Favorite lines form the movie?
Molly Brown
what makes you laugh?
what makes you say "Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"?
"To really communicate with
someone, we have to allow ourselves, just for a moment, to
become that other person."
Robert J. Kolker
Molly Brown wrote:
> whats your favorite line?
This ship is made of iron. I assure it can sink
Why God Himself could not sink this ship
(Cal said that, the Big Mouth).
Oh God Jack, don't stop now!!! (Rose said that).
KimNB
Fifteen hundred people went into the sea when Titanic sank from under us.
There were twenty boats floating nearby, and only one came back. One. Six
were saved from the water, myself included. SIX out of FIFTEEN HUNDRED.
Afterward, the 700 people in the boats had nothing to do but wait. Wait to
die. Wait to live. Wait for an absolution which would never come.
<<what makes you laugh?>>
Rose and Jack spinning around in the steerage dance scene. How much fun is
that?
<<what makes you say "Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"?>>
When Jack and Rose CONTINUE running deeper into the ship even after Cal stopped
chasing them with the gun. I really never did like that second "splashing
around in the water scene" though I understand Cameron's reasoning for it.
KimNB
I somehow missed that line...
TheFrankMan
news:20001231160421...@ng-df1.aol.com...
> <<Oh God Jack, don't stop now!!! (Rose said that).>>
>
> I somehow missed that line...
>
Consulting my trusty Gregg's Short-hand Dictionary, that's precisely part
of what she wrote in the steam of the car window. The remainder of that
same short-hand window-message was, "Ummm, you did bum two cigarettes off
Lovejoy yesterday, didn't you?"
~~~~~~~
:)/ [A Smiley smoking a cigarette...]
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Kimberly Dickson
Jack: Do you love him?
Rose: Pardon me?
Jack: Do you love him?
Rose: You're being very rude. You shouldn't be asking me this!
Jack: What? It's a simple question. Do you love the guy or not?
Rose: This is not a suitable conversation!
Jack: Why can't you just answer the question?
Rose: This is absurd! You are rude, and uncouth, and presumptuous, and I
am leaving now. Jack. Mr. Dawson, it's been a pleasure. I sought you out
to thank and now I have thanked you.
Jack: And you insulted me.
Rose: Well, you deserved it.
Jack: Right.
Rose: Right.
Jack: I thought you were leaving.
Rose: I am. You are so annoying!
> what makes you laugh?
Jack: Over on the bed. The couch.
Only because that line was an honest mistake of Leo's, so I think that's so
cute.
AND
Rose: You're crazy!
Jack: That's what everybody says, but with all due respect, Miss, I'm not
the one hanging off the back of the ship here.
> what makes you say "Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"?
The whole scene when Lovejoy and Cal were accusing Jack of stealing the
necklace.
I dunno about you guys, but even though I've seen the movie 27 times, I
still applaud and cheer on Rose every time I see her spit in Cal's face. I
just love that scene!
Also, my favorite scenes are the 3rd class party, the flying scene, the
ending, and when Jack taught Rose how to spit. I loved Rose's narration
during that scene about her mother. :-)
Kim
Nicholas Cascone
"You wanna take this call..." (Naturally)
> what makes you laugh?
"We gotta check our supply of Depends" (or whatever it is Louis says when
we're standing on the helipad
> what makes you say "Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"?
The whole relationship between Jack and Rose. I find Leo unbelievable as
Jack, and Kate's protrayal of Rose as way too modern and on the nose.
Nick
Janelle Roberts
"Have you heard of Dr. Freud, Mr, Ismay? His ideas about the male
preoccupation with size may be of interest to you"
What makes me laugh
when Rose flips Lovejoy the bird!
<and>
when Old Rose says...'You mean...did we do it?'
What makes you say 'grrrrrrrr'
it always bugged me that they didn't try more than once to get both of them
on the little piece of debris they found...
--
cheers...
"Molly Brown" <happ...@aol.comedy> wrote in message
news:20001231082800...@ng-ft1.aol.com...
Joe Sweeney
> > what makes you laugh?
>
> "We gotta check our supply of Depends" (or whatever it is Louis says when
> we're standing on the helipad
Ha ha! You've been reading the script again haven't you? :) That line was cut from the movie. Perfectly understandable though, considering you probably heard Lewis actually say the line, when the rest of us didn't.
--
Joe Sweeney
Visit the alt.movies.titanic website:
http://www.geocities.com/amt102600/amt.html
Tina/John/Jenny Grimes
news:20001231082800...@ng-ft1.aol.com...
>
> what makes you laugh?
>
> what makes you say "Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"?
It's difficult for me to pick just one line or scene, etc. I have so many
favorites. But here goes....
A favorite line...Rose to her mother: "Oh stop it, Mother, you'll give
yourself a nose bleed!"
Makes me laugh...Jack's face as he says to Rose: "Sorry, you just look like
kind of an indoor girl."
Makes me say "Grrrrr"...the dinner scene, where Rose is talking to Jack
about the men going off to the smoking room to congratulate themselves on
being masters of the universe. This bugs me because Rose is whispering as
she talks to Jack...like she's supposed to be talking ONLY to Jack, and yet
there are 1 or 2 people between them at the table.
Take care. Tina.
Jill
> > whats your favorite line?
>
> "You wanna take this call..." (Naturally)
Hey! I liked that line too! That entire phone call scene was one of the
best parts of the film. Truly.
> "We gotta check our supply of Depends" (or whatever it is Louis says when
> we're standing on the helipad
I don't think that made the final cut, did it?
> The whole relationship between Jack and Rose. I find Leo unbelievable as
> Jack, and Kate's protrayal of Rose as way too modern and on the nose.
Ouch! Them's fightin' words in these here parts. :)
J.
Nicholas Cascone
<3a50b...@silver.truman.edu>...
Nicholas Cascone <nicholas...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:01c073d7$90ae9fa0$4fcb480c@quannie...
> > what makes you laugh?
>
> "We gotta check our supply of Depends" (or whatever it is Louis says when
> we're standing on the helipad
JS: Ha ha! You've been reading the script again haven't you? :) That line
was cut from the movie. Perfectly understandable though, considering you
probably heard Lewis actually say the line, when the rest of us didn't.
NC: Well, nobody said my favorite line actually had to be in the movie,
did they?
Nick
Molly Brown
>"We gotta check our supply of Depends" (or whatever it is Louis says when
>we're standing on the helipad
Nick,
I dont remember this line..........
btw, werent you in the film?????????
Molly Brown
>"Have you heard of Dr. Freud, Mr, Ismay? His ideas about the male
>preoccupation with size may be of interest to you"
>
no, no........... its Ismays reply that gets me........
"who's Freud? Passenger?" hahahahaha
Janelle Roberts
--
cheers...
"Molly Brown" <happ...@aol.comedy> wrote in message
news:20010102222112...@ng-cj1.aol.com...
Nicholas Cascone
<20010102221921...@ng-cj1.aol.com>...
> >
> >"We gotta check our supply of Depends" (or whatever it is Louis says
when
> >we're standing on the helipad
>
> Nick,
>
> I dont remember this line..........
>
> btw, werent you in the film?????????
Yup. I was in that scene, but that line didn't make it into the movie.
Nick
KrikkitSky
realizes that he has to follow Rose instead of getting his bought-and-paid-for
place on the lifeboat. He realizes that he loves Rose enough to follow her,
but he's definitely not happy about it! I thought it was a nice contrast.
The line that made me laugh most was Jack to Rose: "Sorry, you just seem like
kind of an indoor girl." Classic.
The line that made me go grrrr was Old Rose: "A woman's heart is a deep ocean
of secrets." AUUGHHHH!!! That's *so* trite! Would any real human being
*ever* say anything like that? My gut feeling is no.
Krikkit
"Music is a higher revelation than philosophy." - Ludwig van Beethoven
Gordon Davie
news:20001231082800...@ng-ft1.aol.com...
> whats your favorite line?
Old Rose: "Oh, yes. The woman in the picture is me!"
> what makes you laugh?
The expression on Ruth's face when she finds Rose and Jack spitting over the
side.
> what makes you say "Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"?
Cal: "Amazing! You could almost pass for a gentleman!"
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland
"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God"
Just...@webtv.net
good huh?
Molly Brown
>Molly, I read that Jonathon Hyde (Ismay) ad libbed that line. Pretty
>good huh?
>
I didnt know that!! Thats great! haha
TheFrankMan
> <<what makes you say "Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"?>>
>
> When Jack and Rose CONTINUE running deeper into the ship even after Cal
stopped
> chasing them with the gun. I really never did like that second "splashing
> around in the water scene" though I understand Cameron's reasoning for it.
Some new members on the NG might not realize that the reasoning goes
beyond the seemingly obvious. In Cameron's screenplay book, it's explained
that his original intent for that scene was for Cal to tell Lovejoy to
continue chasing Jack and Rose for him, with the promise that if Lovejoy
gets them, he also gets to keep the diamond. So, the scenes we see of Jack
and Rose continuing to run deeper into the ship were originally shot as part
of Lovejoy continuing the chase. The original plan also was for Lovejoy to
catch up with them, only to be surprised by Jack, who defeats him in the
fight that ensues, whle returning to Lovejoy a nice solid punch in the gut,
like the one that he early delivered to a handcuffed Jack. This also
explains why we later see blood on Lovejoy's forehead, in the scene where
the ship is beginning to split apart. Of course, the intermediate scenes of
the chase and fight were deleted, without affecting the overall flow of the
action or plot.
Also, for the benefit of those new NG members who aren't aware of
Cameron's screenplay book, it's an absolute must for any serious student or
fan of Cameron's film, with hundreds of great color pictures, plus tons of
text and notes about deleted & revised scenes & dialogue, etc. It's right
among the top couple books on my personal list of favorites. For your own
copy, here's the link on Amazon, and at a great price:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060953071/qid=978620853/sr=1-2/105-1
660099-4735955
Enjoy!
Cheers,
The FrankMan
KimNB <ki...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001231121705...@ng-mf1.aol.com...
KrikkitSky
>beyond the seemingly obvious. In Cameron's screenplay book, it's explained
>that his original intent for that scene was for Cal to tell Lovejoy to
>continue chasing Jack and Rose for him, with the promise that if Lovejoy
>gets them, he also gets to keep the diamond. So, the scenes we see of Jack
>and Rose continuing to run deeper into the ship were originally shot as part
>of Lovejoy continuing the chase. The original plan also was for Lovejoy to
>catch up with them, only to be surprised by Jack, who defeats him in the
>fight that ensues, whle returning to Lovejoy a nice solid punch in the gut,
>like the one that he early delivered to a handcuffed Jack.
Yes, the in-movie reasoning for the second underwater-chase scene was more or
less logical, especially when you take into account the original
Lovejoy-avarice thing which was later cut. The thing that bothers me about
this sequence isn't the reasoning of the characters (they all did what was
perfectly logical for the circumstances) but rather the meta-movie reasoning of
Cameron in deciding to include the Cal-going-crazy-with-gun,
Jack-and-Rose-get-trapped-underwater- AGAIN scene at all. Essentially, it's
just an excuse for Jack and Rose to be in suspenseful danger again, without
really adding anything to the drama. 15 minutes that could easily have been
cut.
I agree with you about the screenplay book, though; it's indispensable! I love
it.
TheFrankMan
> whats your favorite line?
"I changed my mind..." (and the small curls in Rose's red hair bouncing
in the wind, against the background of the distant wall beneath the bridge,
made a beautifully contrasting pale-yellow by the setting sun).
> what makes you laugh?
"Ya gonna cut her meat for her too there, Cal?!" (especially Kathy Bates'
delivery of the line, and her quick changing of the subject when Cal glares
at her).
> what makes you say "Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"?
For my first several viewings (quite a few, actually), I had a major
problem with Rose's prying Jack's frozen hand from hers, since that seemed
to violate the all-important concept and mutual commitment of "never let
go". I had thought that the scene would have been more dramatic (and true
to the above concept & commitment) if she/they had been close enough to
Chief Officer Wilde's body for Rose to reach his whistle, alert 5th Officer
Lowe and the rescue-lifeboat, only to have Lowe pry loose Jack's hand,
explaining that there was no way that Jack could still be alive because of
how long he'd been in the water, and that they had to hurry to go and search
for other survivors. And, even at that, Lowe would have had difficulty
prying her hand loose from Jack's, because she was still refusing to let go.
But, as time went by, I accepted Cameron's premise that - having no choice
but to pry loose Jack's hand herself, as much as she hated to do so - gave
the scene a nuance of poignancy (and the fulfillment of her promise to never
let go, but in its new context) that I had overlooked earlier.
Anyhow, this all ties into the concept I've more recently adopted, that I
offered on another thread yesterday. If there's a film (or any work of art)
that I overwhelmingly like, I'll just overlook and forgive those few moments
that don't quite "work" for me. I figure that this is the least I can do to
thank (and show respect for) an artist who has otherwise given me a work of
art that *did* work for me in so many other ways, since she/he must have
certainly known what he/she was doing, to have created so much beauty for me
in the first place. And this allows me to enjoy the creator's entire
artisitic statement, which is a "win-win" scenario, all the way around...
especially for me. :)
See ya, Molly!
Cheers,
The FrankMan
TheFrankMan
> The thing that bothers me about
> this sequence isn't the reasoning of the characters (they all did what was
> perfectly logical for the circumstances) but rather the meta-movie
reasoning of
> Cameron in deciding to include the Cal-going-crazy-with-gun,
> Jack-and-Rose-get-trapped-underwater- AGAIN scene at all. Essentially,
it's
> just an excuse for Jack and Rose to be in suspenseful danger again,
without
> really adding anything to the drama.
No argument. But - placing oneself in the mind of the characters - I can
sure see Cal going crazy. After all, it was only (literally) a minute
earlier that Cal had passed up his chance to get in a lifeboat himself, so
that he could be with Rose (which displays his intense feelings for Rose,
whatever they may exactly have been), which is seldom mentioned. And then,
having "sacrificed" his precious lifeboat opportunity to get her off safely
in a lifeboat, she jumps right back on board to run to Cal's starving-artist
steerage rival... Whew, that can tend to make a fella a bit less than sane!
But, still, you're right, all that could still have been done in ways that
removed a few minutes from the film's total length.
> I agree with you about the screenplay book, though; it's indispensable! I
love it.
I forgot to mention last time, re the Amazon link I posted: some browsers
won't highlight (i.e., "light up") the entirety of a URL that's posted in a
NG post like this. If that happens to anyone, just cut/paste the entire URL
address into your browser's URL window, click on "Go", and you'll be
promptly taken right to the Amazon link.
But do get the book - it's great!
Cheers,
The FrankMan
KrikkitSky <krikk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010104102925...@ng-mk1.aol.com...
Molly Brown
>explains why we later see blood on Lovejoy's forehead,
WOW, I always wondered abou that!! Thanks for clearing that up!!
BTW I just ordered the illustrated screen play for $9.99!!!! Thanks for the
link!
Joe Sweeney
> "I changed my mind..." (and the small curls in Rose's red hair bouncing
> in the wind, against the background of the distant wall beneath the bridge,
> made a beautifully contrasting pale-yellow by the setting sun).
You noticed too! Twilight makes everything look better. Sometimes I pause it right...there! just to see the ship in the setting sun.
Just...@webtv.net
Rose. That would have been another heartbreaking scene to endure huh?
Besides, Lowe isn't bad to look at either 8-)
Just...@webtv.net
of James Cameron". Hyde also decided that Ismay must have loved cavier
during the dinner scene, so he ate and ate.
Janelle Roberts
when in fact their body systems have just slowed way down. The symptoms of
severe hypothermia are when shivering stops, the victim loses consciousness,
there is little or no breathing, and the pulse is weak, irregular or
non-existent.
WHAT IF Jack was actually in this severe stage of hypothermia when Rose so
uncerimoniously yanked her hand from his and NOT actually dead?? But in
1912 did they really know all about the stages of hypothermia? i dont
know..
just a thought =)
--
cheers...
TheFrankMan
Molly Brown <happ...@aol.comedy> wrote in message
news:20010104135559...@ng-fv1.aol.com...
> >This also explains why we later see blood on Lovejoy's forehead,
>
> WOW, I always wondered abou that!! Thanks for clearing that up!!
If you like that kind of inside info, you are gonna LOVE this book... The
above is just the tip of the iceberg, if you'll pardon the expression...
[Sorry, couldn't help myself... :) ]
> BTW I just ordered the illustrated screen play for $9.99!!!! Thanks for
the link!
Wow, indeed! The Amazon link I posted shows a price for a new copy at
$24.00, which is $6.00 off from the book's $30.00 cover-price (and it's WELL
worth $30.00). Amazon still shows one more used copy available at $9.99, if
anyone else is interested. If that's gone by now, half.com shows four used
copies available also at $9.99, at:
http://www.half.com/products/books/detail.cfm?item=632381
Curiously, half.com lists the book's author as "Stephen Cameron", which is
simply incorrect. The book is edited by Randall Frakes, based on interviews
with James Cameron. However, half.com does show the exact correct ISBN #,
so the "Stephen Cameron" listing is obviously just a typo.
Enjoy!
Cheers,
The FrankMan
KimNB
sure see Cal going crazy. After all, it was only (literally) a minute
earlier that Cal had passed up his chance to get in a lifeboat himself, so
that he could be with Rose (which displays his intense feelings for Rose,
whatever they may exactly have been), which is seldom mentioned. And then,
having "sacrificed" his precious lifeboat opportunity to get her off safely
in a lifeboat, she jumps right back on board to run to Cal's starving-artist
steerage rival... Whew, that can tend to make a fella a bit less than sane!
But, still, you're right, all that could still have been done in ways that
removed a few minutes from the film's total length.>>
Forget shaving minutes from the film's length. I'd have been happy if the
movie was 15 minutes LONGER. I'd have loved to see Rose going to steerage to
look for Jack, the scenes involving the Californian, Rose and Jack observing
the shooting star after the dance scene, and the ad libbed moment mentioned on
the numberless page opposite page 26 in the screenplay where Rose and Cal
shared "a moment of softness."
KimNB
a pulse. Even if she had tried to, would she have been able to detect a pulse
with near-frozen fingers? It took a half hour for a boat to return. How many
of those in the water might have been merely unconscious, not dead? To think
that maybe even one or two might have been saved if they had been examined more
carefully is truly distressing.
TheFrankMan
> WHAT IF Jack was actually in this severe stage of hypothermia when Rose so
> uncerimoniously yanked her hand from his and NOT actually dead?? But in
> 1912 did they really know all about the stages of hypothermia? i dont
> know.. just a thought =)
I've thought about that too. When I very first saw the film, I had a bit
of trouble with the scene of her seeing the lifeboat, and trying to wake and
talk to him as the lifeboat went floating by. That would have been the
moment to have done nothing other than to muster all her strength and scream
as loud as she could. On the other hand, I can't even begin to imagine the
excrutiating pain and discomfort of being soaking wet in freezing air, not
to mention the intense psychological trauma of being in that horrible
situation. I sure know my own powers of reasoning have failed me in
situations FAR less dire than that... In fact, just this past Christmas Eve
night, I was outdoors in a very light snowfall for a very few minutes in
some mountain air that was colder than I had planned for, caught a chill,
and was quite uncomfortable and thinking of nothing else until I could
remedy my situation. And I was totally dry, wearing relatively warm
clothes. I can't begin to fathom the utter hell experienced by the people
who went through what Titanic's ill-fated passengers endured.
As for the hypothermia, what you say is true. But, within the plot-line
of the film, Cameron made it pretty clear that quite a bit of time had gone
by - more than enough for Jack to have died. In those conditions, even the
hardiest human would be unlikely to survive more than 20 minutes, maybe 30
at most. And Jack was a relatively slightly-bullt man with not much body
fat to provide any insulation.
In real life, Titanic's Chief Baker Joughin (shown in Cameron's film as
the portly man in the white baker's suit, on the stern railing, drinking
liquor from his flask) claims to have tread water for about two hours before
finding a lifeboat to rescue him. Likewise, in real life, Joughin did have
more body-fat than Jack, and had indeed been drinking heavily during the
late evening, . In fact, at least one very very prestigious Titanic
authority (Don Lynch, who narrated the excellent book "Titanic, An
Illustrated History", illustrated by Ken Marschall) outright states that the
liquor acted as a kind of anti-freeze that kept Joughin alive. However,
virtually all modern medical authorities insist that liquor would likely
decrease a person's odds of survival, and that it is virtually impossible
that Joughin was in that frigid water anywhere near the two hours he
claimed.
In any case, Cameron does make it clear that Jack was in the water long
enough to be dead, since everyone else in the water was already totally
quiet. Being entirely the creation of Cameron's mind, we just have to
accept that it wasn't meant for Jack to survive. Nonetheless, if you ever
see me in a similar situation, please do start yelling to the nearest
lifeboat FIRST, and then try to strike up a conversation with me
afterwards... :)
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Janelle Roberts <elle...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6O756.1626$1G4....@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
TheFrankMan
<Just...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:17573-3A...@storefull-106.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
> Frank, I like your idea about Lowe tearing their hands apart to save
> Rose. That would have been another heartbreaking scene to endure huh?
> Besides, Lowe isn't bad to look at either 8-)
If I may paraphrase the film's earlier conversation involving lookouts
Fleet and Lee:
"Well, if that's that it takes to get warm, I just as soon
stick with Rose, if it's all the same with you..."
Trust me.
:)
Cheers,
The FrankMan
TheFrankMan
KimNB <ki...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010104213509...@ng-df1.aol.com...
I'd be one of the first to sit through a 6-hour version, though that's
extremely unlikely since there's really not enough plot-tangents to build or
maintain a cogent story-line for that long.
For me, though, if the film was required to have been kept at no more than
3.3 hours (in order to make it commercially viable), I must say that I did
agree with most of the cuts Cameron made. If forced to stay within that 3.3
hour time-frame, I would have agreed to give up a couple minutes of the
watery travels below-decks in order to re-instate probably at least three
scenes. (1) The one you mentioned, of Rose going into steerage to find
Jack; I would have loved to see the expressions on the faces of Tommy and
Fabrizio. (2) The shooting-star scene that you mentioned (and any later
scene that referenced it at the end of the film, of course, while Rose was
floating on the wooden panelling, looking at the sky). And (3) the scene
where Jack is explaining to Rose that she just doesn't fit in with her
social class, and expresses the thought with the beautiful phrase, "You were
mailed to the wrong address".
I'm sure I also would have greatly enjoyed any and all additional footage
that Cameron shot at the real Titanic ocean-floor wreck-site (just because
I've done tons of study of the ship itself, deep-sea research, and the
actual historical event), although that wouldn't have affected the
story-line at all.
Speaking of shooting-stars, did you ever notice the shooting-star in the
scene right before when Jack first met Rose, when she's running past while
he's laying on the deck-chair smoking a cigarette? If you look carefully
through the cloud of cigarette-smoke, you can just barely see the wisp of
its tail, for a fraction of a second.
Who knows, with computer technology going the way it is, maybe Cameron
will some day be able to release a DVD with all the out-takes, and your DVD
player will let you custom-edit the exact version you want... Or maybe that
technology is already here, and I just haven't been paying close enough
attention! :)
Cheers,
The FrankMan
KimNB
<<I'm sure I also would have greatly enjoyed any and all additional footage
that Cameron shot at the real Titanic ocean-floor wreck-site (just because
I've done tons of study of the ship itself, deep-sea research, and the
actual historical event), although that wouldn't have affected the
story-line at all.>>
Isn't some of that incorporated into an IMAX film? I've seen some discussions
about one that Cameron was involved with in some way. I'd love to see it,
though I am pretty sure we don't have an IMAX theatre in Austin..
Frank continued:
<< Speaking of shooting-stars, did you ever notice the shooting-star in the
scene right before when Jack first met Rose, when she's running past while
he's laying on the deck-chair smoking a cigarette? If you look carefully
through the cloud of cigarette-smoke, you can just barely see the wisp of
its tail, for a fraction of a second.>>
I believe I do remember that. I must say, though, that I've discussed the
whole shooting star theme with various people so many times that I always
expect to see one when Rose is on the wood panel gazing at the sky. If it's
there, I keep missing it.
KrikkitSky
>movie was 15 minutes LONGER. I'd have loved to see Rose going to steerage to
>look for Jack, the scenes involving the Californian, Rose and Jack observing
>the shooting star after the dance scene, and the ad libbed moment mentioned
>on
>the numberless page opposite page 26 in the screenplay where Rose and Cal
>shared "a moment of softness."
>
I would have loved to see all that too, actually--I'm usually not picky about a
movie's actual length, just whether whatever's in there really *needs* to be in
there. Since Titanic worked as a movie without those scenes, I guess the
argument could be made that the scenes you mentioned didn't "need" to be in
there, but I think they definitely would have added something (most especially
the "moment of softness" between Rose and Cal, whose relationship I think is
one of the most interesting in the movie). The second underwater chase scene,
however, really added nothing; that's why it frustrates me.
KrikkitSky
>watery travels below-decks in order to re-instate probably at least three
>scenes. (1) The one you mentioned, of Rose going into steerage to find
>Jack; I would have loved to see the expressions on the faces of Tommy and
>Fabrizio.
I'm glad this was cut; it was a nice idea but not really necessary, and I'm not
sure it would have translated well to film.
>(2) The shooting-star scene that you mentioned (and any later
>scene that referenced it at the end of the film, of course, while Rose was
>floating on the wooden panelling, looking at the sky).
This I would have liked to see...it shows Jack and Rose getting gradually more
intimate, and creating a feeling of relaxed goodness, before their relationship
and the sinking all start in earnest, creating high drama. Also, it makes
"Come Josephine" seem less pulled out of thin air during the sunset/bow/kiss
scene and later on the debris after the sinking.
> And (3) the scene
>where Jack is explaining to Rose that she just doesn't fit in with her
>social class, and expresses the thought with the beautiful phrase, "You were
>mailed to the wrong address".
Beautiful?! Aaagh. Trite. I'm glad this was cut; I think by this point Rose
has already realized she doesn't fit in with her social class.
KrikkitSky
>simply incorrect. The book is edited by Randall Frakes, based on interviews
>with James Cameron. However, half.com does show the exact correct ISBN #,
>so the "Stephen Cameron" listing i
This is probably a confusion due to the fact that one Stephen Cameron actually
does write historical books about the Titanic (I'm waiting eagerly for his
biography of Thomas Andrews, which is supposed to come out sometime this
year...I hope).
Andrys Basten
TheFrankMan <thefr...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>gets them, he also gets to keep the diamond. So, the scenes we see of Jack
>and Rose continuing to run deeper into the ship were originally shot as part
>of Lovejoy continuing the chase.
I have to say that the 2nd chase was just too much and the
unwisest choice he made in the movie, not that the movie wasn't
successful anyway :-) I'm sure he must have cut out the scenes
explaining the 2nd time around because they didn't go well during
screenings, but why they left in the 2nd chase at all is beyond me,
except to show the little boy and the father or that silly last
gate and the keys on the floor to give 'tension' in a story that
already had far more than enough without this 'Perils' bit....
Winslet had said she thought she was going to drown in that
scene and Cameron was not empathetic :-)
> Also, for the benefit of those new NG members who aren't aware of
>Cameron's screenplay book, it's an absolute must for any serious student or
>fan of Cameron's film, with hundreds of great color pictures, plus tons of
>text and notes about deleted & revised scenes & dialogue, etc. It's right
>among the top couple books on my personal list of favorites. For your own
>copy, here's the link on Amazon, and at a great price:
For awhile there were some remaindered copies available and
maybe soon there will be again.
Those who don't check the remaindered or closeout places, try
either my Titanic books page's: http://andrys.com/titanic.html#closeouts
or my direct URL to the Titanic ones at the store, which is
http://www.bookcloseouts.com/bc/show_books_title.asp?rid=andrys&title=titanic
There are a few Cameron and movie-focused books there, including
one with 12 20"x25" full cover posters from the movie ($7) and Parisi's
book re "The Making of James Cameron."
Here's a list of some of the better ones from that list:
==
4 James Cameron's Titanic
Lemos, Jain (Edt) ... Softcover ... Qty Avail: 55
Our Price: $9.99 ... You Save: $10.01 (51%)
5 James Cameron's Titanic
Cameron, James ... Hardcover ... Qty Avail: 53
Our Price: $13.99 ... You Save: $36.01 (73%)
6 James Cameron's Titanic: Poster Book
Cameron, James ... Softcover ... Qty Avail: 46
Our Price: $6.99 ... You Save: $8.01 (54%)
11 Titanic and the Making of James Cameron
Parisi, Paula ... Softcover ... Qty Avail: 1
Our Price: $4.49 ... You Save: $10.46 (70%)
I can't imagine a Titanic movie fan not wanting
to read this one. It's about Cameron and the film.
13 The Titanic
Tibballs, Geoff ... Softcover ... Qty Avail: 83
Our Price: $6.99 ... You Save: $12.96 (65%)
15 The Titanic: End of a Dream
Wade, Wyn Craig ... Softcover ... Qty Avail: 1
Our Price: $4.89 ... You Save: $9.06 (65%)
HIGHLY recommended for its story of the American hearings
after the survivors got to New York. Well written.
- Andrys
--
Andrys Basten, http://andrys.com
http://andrys.com/titanic.html - TITANIC books/videos/music
http://andrys.com/titanic.html#texplorer - Titanic hobbies
- includes software, models, books, half-priced used books
http://andrys.com/titanic.html#closeouts - Closeout pricing
Andrys Basten
TheFrankMan <thefr...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> BTW I just ordered the illustrated screen play for $9.99!!!! Thanks for
>the link!
>
> Wow, indeed! The Amazon link I posted shows a price for a new copy at
>$24.00, which is $6.00 off from the book's $30.00 cover-price (and it's WELL
>worth $30.00). Amazon still shows one more used copy available at $9.99, if
>anyone else is interested. If that's gone by now, half.com shows four used
>copies available also at $9.99, at:
>
>http://www.half.com/products/books/detail.cfm?item=632381
Thanks, Frank. I got one of the $9.99 ones
And I used one of my own coupons to get $5 off.
If anyone else wants to do this, go that URL above and bookmark it
or just copy the link.
Then go to my coupons page: http://andrys.com/coupons.html#half
(which takes you to the half.com Discount Coupon)
and follow the directions to get $5 off of a $10 purchase.
The kicker? The book is $9.99 in some cases, which makes it
under $10. I bought a Who's "Tommy" tape to make $1.80 more.
BUT this coupon is just for first-time buyers at half.com
Also there's a coupon name to use for free-shipping. You can use
one or the other coupon feature but not both.
When I was there, there were only two of the $9.99 ones left,
thanks to Frank, and now there's only one. Another one there costs
$11.75, but with a $5.00 discount, it's still only $6.75, which
beats Amazon's $24 +shipping deal :-)
- Andrys
--
http://andrys.com/coupons.html - Coupons
http://andrys.com/titanic.html - TITANIC books/videos/music
http://andrys.com/titanic.html#texplorer - Titanic hobbies
- includes software, models, books, half-priced used books
http://andrys.com/titanic.html#closeouts - Closeout pricing
http://andrys.com/coupons.html - NY Times Bestsellers at 40% off
Tom Pappas
or
> less logical, especially when you take into account the original
> Lovejoy-avarice thing which was later cut. The thing that bothers me
about
> this sequence isn't the reasoning of the characters (they all did what was
> perfectly logical for the circumstances) but rather the meta-movie
reasoning of
> Cameron in deciding to include the Cal-going-crazy-with-gun,
> Jack-and-Rose-get-trapped-underwater- AGAIN scene at all. Essentially,
it's
> just an excuse for Jack and Rose to be in suspenseful danger again,
without
> really adding anything to the drama. 15 minutes that could easily have
been
> cut.
I may be in the minority here, but I don't think it should be necessary to
consult a book to understand why a movie scene is difficult to interpret.
"Lack of script integrity" is the rubric.
> I agree with you about the screenplay book, though; it's indispensable! I
love
> it.
See above. I submit that the only reason it's indispensible is because it
explains otherwise inexplicable scenes in the movie.
--
"But this script can't sink!"
"She is made of irony, sir. She can, and she will."
Tom Pappas
the victims were probably still alive when Lowe went back. But since there
would have been no way to resuscitate them even if they HAD been pulled
aboard, they were goners anyway. It takes a pretty high-tech trauma room to
bring back victims of hypothermia that has progressed to the unconsciousness
stage.
--
Half-baked Titanic theories galore at
http://www.pcslink.com/~tom/titanic
Great circle computer: /distance.html
SNAME Report: /titanic25.pdf
NIST Report: /metallurgy.pdf
"Janelle Roberts" <elle...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6O756.1626$1G4....@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Tom Pappas
> >
> > For my first several viewings (quite a few, actually), I had a major
> > problem with Rose's prying Jack's frozen hand from hers, since that
seemed
> > to violate the all-important concept and mutual commitment of "never let
> > go". I had thought that the scene would have been more dramatic (and
true
> > to the above concept & commitment) if she/they had been close enough to
> > Chief Officer Wilde's body for Rose to reach his whistle, alert 5th
> Officer
> > Lowe and the rescue-lifeboat, only to have Lowe pry loose Jack's hand,
> > explaining that there was no way that Jack could still be alive because
of
> > how long he'd been in the water,
What makes ME say Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr is people who
shout abuse at me for criticizing the script, and then themselves turn
around and re-write entire scenes. And/or excuse gross editing errors by
saying that you have to read the Illustrated Screenplay to resolve
inconsistencies in the movie.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Tom Pappas
footage
> that Cameron shot at the real Titanic ocean-floor wreck-site (just because
> I've done tons of study of the ship itself, deep-sea research, and the
> actual historical event), although that wouldn't have affected the
> story-line at all.>>
What we need to do is to lobby the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute to
publish (on DVD, one would hope) some of the hours and hours of footage they
made (and which Roy Mengot used to meticulously detail his model of the
wreck) and archived on Laser Disc.
> Isn't some of that incorporated into an IMAX film? I've seen some
discussions
> about one that Cameron was involved with in some way. I'd love to see it,
> though I am pretty sure we don't have an IMAX theatre in Austin..
The IMAX 'Titanica' is about an hour and a half long, with maybe fifteen
minutes of "bottom time" (that I wish had been fifty). The rest of the time
is history - the period photographs of the construction on a 40-foot screen
are breathtaking - and sort of a "The Making Of" onboard Keldysh. James
Cameron is not mentioned in the production notes.
http://www.imax.com/films/distribution/titanica.html
Tom Pappas
can
> sure see Cal going crazy. After all, it was only (literally) a minute
> earlier that Cal had passed up his chance to get in a lifeboat himself, so
> that he could be with Rose (which displays his intense feelings for Rose,
> whatever they may exactly have been), which is seldom mentioned. And
then,
> having "sacrificed" his precious lifeboat opportunity to get her off
safely
> in a lifeboat, she jumps right back on board to run to Cal's
starving-artist
> steerage rival... Whew, that can tend to make a fella a bit less than
sane!
> But, still, you're right, all that could still have been done in ways that
> removed a few minutes from the film's total length.
I would like to have seen (and fully expected) Cal in a
John-Foster-Kane-when-his-wife-left-him blind fury. Somehow, Cal's rage was
too controlled and calculating for the situation, almost as if he was merely
going through the motions.
TheFrankMan
KimNB <ki...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010104233849...@ng-df1.aol.com...
> Said Frank:
>> I'm sure I also would have greatly enjoyed any and all additional footage
>> that Cameron shot at the real Titanic ocean-floor wreck-site (just
because
>> I've done tons of study of the ship itself, deep-sea research, and the
>> actual historical event), although that wouldn't have affected the
>> story-line at all.>>
>
> Isn't some of that incorporated into an IMAX film? I've seen some
discussions
> about one that Cameron was involved with in some way.
Unless you've heard about a more recent IMAX production, The IMAX film I'm
aware of doesn't include Cameron's footage. It was based on a separate
earlier expedition, and is quite good.
> I'd love to see it, though I am pretty sure we don't have an IMAX theatre
in Austin..
Then your prayers are answered! A home version of it is commonly
available, entitled "Titanica", narrated by Leonard Nimoy. Its narration
and related content differs from the IMAX version, but the ocean-floor
footage is just as good. Another great video is also available which
documents the dive itself which shot the IMAX footage (narrated by Walter
Cronkite), and which spotlights the creator of the deepsea research vessel
that made it all possible. I discuss both videos in detail in my Titanic
Bibliography that's available on the Website of Joe Sweeney, a longtime
member of our merry little band of Titaniacs:
http://www.geocities.com/amt102600/amt.html
But, for your convenience, Kim, I've extracted my discussion of both
videos for you below (if your NG-reader doesn't highlight the entirety of
any Web-links shown below, just cut/paste the entire address into your
browser's URL window and click "Go".):
========== BEGIN BIBLIO NOTES ============
Titanica Miramax/IMAX film (C) 1995, reformatted for home video 1998
[sources for VHS Tape & DVD shown below]
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/6304999968/qid%3D971546581/104-344002
0-0488740
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1558908676/mchach40sbookmar/104-34400
20-0488740
These are VHS video & DVD versions of the gigantic IMAX film featuring a
visit to Titanic, narrated by Leonard Nimoy. I don't know exactly what
added material may be on the DVD. I've seen only the VHS version, and know
that this is not exactly the same version that you may have seen in IMAX
theaters. Daniel Allen Butler (author of "Unsinkable"), who helped produce
the VHS video and who offers on-camera commentary in the VHS Titanica,
informed me:
"As I was part of the VHS production, I can tell you that the VHS version
is considerably different from the theatrical release. A lot of extraneous
material in the IMAX movie that wasn't directly related to the Titanic but
were "sidebars" to the expedition has been eliminated, and commentary by
several authorities in various fields has been added. Nimoy's narration
isn't always factually accurate, and does go over the top at times, but by
comparison with some of the other documentaries about the Titanic that were
spawned in 1998, this one is pretty good."
This production (at least the VHS version) also offers a good amount of
technical, historical and philosophical insight, featuring some of the
world's top Titanic authorities & authors. (I suspect the DVD will have all
that and more, but haven't confirmed this.) Well-chosen background music
also helps bring the bygone era back to life. Excellent cinematography, as
you'd expect, but it also probes deeper issues like the controversy and
debates over retrieving personal items vs leaving them at the wreck-site.
[Two of the ocean-floor debaters mentioned above are noteworthy for
Hollywood film fans: Dr. Anatoly Sagalevitch played a cameo role in
Cameron's film (his sole line was "No diamond?") and noted Titanic explorer
Ralph White is very briefly seen (red shirt, full beard) while "Old Rose"
tells the crew how she posed for Jack's sketch. My apologies if I failed to
spot any other cameo appearances.]
Titanic, Treasure of the Deep - Columbia Tristar Home Video (C) 1992
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0767812662/qid%3D971546656/104-344002
0-0488740
Hosted by Walter Cronkite. This documentary chronicles the deepsea
mission that shot the 1990 IMAX footage for Titanica, above. In addition to
great views of Titanic herself, this video focuses far more than any other
I've seen on the deep ocean research vessels that made it all possible: the
two submersibles Mir 1 & Mir 2, and their gigantic surface support ship, the
Akademik Mstislavs Keldysh (featured seven years later in Cameron's film,
serving "Brock Lovett" and his crew).
Also prominently profiled is the Russian oceanographer Dr. Anatoly
Sagalevitch ("No diamond?"), who was the untiring designer & creator of all
of these amazing research vessels. Also revealed are the major political
risks that Dr. Sagalevitch took by working with the West during the era of
this dive and the years leading to it, when the Cold War was far from over.
Aside from its other fine points, this video is worth seeing just to gain
an appreciation for the landmark technology & vessels that Dr. Sagalevitch
designed & created, not to mention the fair amount of guts that were part of
the equation. Very well done.
========== END BIBLIO NOTES ============
I just double-checked for you Kim, and noticed that Amazon is currently
out-of-stock of the VHS Titanica, though they do have the DVD. However, I
also checked half.com at
http://www.half.com/search/search.jsp?product=all&keyword=titanica
Visit the above, scroll down the page to "Movies/DVD's", and you'll find
that 16 used-copies of the VHS Titanica are available at $4.44 (!!!) and 2
used-copies of the DVD Titanica can be had for $14.48, also a great price.
> Frank continued:
>> Speaking of shooting-stars, did you ever notice the shooting-star in the
>> scene right before when Jack first met Rose, when she's running past
while
>> he's laying on the deck-chair smoking a cigarette? If you look carefully
>> through the cloud of cigarette-smoke, you can just barely see the wisp of
>> its tail, for a fraction of a second.>>
>
> I believe I do remember that. I must say, though, that I've discussed the
> whole shooting star theme with various people so many times that I always
> expect to see one when Rose is on the wood panel gazing at the sky. If
it's
> there, I keep missing it.
Being an amateur astronomer since I was a kid, I've studied that scene
many times too, but never saw any trace of a shooting-star. I suspect
Cameron omitted it there because the earlier reference to it was omitted.
Enjoy your IMAX Titanica (and the other video too)! And remember me when
you hit the Lotto!
Cheers,
The FrankMan
TheFrankMan
> > And (3) the scene
> >where Jack is explaining to Rose that she just doesn't fit in with her
> >social class, and expresses the thought with the beautiful phrase, "You
were
> >mailed to the wrong address".
>
> Beautiful?! Aaagh. Trite. I'm glad this was cut; I think by this point
Rose
> has already realized she doesn't fit in with her social class.
But, at that point, she was still of a mind to tell Jack "I'm going back -
leave me alone". It was only later - seeing the little girl being
instructed to properly place her napkin on her lap - that Rose was pushed
into fully realizing the lie she was living.
Ah, beauty indeed continues to be in the eye of the beholder, which is why
both chocolate and vanilla ice-cream continue to be made. :) Having never
heard the above "mailed to the wrong address" metaphor before, and having
studied the metaphysical concept which teaches that souls are sent to
inhabit the earthly bodies whose lives they live, the choice of words
"worked" for me. :) But your feelings are just as valid, of course.
As Nietzsche said, "This is *my* way. What is *your* way? *The* way does
not exist."
Case in point:
> "Music is a higher revelation than philosophy." - Ludwig van Beethoven
Would he have said that if his soul had been born into Nietzsche's
body...? :) :)
Thanks for your thoughts, Krikkit!
Cheers,
The FrankMan
KrikkitSky <krikk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010105000240...@ng-mk1.aol.com...
Tom Pappas
>
> > > And (3) the scene
> > >where Jack is explaining to Rose that she just doesn't fit in with her
> > >social class, and expresses the thought with the beautiful phrase, "You
> were
> > >mailed to the wrong address".
> >
> > Beautiful?! Aaagh. Trite. I'm glad this was cut; I think by this
point
> Rose
> > has already realized she doesn't fit in with her social class.
>
> But, at that point, she was still of a mind to tell Jack "I'm going
back -
> leave me alone". It was only later - seeing the little girl being
> instructed to properly place her napkin on her lap - that Rose was pushed
> into fully realizing the lie she was living.
>
> Ah, beauty indeed continues to be in the eye of the beholder, which is
why
> both chocolate and vanilla ice-cream continue to be made. :) Having
never
> heard the above "mailed to the wrong address" metaphor before, and having
> studied the metaphysical concept which teaches that souls are sent to
> inhabit the earthly bodies whose lives they live, the choice of words
> "worked" for me. :) But your feelings are just as valid, of course.
I vote with Krikkit on this one. Several of Jack's lines were just too
earnest by half, and this is one of them. And deCaprio delivers it so . . .
so _profoundly_ that you get the impression that he is trying to woo Rose
with his gosh-durn-plum-down-to-earthiness. "I'm just a tumbleweed..."
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death my right
to disagree with it." - Thomas Pappas
KrikkitSky
>
>> I agree with you about the screenplay book, though; it's indispensable! I
>love
>> it.
>
>See above. I submit that the only reason it's indispensible is because it
>explains otherwise inexplicable scenes in the movie.
OK, I didn't use the word "inexplicable" in its most literal sense--I have
issues with the script (it was trite, anachronistic, and oversimplistic) but
incoherence wasn't one of its faults, by any means. The illustrated
screenplay, for me, is "indispensable" because I'm the kind of person who likes
to see *everything,* pre-edit, about a movie I like, and I'm also anal and
nitpicky enough to have conversations with James Cameron in my head--"For God's
sake, Jim, why did you leave THAT out and keep THAT in?? Geez, were you on
DRUGS??"
In fairness to Cameron, though, I have to say that Titanic was really quite
well-edited, with the exception of a few points which upset me very much (eg,
the inclusion of the second and completely superfluous underwater chase scene),
and I like having the script around to compare the good edits with the bad, and
also for reference when I want to look up a line. It isn't "indispensable" to
understanding the movie in its final form by any means (although there are
cases, such as Lovejoy's motivation for chasing Jack and Rose, where it can
illuminate and deepen understanding, but in most cases it wasn't necessary to
provide understanding which didn't exist in the film in its final form).
KrikkitSky
>But, at that point, she was still of a mind to tell Jack "I'm going back -
>leave me alone". It was only later - seeing the little girl being
>instructed to properly place her napkin on her lap - that Rose was pushed
>into fully realizing the lie she was living.
Yes, Rose was hesitant about Jack at this point, but I don't think it was due
to any illusions about really being able to fit in with the rest of high
society--her rejection of Jack was just reason kicking in, the realization that
she'd only known this guy for a few days, had no idea who he was, and instead
of denying her feelings for him (which she knows he would see right through),
she instead fabricates the position of being comfortable with life as she's
known it (note how Winslet delivers the line about marrying and loving Cal as
though Rose is thoroughly unconvinced, but saying it anyway). Nothing Jack
said at that point would make a difference--she knows she doesn't fit in with
society, but she thinks she can survive there. The incident with the little
girl is a reminder that she *can't* survive in society, with rules governing
all behavior, so it's going to be Jack or nothing.
None of which, of course, has anything to do with the line itself, which to me
seems ridiculously nineties and over-earnest, and another incidence of Jack's
unrealistic complete lack of bitterness.
> As Nietzsche said, "This is *my* way. What is *your* way? *The* way does
>not exist."
Nietzsche was big on relativism in general, but that doesn't really help when
we're trying to *objectively* analyze something. There has to be some absolute
sense of value, otherwise all movie reviews, book reviews, music reviews would
be worthless to anyone except someone with the exact same psychology as the
reviewer.
>> "Music is a higher revelation than philosophy." - Ludwig van Beethoven
>
> Would he have said that if his soul had been born into Nietzsche's
>body...? :) :)
>
(leave it to me to give a serious answer to a question asked in jest...)
Well, I'm not sure about the concept of a "soul" independent of the functional
states of the mind; Nietzsche's body was born several decades after
Beethoven's, and thus even the same "soul" (if one existed) would have been
completely different because of the cultural differences a few decades create.
On the other hand, maybe he would have--after all, I'm a philosophy major with
a sigquote that admits philosophy isn't the highest revelation!
KrikkitSky
>earnest by half, and this is one of them. And deCaprio delivers it so . . .
>so _profoundly_ that you get the impression that he is trying to woo Rose
>with his gosh-durn-plum-down-to-earthiness. "I'm just a tumbleweed..."
This is what disturbs me about Jack--he hasn't had an easy life at all; you'd
think there would be some bitterness there, or at least a sense that life isn't
happy all the time, and that sometimes it just isn't possible to make a day
count when you've spent it looking for food and not found any. Yet Jack is just
sunny and light all the time. People aren't like that.
>"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death my right
>to disagree with it." - Thomas Pappas
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right
to misattribute it to Voltaire." --Anon.
Tom Pappas
--
Half-baked Titanic theories galore at
http://www.pcslink.com/~tom/titanic
Great circle computer: /distance.html
SNAME Report: /titanic25.pdf
NIST Report: /metallurgy.pdf
"But this script can't sink!"
"She is made of irony, sir. She can, and she will."
"KrikkitSky" <krikk...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010105141833...@ng-cv1.aol.com...
Tom Pappas
>
> Jack, and Kate's protrayal of Rose as way too modern and on the nose.
>
> Nick
Hey, "FrankMan"!
See, Nick thinks Leo's performance is unbelievable and Rose is too '90s. Why
don't you spew about 17kb of invective at him? (If you don't have anything
better to do, which appears likely.)
Or do some more anagrams. That's always a crowd-pleaser.
--
KimNB
explains otherwise inexplicable scenes in the movie.>>
I know you will find it impossible to believe this, but you would be wrong. If
you've seen the illustrated screenplay, you know it has lots of great photos,
explanations of how different scenes were shot, and reasons why Cameron chose
to keep certain scenes and delete others.
My enjoyment of the book has much more to do with my hunger for more TITANIC
than because I might wish one scene or another was done differently. I also
found it interesting to get into Cameron's mind a bit, just as an art lover
might like to hear a painter describe some unique brushstroke he used to do his
painting.
As the film is, I don't think any of the scenes need any explanation. For
instance, when I first saw the film, I assumed the blood on Lovejoy's forehead
was the result of an injury sustained in the chaos somehow. When I learned how
it really was to have happened in the script, it mattered not.
KimNB
videos for you below (if your NG-reader doesn't highlight the entirety of
any Web-links shown below, just cut/paste the entire address into your
browser's URL window and click "Go".)>>
Wow, Frank. You didn't have to do all that. Thanks though. :) I'll have to
check those out sometime soon. And since you mentioned it, I suppose I'll have
to be sure to buy a lottery ticket tomorrow. I'll let you know if I win
anything. :)
KimNB
>earnest by half, and this is one of them. And deCaprio delivers it so . . .
>so _profoundly_ that you get the impression that he is trying to woo Rose
>with his gosh-durn-plum-down-to-earthiness. "I'm just a tumbleweed..."
This is what disturbs me about Jack--he hasn't had an easy life at all; you'd
think there would be some bitterness there, or at least a sense that life isn't
happy all the time, and that sometimes it just isn't possible to make a day
count when you've spent it looking for food and not found any. Yet Jack is just
sunny and light all the time. People aren't like that. >>
Um. The guy was walking around the First Class decks on the grandest ship in
the world", on which he had gained passage in "a lucky hand at poker", and he
was accompanied by a beautiful First Class woman who seemed to be at least a
little interested in him. How bitter do you think he would really be feeling
at that point?
Even very depressed people have good days when they feel happy, or at least
hopeful. It seems to me that, with all he had been through, Jack had learned
to be resilient and to "make each day count".
William Thompson
Shelly
the water "i'll neve let go. I promise." i thought that was soooooo
romantic! and touching,
Shelly
Felix
> whats your favorite line?
I find the scene when Jack realises that he can´t save himself by getting
on the door very impressive. Just a little nod but you can see his mind
work: OK it´s her or me, so it´s her. The acceptance of the inevitable
and then acting in the only possible way.
When Rose decides to live and gets to the whistle. The music takes
several runs, each with one tune more, before it goes on.
The scene when Andrews stands in front of the fireplace and adjusts the
clock. As in the whole film you can see the ´importance´ of time for the
evolving events.
The most impressive scene in the whole movie is the one after the sinking
when you see the people and ever more of them while the camera moves up.
The sinking of the stern when you see the very _name_ TITANIC vanish.
´it has been a privilege playing with you tonight´
The scene when the band plays nearer my god to thee. The hymn is repeated
twice. First you can see the people sort of prepare for what will follow
(the strauss couple, the captain, the irish mother). On the second run
everything rips apart. Very impressive when the camera moves backwards in
the passage way and the water breaks the doors and the dishes fall down.
´... the former world has passed away.´ followed by that dead woman
´flying´ over the grand staircase. I find that a really ingenious idea,
because she looks like the perfect symbol for the now gone age before WW
I, as the grand staircase is the symbol for all that TITANIC was. Does
that strike anybody else or is it just my imagination?
> what makes you laugh?
the whole ´Freud´ scene
´...and that makes you my best friend´
the spitting scene when ruth comes into sight
´you unimaginable bastard´
the t-shirt with the smiley (by the way, are they sold anywhere?)
the scene when Jack talks Rose off the rail. Not the usual ´you are so
young, don´t jump´ thing.
> what makes you say "Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"?
the theft plot is not one of the best parts of the film
Cal and Fabrizio are not very elaborated characters
CU Felix
Nicholas Cascone
Speaking of which, Danny Nucci's performance has spawned a new verb in my
circle:
to nucci: v. to perform using a howlingly bad accent, as Danny Nucci in
Titanic, or Kevin Costner in Robin Hood. ex.: Did you hear Tom Cruise
nucci'ing through Far and Away?
Nick
Joe Sweeney
Nicholas Cascone <nicholas...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:01c07c24$9da866a0$9a28480c@quannie...
Ah yes, the Nooch! I love accents, and even for a bad one it sure is fun to listen to!
--
Joe Sweeney
Visit the alt.movies.titanic website:
http://www.geocities.com/amt102600/amt.html
Stephen Cozzi
flicks that have shown up on Sundance, and he's not a bad little actor. So
what the heck happened?
You might want to post this in the forum
(http://www.cinemarati.org/roundtable) at a new film site of which I'm on the
organizing committee of. We already have a John Waters Bad Film Award, and a
What Were They Thinking? award (called the Jar Jar Binks award), why not the
Danny Nucci Bad Accent Award?
Here's another one: Chris Eccleston in A PRICE ABOVE RUBIES. Now, I happen
to worship the ground Chris Eccleston walks on and would go to a movie to
watch him tie his shoes. I even sat through GONE IN SIXTY SECONDS. But his
interpretation of a Brooklyn Hasid was truly something to see....NOT.
J.
Andrew Clarkson
"Nicholas Cascone" <nicholas...@worldnet.att.net> wrote ....
> to nucci: v. to perform using a howlingly bad accent, as Danny Nucci in
> Titanic, or Kevin Costner in Robin Hood. ex.: Did you hear Tom Cruise
> nucci'ing through Far and Away?
>
If that's the case, did anyone see Dick Van Dyke nucci'ing his way through
Mary Poppins? His feeble attempt at cockney rhyming slang is always good
viewing!
Andrew Clarkson
Robert J. Kolker
Joe Sweeney wrote:
>
> Ah yes, the Nooch! I love accents, and even for a bad one it sure is fun to listen to!
>
Look-a. Ders-a de statue-a of-a liberty! Its-a still-a far away!
If I were Italian, I would sue.
Bob Kolker
Za-bo-boh-ru
>The line that made me go grrrr was Old Rose: "A woman's heart is a
>deep ocean of secrets." AUUGHHHH!!! That's *so* trite! Would any
>real human being *ever* say anything like that?
Heh. I actually didn't catch the Heart of the Ocean metaphor when I first saw
that scene. When it finally dawned on me during the next viewing, I just sort
of had to roll my eyes and groan.... :)
--
Zobovor
Za-bo-boh-ru
> For my first several viewings (quite a few, actually), I had a major
>problem with Rose's prying Jack's frozen hand from hers, since that
>seemed to violate the all-important concept and mutual commitment of
>"never let go".
Well, that and the fact that she appeared positively repulsed when she peeled
the corpse's hand off. Ick, it's dead, get it off getitoffgetitoff!
> But, as time went by, I accepted Cameron's premise that - having no >choice
but to pry loose Jack's hand herself, as much as she hated to
>do so - gave the scene a nuance of poignancy (and the fulfillment of her
>promise to never let go, but in its new context) that I had overlooked
>earlier.
I wonder if that scene wouldn't have made more sense if, say, her "boat"
started sinking and she had to let him drop off so that she could survive. I'm
not sure if the logistics of that would have really worked, but hey, there was
plenty of room on that door or whatever it was for two people, so why not
stretch the premise even further? :)
--
Zobovor... the scene of Jack drifting down into the murky deep also bothers me,
and I'm not really sure why.
Kimberly Dickson
> problem with Rose's prying Jack's frozen hand from hers, since that seemed
> to violate the all-important concept and mutual commitment of "never let
> go".
Hey there, Frank!
A long time ago, I asked my uncle about his opinion on this scene, and I
told him that I didn't understand it as Rose said she'd never let go. What
he told me made sense to me, and that is by letting him go, is a way of
burying him. Afterall, a lot of victims were buried at sea, too.
Kim
TheFrankMan
> A long time ago, I asked my uncle about his opinion on this scene, and I
> told him that I didn't understand it as Rose said she'd never let go.
What
> he told me made sense to me, and that is by letting him go, is a way of
> burying him. Afterall, a lot of victims were buried at sea, too.
>
Good point. As I mentioned a while back, I just reconciled with that
scene, reasoning that it was her only choice to keep her promise to survive,
and was all the more poignant because that was her only choice. And I just
decided anyway that I was going to enjoy 100% of the movie, and not let
anything interfere with that enjoyment.
On a related topic, quoting the previous poster, Zah-bo-boh-ru:
> Zobovor... the scene of Jack drifting down into the murky deep also
bothers me,
> and I'm not really sure why.
Interesting. To me, that scene was one of the most hauntingly beautiful.
His one hand was reaching upwards, from having been above the water holding
Rose's, and now it remains upwards, frozen in death into that position, as
if to gesture a goodbye before sinking out of sight. Fascinating how people
can see the same exact scene and react so differently, eh?
All of which reminds me, I'm overdue to watch the film again. It's been
several weeks, two of which have been getting settled in to the highly
techie abstractions of a new computer job, so I definitely can use a Titanic
fix. BTW, I've been assigned a spiffy new laptop at work that has a DVD
player built in, and was tempted to sneak in a Titanic DVD as soon as I buy
one, but today they switched me to a more visible desk, so I guess
somebody's reading my mind...
Which reminds me, are there any extra special goodies on the Titanic DVD?
I plan to buy the Wide-Screen version, and don't know such details, since
I'm very new to the world of DVDs. Any tips (anybody) on the best reputable
online place to buy a guaranteed new copy at the best price?
Gotta run - nice hearing from ya, Kim!
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Kimberly Dickson <VaEs...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:rq_b6.9659$1m.6...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Bonnie S. Howell
peeled
> the corpse's hand off. Ick, it's dead, get it off getitoffgetitoff!
I didn't think Rose looked repulsed. She was ready to give up and die until
she remembered her promise. She was cold and hallucinating by the time she
saw the boat. She was beyond shivering and I'm sure wouldn't have lasted
much longer. I thought the look on her face was one of pain from the
heartbreak of what she was about to do and possibly fear when she realized
that the those in the boat couldn't hear her. Then I think survival
instinct kicked in. Heck, it didn't really happen but I enjoy speculating
about it.
> not sure if the logistics of that would have really worked, but hey, there
was
> plenty of room on that door or whatever it was for two people, so why not
> stretch the premise even further? :)
There wasn't room on the door (or piece of staircase, or whatever) for both.
Notice when he realized that it wouldn't hold them both, he nodded his head
in acceptance. When he tried himself to get on, it became partially
submerged. Even if he were able to stay afloat with it partially submerged,
the water surely would have decreased Rose's chances for survival. The
character, Jack, was smart and he knew that. I think James Cameron is a
genius!
Kimberly Dickson
trailer.
Kim
Tina/John/Jenny Grimes
to shop online, I usually recommend www.buy.com to people looking to shop.
Their prices beat many places online. If you want to comparison shop first,
try www.mysimon.com and use that to search for the best price for Titanic on
the web. It'll give you the lowdown on the best deals, including shipping
costs! Happy hunting! Tina.
"TheFrankMan" <thefr...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:94qkv9$144$1...@slb1.atl.mindspring.net...
TheFrankMan
> I looked at a DVD last week, and the only extra on it is the theatrical
> trailer.
Boy, you'd think with a movie that popular they would have tossed in at
least a few interviews or behind-the-scenes things.
BTW, I'm REALLY glad I never saw the trailer until AFTER I saw the movie
itself, because - if I had - I never would have bothered to see the movie.
The trailer made the film look really sappy and hokey, with no depth or
anything of even the remotest value, like an over-blown soap-opera. Who the
hell creates these trailers, I wonder?
The same thing happened with The Mask of Zorro, with Anthony Hopkins,
Antonio Banderas and Catherine Zeta Jones. I hated the trailer because it
made the film look absurdly unrealistic and overly choreographed, but rented
the film anyway, just being in a salty mood one day, and really liked it.
So much, in fact, that I bought a copy, which I *rarely* do. It was a very
entertaining ton of fun, which I'd highly recommend. The fact that
Titanic's James Horner also did the music sure didn't hurt either.
BTW, if you're into fun and entertaining films, I'd highly recommend one
I've mentioned here before, the 1991 Austrailian film "Strictly Ballroom".
It quickly became one of my very favorites. Silly, crazy, but just plain
simple fun, with some great characters and performances.
Thanks for the info, Kim - gotta run... :)
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Joe Sweeney
> BTW, I'm REALLY glad I never saw the trailer until AFTER I saw the movie
> itself, because - if I had - I never would have bothered to see the movie.
> The trailer made the film look really sappy and hokey, with no depth or
> anything of even the remotest value, like an over-blown soap-opera. Who the
> hell creates these trailers, I wonder?
Hi Frank,
I didn't see the trailer until after also, but I really liked it! There are a couple of shots (don't blink!) that aren't in the movie, so that's cool. But the part I like best is the end. The action gets more and more rapid and intense, and then BOOM, cuts to an underwater shot of the bow. Really creepy I think.
--
Joe Sweeney
So you wanna go to a real party?
http://www.geocities.com/amt102600/amt.html
TheFrankMan
> I didn't see the trailer until after also, but I really liked it!
I saw it only once, and only just shortly after seeing the movie. Maybe
I'd appreciate it more, now that I've seen the movie a couple bazillion
times.
Just goes to prove that sometimes great minds *don't* think alike!
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Joe Sweeney <muad...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3a722...@silver.truman.edu...
Just...@webtv.net
movie. Instead of a romance/historical one. BUT I still would have
gone to see it and did. Did you? (kidding)
TheFrankMan
> BUT I still would have gone to see it and did. Did you? (kidding)
Actually, no... Having been burnt out by so much hype for other films
that disappointed me, I put it off forever; so I've seen it only on video,
and have been kicking myself in the butt ever since. (no kidding)
I guess I just don't like trailers in general. They all have such a corny
"canned" style: a brief video-clip, a pithy half-sentence; a brief
video-clip, a pithy half-sentence; a brief video-clip, a pithy
half-sentence - all set to a stilted verbal pacing that tries to sound so
profound and poetic and dramatic, but usually winds up feeling like a cross
between a dorky birthday-card and a home-movie...
I was especially turned off by the trailer I saw on TV recently for Tom
Hanks' new movie about being stranded on a desert island. I mean, the
scenes of his lady-love running in a watery setting while she yells, "Jack!
Jack!" Puh-leeeze!! Is that the most blatant and cheesy rip-off of Titanic
that anyone could imagine, or what?!?! I half-expected it to include a
trailer-scene where Hanks is exploring a water-filled cave for food and says
to himself, "A man's heart for survival is his deep ocean of secrets...
trust me..."
:)
BTW, have you (or anyone out there) seen that Hanks film? Any opinions?
Cheers,
The FrankMan
<Just...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:5957-3A...@storefull-101.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
Tina/John/Jenny Grimes
by a Tom Hanks film. I've always liked him...all the way back to his Bosom
Buddies days. Cast Away seemed like a very realistic portrayal of what life
as a cast away would be like, and the impact it would have on someone upon
their return to "normal" life. By the way though...Tom's character's name is
Chuck, not Jack. But I myself thought that they said Jack when I saw the
trailer. It sounded like that to me too! Take care. Tina.
"TheFrankMan" <thefr...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:94un80$lq4$1...@slb7.atl.mindspring.net...
TheFrankMan
> Hi, Frank. I saw Cast Away, and I really liked it. I am seldom
disappointed
> by a Tom Hanks film.
[snip]
> By the way though...Tom's character's name is Chuck, not Jack.
Then I stand corrected. Well, okay, since I'm typing, I sit corrected
anyway. :)
> But I myself thought that they said Jack when I saw the
> trailer. It sounded like that to me too!
Interesting. I don't suppose some clever marketing person might have
instructed to tweak the pronunciation in the trailer just enough to sound
like "Jack" but left it more clearly as "Chuck" in the actual film, so they
could insist there was nothing fishy going on. Hollywood marketing people
wouldn't do anything dishonest to sway the public's opinion, would they?
Hello? Hello? Is this modem still connected?
:)
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Tina/John/Jenny Grimes <artc...@defnet.com> wrote in message
news:t76eblt...@corp.supernews.com...
KimNB
wouldn't do anything dishonest to sway the public's opinion, would they?
Hello? Hello? Is this modem still connected?>>
I was at Blockbuster perusing the new releases, and I came across a video cover
for a movie called "Octopus" on which it looks very much like a giant octopus
is attacking the Titanic. I don't suppose this is an attempt to get Titanic
fans like me who would otherwise never give a moment's thought to a movie about
a giant octopus to rent such a movie out of shear curiousity that it might
actually be the Titanic that is being attacked?
Want to know what I am talking about? Look up the movie on the Internet Movie
Database at www.imdb.com. It shows the same image that was on the video cover.
See if you don't think it looks like that octopus is pulling Titanic, already
split as it did in Cameron's film but minus any funnels, into the sea.
Did they use leftover Titanic movie props? I'm just wondering.
TheFrankMan
> See if you don't think it looks like that octopus is pulling Titanic,
already
> split as it did in Cameron's film but minus any funnels, into the sea.
An octopus the size of New Jersey... what will Hollywood think of next?
:) Maybe it'll pal up with Godzilla or something.
Yeah, it seems to look as you describe, though the picture on IMBD was
kinda small and didn't get any bigger when I clicked on it. I guess the
funnels were gone because the octopus was planning to use them for making a
long-sleeved sweater. Kind of makes ya wonder how the creative geniuses who
dream up this stuff are actually able to run the camera equipment or find
their way to work each day. :)
But thanks for that lead, and especially for the link to IMBD - that one
is worth bookmarking to research movies in general. But I'll probably pass
on the other nine octopus movies they listed. Unless one of them features
an octopus making eight simultaneous sketches of Rose. Now *that* would be
worth renting! :)
Cheers,
The FrankMan
KimNB <ki...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010127212234...@ng-mk1.aol.com...
Joe Sweeney
--
Joe Sweeney
What, you think a first-class girl can't drink?:
http://www.geocities.com/amt102600/amt.html
KimNB <ki...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20010127212234...@ng-mk1.aol.com...
William J. Leary Jr.
> Yeah, it seems to look as you describe, though the picture on IMBD
was
> kinda small and didn't get any bigger when I clicked on it.
Look it up again and hit "Posters" on the left column. The first one
is fairly large.
Joe Sweeney
> I saw this box too. I had to laugh when I saw it! They've got a Ken
> Marschall painting of Titanic tearing in two...with a giant octopus
at
> the sinking end!
It does look a lot like Titanic, and more than a little (in these
pictures, anyway) like Marschall's work.
Using the poser noted above, and using my browser (Opera)
magnification feature, I've got that just about covering my 19"
screen. It's a fairly good picture, it's not too grainy at this mag.
Although it looks like a Marschall picture, I don't recall any of his
showing the break this far forward. Properly, it should be around the
area where the "B" deck windows start (coming fore from aft). Or, if
you like, just about where the three or four windows are separated
from the rest on "C" deck.
Also, the area where the docking bridge should be doesn't look right.
Even in the bigger picture, it looks like a rail separating the poop
deck from the well deck (which should be there). The docking bridge
isn't in evidence at all, unless it's that gray thing in the well
deck, which is wrong for Titanic, of course.
- Bill
TheFrankMan
Thanks for the tip. Here's a direct link to the first large image I
found, for anyone who's vaguely curious but didn't have the energy to
navigate their way to an image of this theatrical masterpiece:
http://www.fantasyfilmfest.com/2000/poster/revenge_octopus_gross.html
You're right too about the apparent docking bridge; it shouldn't extend as
far from port to starboard as its shown. I suspect this low-budget
production probably scanned in some decent artwork of a ship that roughly
approximated Titanic's design, and then used some graphics program to
quickly make a few changes to avoid copyright infringement. Overall, I
don't think this movie was released. It escaped!
Pah Dah Boom!
Makes ya wonder too just what this demented octopus plans to do with this
ship once he/she tears it apart, since it would be fairly hard to digest.
Unless this is an octopus's idea of tearing open a can of peanuts to get to
the tasty little squirming and screaming snacks inside. But that would be
an awful lot of work with very little payoff, i.e., it'd be like humans
trying to rip open an army tank to feast on a couple dozen ants. All of
which begs the question of why this silly creature bothered the ship in the
first place, since food could hardly be the reason, and a ship floating past
overhead was posing no threat. But, alas, I guess there are some in this
world who just enjoy trying to trash Titanic for no good or logical reason
at all, a sad phenomenon with which this NG is not unfamilar... :)
Cheers,
The FrankMan
William J. Leary Jr. <Bill_...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:ybVc6.689$_h6.6...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
Just...@webtv.net
towards you. tee hee
Sherri
TheFrankMan
news:15249-3A...@storefull-101.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
> Frank, I know you didn't see it at the theatre, that was a little dig
> towards you. tee hee
>
> Sherri
Et tu, Sherrimus?
:)
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Tina/John/Jenny Grimes
>Hollywood marketing people
> wouldn't do anything dishonest to sway the public's opinion, would they?
> Hello? Hello? Is this modem still connected?
That just made me think about something I've noticed frequently in video
stores. Ever notice how, after some movie star gets famous, all their old
movies--especially ones they only had bit parts in--start showing up on
video? Or they get rereleased with new video packaging to feature a
prominent photo of the now famous star. In many cases, the actors were seen
only briefly in the film. But now that they're famous, everyone wants to
capitalize on their celebrity. All that talk about the octopus flick and
the Titanic-like photo just made me think about that. This is definitely
Hollywood marketing, to be sure.
Take care. Tina.
TheFrankMan
> Ever notice how, after some movie star gets famous, all their old
> movies--especially ones they only had bit parts in--start showing
> up on video?
Speaking of stars' humble roots, I was bit surprised to find George
Clooney in Attack of the Killer Tomatos and Jack Nicholson in the *original*
Little Shop of Horrors. Of course, Nicholson was also in Easy Rider with
Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper. Nicholson was also in Chinatown, of course,
but most people didn't realize that the thug who sliced Nicholson's nose
with a knife was director Roman Polanski (who later went on to make Close
Encounters With The Third Grade). Also, Gloria Stuart ("Old Rose")
co-starred with Claude Raines in The Invisible Man, back in 1933;
interestingly, Raines was her love-interest, and his name was Jack! Also,
Bill Paxton (Brock Lovett) was one of the three street-punks (the one with
the blue mohawk hair-do) who made the maaaaajor (and I mean MAAAAAAJOR)
mistake of messing with Arnold Schwarzenegger in the opening scenes of
Terminator. And, of course, who could forget Ronald Reagan in the 8-year
epic production of Bonzo Goes To Washington?
:)
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Tina/John/Jenny Grimes <artc...@defnet.com> wrote in message
news:t79hpjl...@corp.supernews.com...
TheFrankMan
> What, you think a first-class girl can't drink?
Your above line led me to day-dreaming about getting Kate drunk (I'll
leave out the details, since this is a family NG) but I should at least
mention that the phrase:
"A first-class girl *can* drink" is an anagram for a quote of me in my above
state of mind, namely:
"Crass cad Frank: ' I'll stir gin.' "
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Joe Sweeney <muad...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3a73e...@silver.truman.edu...
Joe Sweeney
> director Roman Polanski (who later went on to make Close
> Encounters With The Third Grade).
BWAHAHAHAHA! ROFL!!
> Bill Paxton (Brock Lovett) was one of the three street-punks (the one with
> the blue mohawk hair-do) who made the maaaaajor (and I mean MAAAAAAJOR)
> mistake of messing with Arnold Schwarzenegger in the opening scenes of
> Terminator.
"Looks like this guy's a couple o' cans short of a six pack, huh huh."
"Wash day tomorrow. Nothing clean, right?"
Luv that scene!
--
Joe Sweeney
Teach me to ride like a man:
http://www.geocities.com/amt102600/amt.html
Just...@webtv.net
tee hee
Corey Doyle Cowan
Saw it, hated it.
It would probably have been better if I wasn't sitting in the front row. But
it was OK I suppose. Just not my kind of movie.
Corey Ann
*Collide With Destiny* http://www.coreyann.com/titanic
TheFrankMan
news:3a755...@silver.truman.edu...
TheFrankMan <thefr...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:952oof$etn$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net...
>> director Roman Polanski (who later went on to make Close
>> Encounters With The Third Grade).
>BWAHAHAHAHA! ROFL!!
ROFL myself, over your response! Glad you included the "ROFL", i.e., at
first I couldn't tell if you were laughing or trying out for a Dracula
movie... :) Sounds like maybe you were having lunch when you read my post,
and coughed up half a grilled-cheese sandwich through your nose. Made my
day, just knowing that's what might have happened!
I was wondering if anybody would remember ol' Roman's youthful romantic
forays of many years ago. If I'm not mistaken, I believe after "Close
Encounters", he went on to make "Honey, I _____ The Kids..." I guess those
Hollywood folks can get pretty geeky and never catch on to just how far out
in left field they are. Oh, well, at least Polanski could go out on
double-dates with Michael Jackson and know that the other couple would look
pretty normal...
>> Bill Paxton (Brock Lovett) was one of the three street-punks (the one
with
>> the blue mohawk hair-do) who made the maaaaajor (and I mean MAAAAAAJOR)
>> mistake of messing with Arnold Schwarzenegger in the opening scenes of
>> Terminator.
> "Looks like this guy's a couple o' cans short of a six pack, huh huh."
> "Wash day tomorrow. Nothing clean, right?"
> Luv that scene!
Yeah, me too. I like when Arnold non-chalantly shoves his hand into the
punk's chest and lifts him off the ground. I always say that - when you're
fighting a guy who's just grabbed hold of your heart with his bare hand -
it's generally a safe bet that you've lost the fight. I mean, even if
you're able to sneak in a good solid sucker-punch right afterwards, even if
you bloody the other guy's nose, it's still kind of a moot point.
Lastly, you ended with
> Teach me to ride like a man
whose letters yield a nice variety of anagrams, such as...
"Kate / Leo drama: entice him" (a description of the famous portrait/sketch
scene)
"Animate idle Ektachrome" (considering how Rose brought the film to life)
"E'er make Titanic home, lad." (a eulogy for Jack)
"Kate, American, hide, motel" (a description of Jack's & Roses plans if
they'd reached NY)
"Kate and Leo: harm/ice time." (a summary of their combined fate)
"I'm Kate - I meld heart, ocean." (a summary of Rose's pesonal legacy)
This particular set of letters was really brimming with great words to be
found. There was even at least one really spicy anagram to be found amid
the above letters, but I omitted it here because this is still a family NG.
I'm sure there's more. Maybe get hopping and go hunting for a few yourself,
Grasshopper... :)
Cheers,
The FrankMan
TheFrankMan
news:18105-3A...@storefull-102.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
> Frank,
>
> tee hee
Which is an anagram for "hee tee"... [Okay, that was lame. But, hey,
gimme a break, there wasn't much to work with in that one... :) ]
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Joe Sweeney
> ROFL myself, over your response! Glad you included the "ROFL", i.e., at
> first I couldn't tell if you were laughing or trying out for a Dracula
> movie... :)
Naw...that would be MUAHAHAHA!
>Sounds like maybe you were having lunch when you read my post,
> and coughed up half a grilled-cheese sandwich through your nose. Made my
> day, just knowing that's what might have happened!
Wow, I was actually! But it was a turkey sammich. That ought to put an end to my bad habit of "eat 'n' surf". Now, if you had posted that this morning, I would have been eating my cereal. In which case I wouldn't be talking to you now, what with the milk in the keyboard and all. :)
> Yeah, me too. I like when Arnold non-chalantly shoves his hand into the
> punk's chest and lifts him off the ground. I always say that - when you're
> fighting a guy who's just grabbed hold of your heart with his bare hand -
> it's generally a safe bet that you've lost the fight. I mean, even if
> you're able to sneak in a good solid sucker-punch right afterwards, even if
> you bloody the other guy's nose, it's still kind of a moot point.
St Peter: So what's your story?
Punk: Got in a fight.
St. Peter: and?...
Punk: And...and he was naked, all right?! He was naked! There, I said it!
St. Peter: BWAHAHAHA!
Bill Paxton's great, isn't he? Have you ever seen Weird Science? He was HILARIOUS! Ah, Chet, the buzz-cut fascist. I need to watch that one again. He played a similar, yet more hysterical character in Aliens. I just love to quote him:
"Game over, man! GAME OVER!"
"Well, we're in some real pretty s**t now! What are we gonna do, man? What are we gonna do?"
"Yeah, well you can count me out!"
"You want some o' this? Oh, you want some too? Aaarghh! <gurgle>"
and my favorite:
Marine: "It's hot in here."
Hudson: "Yeah, but it's a dry heat."
I heard he was for some reason dissatisfied with the way the character was written, so he said to hell with it. He thought everyone would hate Hudson, but it turns out he's everyone's favorite.
BTW, have you seen "A Simple Plan"? That was a good one. Boy, that ending was hard to watch.
Also, those were some excellent anagrams!
--
Joe Sweeney
I know what ice fishing is!
http://www.geocities.com/amt102600/amt.html
Pet peeve of the day:
People who use the word "literally" when they exaggerate:
"I literally jumped out of my skin!"
TheFrankMan
> Bill Paxton's great, isn't he? Have you ever seen Weird Science?
Yeah, but I was definitely focused on Kelly LeBrock (or, as her publicists
always billed her, "The Amazing Kelly LeBrock"...) Nothing like having your
own genii with magical powers who'll do anything you want and who looks like
**that**! Yo! A fella'd wind up in body-cast for **months**! I guess she
married Steven Segal, but they broke up a few years back, so maybe she's
available again... (hey, no laws against dreaming, eh?) So Paxton was in
Weird Science too, eh? Never knew him before Titanic, though I had seen
both Terminator and Aliens a few times. I do remember the Humungo bad-ass
biker guy from Road Warrior being in Weird Science, because he's pretty hard
to miss in a crowd. And did I mention Kelly LeBrock? She was also in The
Woman in Red (or Lady in Red, I always forget) with Gene Wilder and Gilda
Radner, which was a lot of fun. I'll have to rent Weird Science again.
> BTW, have you seen "A Simple Plan"? That was a good one. Boy, that ending
was hard to watch.
Nope. Will have to add it to my list.
> Also, those were some excellent anagrams!
Thanks. It's always a surprise to me to see which phrases are just plain
boring, with no good words at all to offer, and which other phrases simply
overflow with so many possibilities and great & appropriate words that match
the theme of the topic. "Teach me to ride like a man" was one of the best
sets of letters I've seen in a loooooong time; thanks for bringing it to my
attention! Try digging into it yourself, I'm sure there's plenty more good
ones to be found in there.
Gotta run - the sun will rise in a couple hours, and I gotta go back and
row with the other slaves...
Cheers,
The FrankMan
Joe Sweeney <muad...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3a765...@silver.truman.edu...
Janelle Roberts
He was CHET...the obnoxious older brother.."how you would you like a nice,
greazy pork sandwich served in a dirty ashtray" HEHEHE and then kelly
lebrock changes him into a big ball of puss or something toward's the end...
i guess a guy's gotta start somewhere right?? I think he gets killed early
on in Alien...not sure, but i do remember him being in it.
--
cheers...
"TheFrankMan" <thefr...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:956dgj$3c1$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...