elle UK, and in her interview she
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Mr. Hole the Magnificent</name>
  <email>classic.mr.h...@gmail.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T06:07:12Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/754a42ab9c6525e2/8dacca149f48a0aa?show_docid=8dacca149f48a0aa</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/754a42ab9c6525e2/8dacca149f48a0aa?show_docid=8dacca149f48a0aa"/>
  <title type="text">Re: Roger Ebert&#39;s Best Movies, 2000-2009</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  On Jan 6, 10:10 am, Dave U. Random &amp;lt;anonym...@anonymitaet-im- &lt;br&gt; As I said elsewhere that #1 is absurd.
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Francis A. Miniter</name>
  <email>famini...@comcast.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T04:58:31Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/a6df287211c1038b?show_docid=a6df287211c1038b</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/a6df287211c1038b?show_docid=a6df287211c1038b"/>
  <title type="text">Re: &quot;Blue Velvet&quot; (1986) On TCM Yesterday [Like &quot;I Spit on Your G...</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Then you did not read my first response on 1-5-10. &lt;br&gt; The X rating was replaced by the NC-17 rating in 1990. &lt;br&gt; &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=nofollow href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_of_America_film_rating_system&quot;&gt;[link]&lt;/a&gt; &lt;br&gt; The films I mentioned in my first post received either X &lt;br&gt; ratings or NC-17 ratings or none at all. &lt;br&gt; For a list of all films rated NC-17, see
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>tomcervo</name>
  <email>tomce...@aol.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T04:41:39Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/327369873bbfba36?show_docid=327369873bbfba36</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/327369873bbfba36?show_docid=327369873bbfba36"/>
  <title type="text">Re: &quot;Blue Velvet&quot; (1986) On TCM Yesterday [Like &quot;I Spit on Your G...</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  I can forgive anything that brings me Dean Stockwell&#39;s Ben.
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>william</name>
  <email>wlahe...@gmail.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T03:39:26Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/3ea50927e4cdcee6?show_docid=3ea50927e4cdcee6</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/3ea50927e4cdcee6?show_docid=3ea50927e4cdcee6"/>
  <title type="text">Re: &quot;Blue Velvet&quot; (1986) On TCM Yesterday [Like &quot;I Spit on Your G...</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  Ain&#39;t the first amendment grand? I&#39;m glad US filmmakers can finally -- &lt;br&gt; theoretically -- make films that are &amp;quot;adult&amp;quot; in nature. Having said &lt;br&gt; that, I think &amp;quot;Blue Velvet&amp;quot; is a fake and pretentious bucket of &lt;br&gt; middleclass delusions. In that film, the &amp;quot;evil&amp;quot; is as fake as the &lt;br&gt; &amp;quot;good.&amp;quot; It&#39;s junk but I&#39;ll defend David Lynch&#39;s right to spill his
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Old Movie Fan</name>
  <email>bigmovie...@webtv.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T03:27:33Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/bd884c703a66f5d8?show_docid=bd884c703a66f5d8</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/bd884c703a66f5d8?show_docid=bd884c703a66f5d8"/>
  <title type="text">Re: &quot;Blue Velvet&quot; (1986) On TCM Yesterday [Like &quot;I Spit on Your G...</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  So, NC-17 eventually replaced the discarded X rating, making 17 the &lt;br&gt; offical Adult age. &lt;br&gt; Thank you William for clarifying this since I&#39;ve never had to pay &lt;br&gt; attention to ratings. Before I was an adult, there weren&#39;t any films &lt;br&gt; like this being shown to the public. &lt;br&gt; Rich Wagner
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>TBerk</name>
  <email>bayareab...@yahoo.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T03:21:43Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/d921bdbd6279a743/2638e1b37d9bfc75?show_docid=2638e1b37d9bfc75</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/d921bdbd6279a743/2638e1b37d9bfc75?show_docid=2638e1b37d9bfc75"/>
  <title type="text">Re: &quot;James Bond&quot; Are you ready for a Sam Mendes directed 007?</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  The Director makes what we see on the screen but the comments about it &lt;br&gt; being &#39;this&#39; kind or &#39;that&#39; kind of film forget the Director gets &lt;br&gt; handed a script, the Producer(s) are looking over his shoulder and the &lt;br&gt; Studio is poking him with a sharp stick, whenever possible. &lt;br&gt; My point is what we get isn&#39;t alway about picking a Director for his
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>william</name>
  <email>wlahe...@gmail.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T03:02:23Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/07fffff631dfe3c8/467efdfb2d7bb3b8?show_docid=467efdfb2d7bb3b8</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/07fffff631dfe3c8/467efdfb2d7bb3b8?show_docid=467efdfb2d7bb3b8"/>
  <title type="text">Re: All-time favorite movie cat</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  You got that right. It&#39;s just such an easy shot and I wanted to dump &lt;br&gt; on the rest of the film. Even so, Rooney&#39;s performance is utterly &lt;br&gt; despicable even for 1961. No excuse whatsoever. There aren&#39;t enough &lt;br&gt; slings or arrows. Or even birdshot in the butt to pay off that &lt;br&gt; mistake. &lt;br&gt; William &lt;br&gt; &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=nofollow href=&quot;http://www.williamahearn.com&quot;&gt;[link]&lt;/a&gt;
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>william</name>
  <email>wlahe...@gmail.com</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T02:55:11Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/a0263ae83be59549?show_docid=a0263ae83be59549</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/a0263ae83be59549?show_docid=a0263ae83be59549"/>
  <title type="text">Re: &quot;Blue Velvet&quot; (1986) On TCM Yesterday [Like &quot;I Spit on Your G...</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  The MPAA hasn&#39;t used X as a rating since the 1970s. It realized too &lt;br&gt; late that by creating an X category that porn could then be &lt;br&gt; mainstreamed into theatres since it had a legitimate rating. X was &lt;br&gt; quickly dropped and NC-17 added at some later date allowing X to &lt;br&gt; define porn but not to have porn seem to have an MPAA rating or
  </summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
  <author>
  <name>Old Movie Fan</name>
  <email>bigmovie...@webtv.net</email>
  </author>
  <updated>2010-01-07T02:21:37Z</updated>
  <id>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/066851689f558213?show_docid=066851689f558213</id>
  <link href="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies.past-films/browse_thread/thread/67615296526d6812/066851689f558213?show_docid=066851689f558213"/>
  <title type="text">Re: &quot;Blue Velvet&quot; (1986) On TCM Yesterday [Like &quot;I Spit on Your G...</title>
  <summary type="html" xml:space="preserve">
  So, what year would that be? 15? &lt;br&gt; If my children were adults (over 21) like you were, then they would &lt;br&gt; not be children any longer. Being X rated would not have prevented them &lt;br&gt; or you from seeing the film. &lt;br&gt; You were fully an adult when you saw it. Now, imagine just for a &lt;br&gt; moment that you saw this when you were 15. Would you still have laughed
  </summary>
  </entry>
</feed>
