mst3k sucks
Stuart Galbraith
be me.
Let me begin by saying that my beef with MST3K isn't about whether the
films being poked at are good or bad, nor is a question as to whether the
show's funny or not.
Rather, what's happening here is that the generally sincere (if often
misguided) efforts of various filmmakers are crassly being perverted;
at the same time, the show's audience is being cheated out of its right
to make aesthetic judgements on its own.
MST3K insults its audience just as surely as the films it lampoons by
presuming to know more than they do. I, for one, am smart enough to be
able to tell a good film from a bad one, etc., only MST3K doesn't give
ITS audience that much credit.
EVERY film--classics, turkeys and everything in between--derserve the chance
to be seen objectively. Now I'm not suggesting PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE
is a masterpiece that should be viewed in stony silence--hardly. Many of the
films shown on MST3K ARE bad, and often unintentionally hilarious.
But I am (and I trust that many of you are also) smart enough to figure that
out for myself. Each films attributes and/or failings should be allowed
to work on their own level; they don't need any sophomoric "assistance."
And what happens when MST3K runs out of "bad movies." Of course, the
answer is they already are. Not-bad movies like ROCKETSHIP X-M and
MAROONED have started to turn up. Could FORBIDDEN PLANET, 2001, and for that
matter, CITIZEN KANE and LA DOLCE VITA be far behind?
My wife and I recently attended a 24-hour sci-fi marathon, and were
shocked to hear MST3K fans hooting GOOD movies like 20,000 LEAGUES
UNDER THE SEA, the 1956 INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, and others.
There were a lot of kids in the audience whose parents had obviously
seen these same movies when THEY were kids, and wanted to share the experience.
But what were the children to make of the rude, crude, often sexist and
thoroughly inescapible behavior of their fellow patrons?
It's as if the folks at MST3K aren't talented enough to make their
own movies, and so make fun of the sincere efforts of others.
Movies shown on television already endure commercial breaks, editing for
reasons of time, language, nudity, pan-and-scanning, time-compression, etc.
Don't they suffer enough already?
Stuart Galbraith
sgal...@chaph.usc.edu
Dave Van Domelen
back? He certainly has the same attitudes and platitudes.
Dave Van Domelen, to be frank, Marooned isn't all that good....
Ron Hogan
>Okay, okay. Somebody's got to say it, so I guess it might just as well
>be me.
>Let me begin by saying that my beef with MST3K isn't about whether the
>films being poked at are good or bad, nor is a question as to whether the
>show's funny or not.
>Rather, what's happening here is that the generally sincere (if often
>misguided) efforts of various filmmakers are crassly being perverted;
>at the same time, the show's audience is being cheated out of its right
>to make aesthetic judgements on its own.
"Generally sincere...efforts...crassly being perverted?" Puh-leese. We're
talking flicks here. No audience is being cheated out of any right to make
any aesthetic judgment. You want to watch an unaltered PAINTED HILLS, head
on down to the video store.
>EVERY film--classics, turkeys and everything in between--derserve the chance
>to be seen objectively.
And they have a chance. MST3K is about destroying the stupid notion that
film auteurs have rammed down our throats that film is some kind of intrinsic
art which we are supposed to contemplate in silent reverence. Bullpuckey.
Seize the means of production of meaning! Death to the author, long live
the viewer! Personally, I live for the day that the bots show 2001 and
CITIZEN KANE. Create new meanings for the text. Engage in dialogue, don't
suffer through monologue.
>It's as if the folks at MST3K aren't talented enough to make their
>own movies, and so make fun of the sincere efforts of others.
Standard auteur-worship twaddle. Pick on anyone who undermines the director's
position as brilliant artist.
You know what really ticks me off, is how Bravo has that "Artist's Rights"
thing at the start of their films. "We respect artist's rights to creativity,
so we would like to say that this is not the director's original version, but
we fixed it up for TV." If they had any respect for the artist, they would
show the damn film.
So, if anything, MST3K is the most honest programming of movies there is.
And I'd rather hear one guy and two robots talk intelligently about film
that watch some ponderous, edited art film anyday.
Ron
of course, if it were Bob Dorian
up there on the Satellite of Love,
that would be bitchin'.
John Switzer
I'm still cracking up about the line "Every film deserves to be seen" like
its director/producer/writer/etc. intended. Talk about a slim grip on
reality. Perhaps this guy ought to realize that some people, believe it
or not, make films to make money.
--
John Switzer | "You probably can't imagine what it is like
| to be so lost and frightened that you will
CompuServe: 74076,1250 | listen to any voice which promises change."
Internet: j...@netcom.com| --Hugh the Borg, or any repentant Clinton voter
Harlan Freilicher
>Rather, what's happening here is that the generally sincere (if often
>misguided) efforts of various filmmakers are crassly being perverted;
>at the same time, the show's audience is being cheated out of its right
>to make aesthetic judgements on its own.
>MST3K insults its audience just as surely as the films it lampoons by
>presuming to know more than they do. I, for one, am smart enough to be
>able to tell a good film from a bad one, etc., only MST3K doesn't give
>ITS audience that much credit.
>
>EVERY film--classics, turkeys and everything in between--derserve the chance
>to be seen objectively. Now I'm not suggesting PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE
>is a masterpiece that should be viewed in stony silence--hardly. Many of the
>films shown on MST3K ARE bad, and often unintentionally hilarious.
>But I am (and I trust that many of you are also) smart enough to figure that
>out for myself. Each films attributes and/or failings should be allowed
>to work on their own level; they don't need any sophomoric "assistance."
You know, it's really rare that I'm tempted to tell somebody to "Repeat to
yourself, 'It's just a show; I should really just relax,'" but this guy needs
a serious perspective check. Somebody's seriously misinterpreted the term "cult
show" here. Nobody's attempting thought control here, Stuart. We're just making
a few (submit) jokes. If you don't agree, that's (conform) just fine. Diverse
opinions are the right of every (follow) human being, and we all realize that.
That's why the closing credits give special thanks to the Authors of the First
Amendment. The point isn't to agree with every opinion expressed; it's to get
a few laughs.
>
>And what happens when MST3K runs out of "bad movies." Of course, the
>answer is they already are. Not-bad movies like ROCKETSHIP X-M and
>MAROONED have started to turn up. Could FORBIDDEN PLANET, 2001, and for that
>matter, CITIZEN KANE and LA DOLCE VITA be far behind?
>
You're comparing Rocketship X-M to Citizen Kane? Does it hurt much, Stuart???
>My wife and I recently attended a 24-hour sci-fi marathon, and were
>shocked to hear MST3K fans hooting GOOD movies like 20,000 LEAGUES
>UNDER THE SEA, the 1956 INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, and others.
>There were a lot of kids in the audience whose parents had obviously
>seen these same movies when THEY were kids, and wanted to share the experience.
How exactly did you determine that the hecklers were MiSTies? Did they have
gumball machines for heads, or were they just wearing red jumpsuits?
>But what were the children to make of the rude, crude, often sexist and
>thoroughly inescapible behavior of their fellow patrons?
I don't know; I guess it depends on whether the kids had already been
"brainwashed" by watching an episode of MST3K.
>
>It's as if the folks at MST3K aren't talented enough to make their
>own movies, and so make fun of the sincere efforts of others.
>
Yup, 10 points for effort; totally sincere. 9 points for penmanship, too. But
as for quality, cinematography, acting, directing, originality, and believable
scripts. . .
>Movies shown on television already endure commercial breaks, editing for
>reasons of time, language, nudity, pan-and-scanning, time-compression, etc.
>Don't they suffer enough already?
No, Stuart. Movies can't feel anything; they're not alive. *We* suffer when we
watch lousy movies. MST3K just helps ease the pain. And if you think movies
can suffer, why are you so bothered by a show that strives to put them out of
their misery?
Just one guy's opinions; I can't speak for all MiSTies.
-Harlan
P.S. No personal offense intended. Understand that this is a MiSTie forum, and
so biting sarcasm and quips are part of the culture.
P.P.S. You know, if you don't enjoy the show, you can always change the channel
or turn the set off.
--
_________________________________________________________________________
| Harlan Freilicher | "Quit complaining! We killed it before we |
| har...@acpub.duke.edu | stuffed it in there, didn't we?" Crow T. Robot |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
R. M. Dunkle
Wow, this is weird. By name, it *is* the same guy from Ann Arbor.
Question one: What is he doing in CA?
Question two: "MST3k sucks"? I don't *think* so. SGIII (or "stu")
would *never* title his article that way.
This is a verbatim (or close to it) repeat of his newspaper article.
Someone on that system is having a little fun with us.
To reply, anyway:
The show isn't perverting or destroying anything - every movie they
show is still available in its original form. If you don't like what they're
doing, don't watch the show.
As for the public thing, that behaviour is indeed inexcusable. I'm sure
everyone at Best Brains would agree. Blaming the show for it is stupid, though.
MST3k didn't make the people into assholes.
--
* Brian A. Dunkle | rdu...@aal.itd.umich.edu <- REPLY TO HERE!! Not "engin" *
* Also available at bdu...@ccit.arizona.edu <- Where I really am, but VAX *
* Support systems analyst, Information Technologies Center, AzHSL /\ *
* Detroit Red Wings fan, stranded in the desert, Tucson, Arizona \/ *
Paul Monty Ashley
>Rather, what's happening here is that the generally sincere (if often
>misguided) efforts of various filmmakers are crassly being perverted;
>at the same time, the show's audience is being cheated out of its right
>to make aesthetic judgements on its own.
No they're not. You can go watch a movie any time you want, regardless
of what MST3K has done to it on their show. That's like saying a newspaper's
theatre reviewer robs you of the chance to form an opinion of your own.
> Each films attributes and/or failings should be allowed
>to work on their own level; they don't need any sophomoric "assistance."
So? It's not like the videotapes you can find at your local Blockbuster
have all had Joel, Tom,and Crow matted on. If someone wants to watch the
film, they _can_. If someone wants to watch some guy from Minneapolis
and a couple puppets watching the film, they can, too.
>And what happens when MST3K runs out of "bad movies." Of course, the
>answer is they already are.
Oh, let's see . . . three or four movies come out every Friday in
theatres, many more on videotape. So let's say a conservative 500
movies a year. And there's a huge backlog of movies going back to the
thirties. And they're making 26 episodes of MST3K a year. I really
don't think there's any danger of their being completely unable to
find _any_ bad movies.
What's happening, though, in the cases where they do a movie like
"Marooned", is that they feel that they can be funny enough with
the material in the movie to justify the show. There's no rule
that says you can only mock badness.
>My wife and I recently attended a 24-hour sci-fi marathon, and were
>shocked to hear MST3K fans hooting GOOD movies like 20,000 LEAGUES
>UNDER THE SEA, the 1956 INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, and others.
>There were a lot of kids in the audience whose parents had obviously
>seen these same movies when THEY were kids, and wanted to share the experience.
>But what were the children to make of the rude, crude, often sexist and
>thoroughly inescapible behavior of their fellow patrons?
First: Are you sure that all those guys were MST3K fans? Let's face
it, there's people talking about the movie and laughing at it
everywhere (I'm a movie theatre manager - - trust me on this one <grin> )
Second, and more importantly: This "rude, crude, often sexist and
thoroughly inescapible (sic) behavior" - - was it done by Joel
Hodgson, Mike Nelson, Trace Beaulieu, Kevim Murphy, Josh Weinstein,
Jim Mallon, or anyone connected to Best Brains? If not, you
shouldn't blame them.
Third, again, talking _in a movie theatre_ is fairly inescapable, true.
But it's _easy_ to avoid MST3K. Heck, it's on _Comedy Central_!
>It's as if the folks at MST3K aren't talented enough to make their
>own movies, and so make fun of the sincere efforts of others.
You're bitter. We understand. But just because somebody makes fun
of a movie doesn't make them untalented hacks. Besides, they've
probably given more exposure to movies like "First Spaceship to
Venus" (a movie that I personally enjoy) than the movies would
have nowadays.
>Movies shown on television already endure commercial breaks, editing for
>reasons of time, language, nudity, pan-and-scanning, time-compression, etc.
>Don't they suffer enough already?
Movies don't have feelings. People have feelings.
-Paul "Monty" Ashley
Catherine M Leonard
You're missing the boat, Stuart. It's just plain fun. We, the audience,
are laughing _with_ the bots (& Joel). We aren't being guided into the
land of comedy milk & honey. I _love_ it when they're reading my mind!
They'll say things I would've thought. Besides, it's great entertainment!
Glenn #6703
Niles
in movies that are shown as movies are annoying, but please have the
intestinal fortitude to tell them to be quiet instead of being bitter at
their fun and ranting to us. Sorry if we are destroying your silent world.
*comfort*
Niles
Mike Cohen
>Okay, okay. Somebody's got to say it, so I guess it might just as well
>be me.
>Let me begin by saying that my beef with MST3K isn't about whether the
>films being poked at are good or bad, nor is a question as to whether the
>show's funny or not.
>Rather, what's happening here is that the generally sincere (if often
>misguided) efforts of various filmmakers are crassly being perverted;
>at the same time, the show's audience is being cheated out of its right
>to make aesthetic judgements on its own.
Generally sincere efforts? What about "Manos the hands of fate", "Eegah!",
"Teenagers from outer space", "the Killer Shrews", or "the Giant Gila Monster".
Do you think Sandy Frank intended to make a masterpiece with his badly dubbed
Japanese movies?
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
Mike Cohen is...@netcom.com
ksa...@news.delphi.com
Politically correct dickweed.
CHE STUD
> Let me begin by saying that my beef with MST3K isn't about whether the
> films being poked at are good or bad ....
Then why are you so worried about what happens when MST3K runs
out of bad movies?
>
> ....the show's audience is being cheated out of its right
> to make aesthetic judgements on its own.
>
> MST3K insults its audience just as surely as the films it lampoons by
> presuming to know more than they do. I, for one, am smart enough to be
> able to tell a good film from a bad one, etc....
OK, so YOU'RE able to judge which films are good or bad, but
the MST3K audience isn't (otherwise, how are they being "cheated out of
their right to make aesthetic judgements"). My, aren't we feeling superior
today?
Of course, MST3K is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to
depriving the audience (except you of course) from making an aesthetic
judgement on its own. Obviously, we must ban MST3K so people can make
their own judgements. And then, Siskel and Ebert and all other movie
critics must be banned to keep people's opinions unsullied. Oh, and I
suppose we better toss out the 1st ammendment so that we can keep people
from spreading word-of-mouth opinions!
>
> EVERY film--classics, turkeys and everything in between--derserve the chance
> to be seen objectively. Now I'm not suggesting PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE
> is a masterpiece that should be viewed in stony silence--hardly. Many of the
Hey, you gave an opinion on Plan 9! How can I possibly come to
an aesthetic judgement of my own now!!!
>
> And what happens when MST3K runs out of "bad movies." Of course, the
> answer is they already are. Not-bad movies like ROCKETSHIP X-M and
> MAROONED have started to turn up. Could FORBIDDEN PLANET, 2001, and for that
> matter, CITIZEN KANE and LA DOLCE VITA be far behind?
Hey, I thought you said in the opening paragraph that you didn't care
if the movies they made fun of were good or bad!
Actually though, I think it would be hilarious if MST3K did a special
"good movies week."
> It's as if the folks at MST3K aren't talented enough to make their
> own movies, and so make fun of the sincere efforts of others.
What's this obsession with "sincerity" all about?? Frankly, I
suspect that the makers of Double-Double-O 7 weren't a bunch of "sincere"
auteurs trying to make a statement so much as rip-off artists trying (badly)
to cash in on something.
Also, since "sincerity" seems to be your pick for the all-important
virtue, I think that the makers of MST3K *sincerely* believe that, say, The
Painted Valley" blew chunks.
> Movies shown on television already endure commercial breaks, editing for
> reasons of time, language, nudity, pan-and-scanning, time-compression, etc.
> Don't they suffer enough already?
>
Movies "endure" and "suffer"??? Stuart, movies are inaminate objects!!!
> Stuart Galbraith
> sgal...@chaph.usc.edu
>
>
Also, Stuart, if you really hate MST3K that much, here's a novel concept:
DON'T WATCH!!!
PS-Anybody else notice that the whole article boils down to: Here's a show
which says it's gonna make fun of bad movies, and--OH MY GOD-- it *actually*
does make fun of bad movies?
*********************************
Chris Fishel * "In the winter, I'm a Buddhist*
University of Virginia * & in the summer I'm a nudist"*
ct...@virginia.edu * -Joe Gould (U. S. poet and *
* translator of the *
* language of the seagulls) *
*********************************
Daniel S. Rice
problem of filtering out painful and unsightly Usenet posts.
Goodbye, kill files, helllllo _stun files_.
Frank: Yes, with our invention annoying posters are treating to
a low-level, yet painful, shock every time you have to wade
through one of their postings. The harmless power spike
is able to travel over TCP/IP, Bitnet, and uucp, so you
can feel sure your intended recipient will feel it!
Dr. Forrester: We've shut down Kibo almost entirely, and we're working on
a special gas attachment for the folks in alt.revisionism.
Unfortunately, the folks at zuma.uucp seem to be storing
up the power and running their android overtime. Now Joel,
why don't you show us your invention.
Joel: Tired of brutal and excessive methods for filtering out
garbage while reading news? Now you can remove zero-content
postings yet never miss a good chuckle on alt.fan.gene-scott.
We like to call it the "Inter-Net."
Tom Servo: Simply attach this fine mesh filter to the input port of
your newsreading machine. Flames, notes from B1FF, and
irrelevant postings of all kinds are instantly eliminated!
Crow: Hey look! Only three postings on talk.politics.mideast!
And wow, they're full of meaty, unbiased, flame-free content.
Thank you, Inter-net!
Tom Servo: With our lame joke removal attachment, you'll never have to
look at rec.humor.funny again!
Dr. Forrester: Well, Joel-y boy, we have a special treat for you today.
It's our old friend Stuart Galbraith, master MST nay-sayer.
You remember, we sent you a column of his one time...
_Hopping Mad Over MST3000_.
Joel: How could we forget?!?
Dr. Forrester: Well, he's back, and this time he has an internet account.
You and your droids are in for some deep hurting this time.
We'll be sending up his posting in a bit, but first you're
in for a little flashback.
Magic Voice: Flashback in 5...4...3...2...1...Flashback _now_.
Joel: Saigon, no!
----------
[Lights blink in the control pod]
Joel: Oh No! We got criticism sign!
HOPPING MAD OVER 'MST3000'
Joel: (old Scandinavian lady voice) Well I vash so mad I could just hop!
Tom: Yah, dat really ticks me off ven dey do dat.
By STUART GALBRAITH IV
Tom: Wow! My favorite economist!
NEWS SPECIAL WRITER
Joel: He's "Special" (makes quotes with hands)
My wife, Anne, normally writes this column, but right now she's just too
mad. She just caught
Crow: A bad dose of the clap from some sailor...
part of the Comedy Channel's "Mystery Science Theater 3000." For
anyone lucky enough to have avoided the program thus far "MST 3000"
features an "astronaut"
Joel: I'm just a janitor, really...
and several "robots" (the latter actually Muppet-like puppets)
Crow: You don't think we're muppet-like, do you Joel? (quivery voice)
Joel: No, no, Crow, I prefer to think of you as "animatronic"
Crow: Thanks, Joel. I'm relieved.
who watch real, honest-to goodness movies
Tom: This guy obviously didn't see "Manos"!
while making comments, supposedly comical, based on the events onscreen.
Joel: Any resemblance between these comments and any actual onscreen
events is purely coincidental.
The impact of this program, not only on the "so-bad-it's-good" genre, but
on movies of all types, is tremendous.
Crow: Why thank you... Hey!
At a recent 24-hour science fiction movie marathon in Columbus, Ohio,
Anne and I watched helplessly
Tom: As the technicians dripped saline solution into our clamped-open
eyeballs...
as classic films the likes of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" and
Disney's "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea"
Tom: (sings) unda da sea, unda da sea
were mercilessly assaulted by audience members "inspired" by this
insipid show. One patron even brought a life-size replica of one of
the robots to keep him company.
Tom: My long-lost brother!
After enduring several hours of crude, sexist remarks,
Crow: ...we got the hang of it and cracked wise with the best of them.
We laughed and laughed!
nonstop belching
Joel: Is that anatomically possible?
(Noel Coward it ain't)
Tom: It's not even Noel Redding.
and other contemptible, frighteningly animal-like behavior from these
morons--about one-third of the audience--we left furious and deeply
saddened.
Joel: I wonder why everyone applauded when we left...?
We felt sorry for all the children in the audience, children who were
Tom: ...no doubt playing hooky.
presumably seeing these films for the first time. And as film Critic
Gene Siskel has rightly stated: You can only see a film for the first
time once.
Joel: Also the second time.
Crow: I think Ebert disagreed, though.
What were they to make of all this mayhem'?
Tom: Johnny was deeply scarred by the mayhem around him and
had killed a man before his 12th birthday. Today he sells
brushes door-to-door and has made peace with his demons.
Given the chance to work its powers, 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers" is
still genuinely creepy and unsettling,
Crow: So is a 7-11 burrito.
"20,000 Leagues" is still full of wonder and excitement. But
uninterested audience members didn't give either film a chance.
Joel: Why did the producers?
"Mystery Science Theater 3000" had given them the green light to tear
these pictures to shreds, and so they did.
Crow: You are our willing slaves...
Just like the madman who, a while back, flipped out in a Florence
museum and took a swing at Michelangelo's "David's" big toe.
Joel: Hey, I think I went to highschool with that guy!
An usher I spoke with suggested the audience would calm down for the
newer films shown later that evening;
Tom: By then the drugs in the popcorn would have kicked in.
laughing at older films, he implied, was somehow acceptable simply because
they were older, as if a picture made before 1980 was inherently
inferior to something new.
Joel: "Citizen Kane" cracks me up every time.
Don't get me wrong,
Tom: (sings) Don't get meeee wrong...
I'm not defending bad films as great art, nor am I demanding stony
silence during screenings of "Plan 9 From Outer Space." A bad script,
cheap special effects, and amateurish acting can turn a bad movie into
a laugh riot.
Joel: Oh, for fun! Let's make more films like that! I'm chuckling already!
The difference here is the audience didn't let the films' inadequacies
or attributes speak for itself.
Crow: They let this guy write a column?
Tom: Maybe his wife has a better grasp of English grammar?
They simply didn't want to sit still for 90 minutes and keep their
mouths shut. Long before the program even began, these fools had
declared an open season on our film heritage.
Tom: "Gentlemen, I hold here the last remaining print of Gone With the Wind.
Pull!"
Their complete lack of consideration was topped only by their astonishing
lack of talent.
Tom: Which in turn was bested by my astounding lack of gonads.
"Mystery Science Theater 3000" is itself painfully unfunny,
Crow: Has this guy been hanging out with the Mads?
Joel: Probably a deep childhood trauma.
Tom: We should all pity him.
and this audience was much worse than that. The folks behind the TV
show and at the theater lack both the talent and the guts to do
stand-up before a real audience
Tom: How about a fake audience?
or come up with original material on their own
Joel: Yes, I prefer to steal my original material.
(they use so-called "bad" movies as their crutch).
Crow: Funny as a crutch, Potsie.
These people are talentless cretins, and no one should have to put up
with their behavior in a public theater.
Joel: Didn't the supreme court say it's ok to be a talentless cretin in
a crowded theater?
Every film, no matter how good or bad, deserves a chance.
Crow: You're right Tom, he hasn't seen "Manos."
If you're someone who believes film patrons want to spend $6.00 to
listen to you yak, please stay home.
Tom: (sarcastic) I'll go tell Spalding Gray.
It'll make Anne--and myself--a lot happier.
Crow: Do I detect a causal relationship?
Tom: Next week: "Hoppin' Mad Over _Rhoda_"
Joel: We're outta here, guys.
All: Bite us, it's fun!
----------
Mr. Duality
Daniel S. Rice <ri...@enterprise.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>Dr. Forrester: Well, he's back, and this time he has an internet account.
> You and your droids are in for some deep hurting this time.
> We'll be sending up his posting in a bit, but first you're
> in for a little flashback.
>
>Magic Voice: Flashback in 5...4...3...2...1...Flashback _now_.
>
>Joel: Saigon, no!
>
>----------
>
>[Lights blink in the control pod]
>
>Joel: Oh No! We got criticism sign!
>
Cambot, save this post away in still-store...
Oh, this is classic... kudos to you, Mr. Rice, for a truly entertaining
and enlightening work... I was looking forward to the day when UseNet posts
are MST-ed... good job! :)
My opinion on this matter to Mr. Stu or whoever:
Dammit, the show's whole POINT is to make fun of movies. If you want to see
these movies shown in full without a guy and two 'bots cracking jokes about
them, then either rent them from your favourite video store (if you can find
them) or watch any UHF station late at night that doesn't show the Psychic
Friends Network. Hey, besides, making fun of movies is FUN, and is also
tolerated more in the comfort and privacy of your own home. I'm not defending
those yelling at the Con (actually, there goes my idea to attend a local con
in a red jumpsuit), I'm defending the show.
Actually, I don't know what I'm saying.
Good going, Mr. Rice.
--
spa...@titan.ucs.umass.edu
+-------+ My personality has plurality
|||||=========| O O O | That's why they call me Mr. Duality
+-------+ - the BOBS
Matt Garretson
Harlan Freilicher <har...@acpub.duke.edu> wrote:
>
>P.P.S. You know, if you don't enjoy the show, you can always change the channel
>or turn the set off.
But maybe Stu can't control when the movies begin or end.
Sorry, but it had to be said.
--
Matt Garretson Linus: "What's wrong with patting birds on the head?"
bul...@rpi.edu Charlie Brown: "No one else does it!"
Albany NY, USA
Harlan Freilicher
>In article <21...@news.duke.edu>,
>Harlan Freilicher <har...@acpub.duke.edu> wrote:
>>P.P.S. You know, if you don't enjoy the show, you can always change the channel
>>or turn the set off.
>But maybe Stu can't control when the movies begin or end.
God, do I wish I'd thought of that one! Matt, you deserve a RAM chip.
Gawking in awe,
Harlan
Robert Church
>In article <28li66$k...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> dva...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Dave Van Domelen) writes:
>>I can't recall...is this the guy who wrote the Ann Arbor article a few months
>>back? He certainly has the same attitudes and platitudes.
>> Dave Van Domelen, to be frank, Marooned isn't all that good....
>
>I'm still cracking up about the line "Every film deserves to be seen" like
>its director/producer/writer/etc. intended. Talk about a slim grip on
>reality. Perhaps this guy ought to realize that some people, believe it
>or not, make films to make money.
Well, for my .02 worth, he should either tell the people in the the theatre
to shut up (the 24 hour marathon that was spoiled for him) or let it rest.
If he's going to go through life not having whatever it takes to stand up
for himself and then look for something else to blame it on he's going to end
up taking an assault rifle to work some day.
Bob Church (actually, Marooned sucked, but the mst version was great!)
Ken Ludington
Summary:
Expires:
References:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: FSU Meteorology Department
Keywords:
Once upon a time, all was grand in my life. I had a cable
company that carried Comedy Cental 24 hours a day. MST3K was
an integral part of my life. Then, for the sake of a mere
education, graduate school thrust the poor, comedy seeking
individual into Tallahassee, Florida, where totalitarianists
have seen to it that I shall live deprived of my true love.
But, in my many days of MST3K bliss, I did once see an episode
in which Tom Servo explodes a la the Hinderberg, while Crow utters
the immortal words "Oh, the humanity."
I believe this is episode 409 - Indestructable Man. My only evidnce
for this is the episode guide, listing the first skit as "any excuse
for a parade." I'm afraid that while I quite clearly recall the
skit, I don't have a clue as to the experiment that week.
All I can say is : "help?"
And thanks for the wondeful post, Mr. Rice. Bravo!!
Ron Asbestos Dippold
>MST3K insults its audience just as surely as the films it lampoons by
>presuming to know more than they do. I, for one, am smart enough to be
>able to tell a good film from a bad one, etc., only MST3K doesn't give
>ITS audience that much credit.
Only if you're too stupid to figure out how a VCR works, or read a TV
schedule. I can see these movies in their original forms if I care to,
because I can do both. Can you?
--
And now a word for dog lovers: kinky!
Greg Bandy
can voice their opinions.
Second, I'm not interrested in responding to Stuart's opinions on
MST3K because I really don't give a tinker's damn what he thinks.
I like the show. He doesn't. Fine. I'm not interested in trying
to get him to like it, or in explaining to him why I like it. I'm
also not interested in listening to him talk about why he thinks
it's so terrible.
'Nuff said.
________________________
Greg Bandy
Richmond, VA
USA
gba...@hunter.win.net
CIS 71331,142
Ron Asbestos Dippold
>I like the show. He doesn't. Fine. I'm not interested in trying
>to get him to like it, or in explaining to him why I like it. I'm
>also not interested in listening to him talk about why he thinks
>it's so terrible.
I don't think many are interested in any of those. It's a fun post to
respond to because it's so obviously flawed on so many levels. Even those
who don't get the chance too often to administer a really good flaming or
ridicule can do so easily here - there's no threat of a withering defense.
--
Other kings said I was *daft* to build a castle in a swamp!
Edward C. Bennett
--
Edward C. Bennett edw...@twg.com
The Wollongong Group (415) 962-7252
1129 San Antonio Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303
"He's become a growling, snarling mass of white-hot canine terror"
vacs...@vax.csun.edu
You should really just relax.
Phineas Narco
> But what were the children to make of the rude, crude, often sexist and
> thoroughly inescapible behavior of their fellow patrons?
>
> It's as if the folks at MST3K aren't talented enough to make their
> own movies, and so make fun of the sincere efforts of others.
>
> Movies shown on television already endure commercial breaks, editing for
> reasons of time, language, nudity, pan-and-scanning, time-compression, etc.
> Don't they suffer enough already?
>
> Stuart Galbraith
> sgal...@chaph.usc.edu
Well if it hasn't been said by now...
It's just a show... you should really just relax.
--Phineas Narco
EVAN L. SCHEMM
Well, just to add one more post to this thread, while I agree that MST3K
is great, and I try to watch it every night (or at least let the VCR watch it
for me), I do understand what he was saying about the theater. MiSTing a
movie in your house (or even somebody elses) is OK, but in a theater??
If I paid $X to see a movie, I would want to enjoy it my way, and not have
to listen to a bunch of comments. If I rent a movie and watch it in my
apartment, that's different; anything goes.
I guess what I am saying is it is OK to be rude and obnoxious, but not in
public.
Schemm
Lee Joseph Cockrell
Galbraith) writes:
|> [ incredibly moronic, whiny post deleted ]
Well, this isn't rec.games.netrek, but...
. <~ |_| | | ~|~ | | |~> ~|~ \ /\ / ~|~ |\ | |/
. _> | | |_| | |_| |~ | V V _|_ | \| |\
LJC
--
no .sig yet
Mr. Duality
>In article <21...@news.duke.edu>,
>Harlan Freilicher <har...@acpub.duke.edu> wrote:
>>
>>P.P.S. You know, if you don't enjoy the show, you can always change the channel
>>or turn the set off.
>
>But maybe Stu can't control when the movies begin or end.
>
CROW: Maybe his wife used those special parts to build him!
TOM SERVO: D'oh!
(JOEL rips CROW'S arm off and throws it at the terminal.)
Scott M. Fabbri
>Let me begin by saying that my beef with MST3K isn't about whether the
>films being poked at are good or bad, nor is a question as to whether the
>show's funny or not.
>
>Rather, what's happening here is that the generally sincere (if often
>misguided) efforts of various filmmakers are crassly being perverted;
>at the same time, the show's audience is being cheated out of its right
>to make aesthetic judgements on its own.
I defy you to produce one person who makes "aesthetic judgements" on films
based on their viewing of the MiSTed version.
>MST3K insults its audience just as surely as the films it lampoons by
>presuming to know more than they do. I, for one, am smart enough to be
>able to tell a good film from a bad one, etc., only MST3K doesn't give
>ITS audience that much credit.
Shame on you. MST3K demands more from a viewer than most of the films they
vivisect. If you don't believe this, go through any episode and list as
many of their references as you can. You have to be pretty sharp to catch
them all. Or is it your point that it's presumptuous of them to know more
than their viewers? There's a name for the place where that can't happen
-- it's called "network TV."
>EVERY film--classics, turkeys and everything in between--derserve the chance
>to be seen objectively. Now I'm not suggesting PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE
>is a masterpiece that should be viewed in stony silence--hardly. Many of the
>films shown on MST3K ARE bad, and often unintentionally hilarious.
>But I am (and I trust that many of you are also) smart enough to figure that
>out for myself. Each films attributes and/or failings should be allowed
>to work on their own level; they don't need any sophomoric "assistance."
Please. First of all, it's probably worth mentioning that these films were
all seen in theaters long before they were given the business by
MST3K. That aside, the movies Best Brains picks to MiST have to be the
right kind -- clumsy acting, wooden dialogue, pauses, etc.
>And what happens when MST3K runs out of "bad movies." Of course, the
>answer is they already are. Not-bad movies like ROCKETSHIP X-M and
>MAROONED have started to turn up. Could FORBIDDEN PLANET, 2001, and for that
>matter, CITIZEN KANE and LA DOLCE VITA be far behind?
But you said up front that your beef wasn't whether or not the movie
was good or bad!
Is the point here: "Hands off the classics, man"? Can you say, "Go ahead
and crush _The Sidehackers_, but leave _2001_ alone"? Either a movie works
in MiSTed format or it doesn't. If it does, work it over. :-) Also, unless
I'm mistaken, they have to get permission from the holder of the copyright
to do this.
>My wife and I recently attended a 24-hour sci-fi marathon, and were
>shocked to hear MST3K fans hooting GOOD movies like 20,000 LEAGUES
>UNDER THE SEA, the 1956 INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, and others.
>There were a lot of kids in the audience whose parents had obviously
>seen these same movies when THEY were kids, and wanted to share the experience.
>But what were the children to make of the rude, crude, often sexist and
>thoroughly inescapible behavior of their fellow patrons?
Is that relevant to the argument, though? Amazingly enough, there is a
distinction between MST3K and its fans. If nothing else, we don't get
paychecks when we make funny comments. :-) There are plenty of moviegoers
everywhere -- MST3K fans or not -- who make life miserable for others.
>It's as if the folks at MST3K aren't talented enough to make their
>own movies, and so make fun of the sincere efforts of others.
Sandy Frank? Talented guy. Bert I. Gordon? Can't compare with him. I could
probably argue against the "sincere effort" part, too, but I'm not in the
mood.
>Movies shown on television already endure commercial breaks, editing for
>reasons of time, language, nudity, pan-and-scanning, time-compression, etc.
>Don't they suffer enough already?
Don't anthropomorphize. Movies don't suffer -- people suffer. Some less
than others. Also, it's not relevant to the discussion.
You seem to be making the point that MST3K simply trashes movies for
sport. I don't buy that argument. The movies are bad -- sometimes enough
to be funny on their own -- but the MiSTing makes them comedies, whether
they were designed to be or not. (Well, generally, anyway. Maybe not for
_Manos_.) IMO, it's value added, which makes most of these movies more
bearable. I wouldn't spend the time to watch any of the movies I've seen
on MST3K without Joel and the 'bots along the bottom. I might accept your
argument if the MiSTed versions were the only ones available and there
were a demand for the originals, but that just isn't true.
I spend money on Cinemax and Showtime, which is where I see the movies I
really want to (_Beau Geste_, _North By Northwest_, _Porky's_, etc.) in
their original form. If I expected to see _Marooned_ in its original form
on Cinemax and wound up with the MiSTed version, I'd feel swindled; when I
watch MST3K, I know what to expect, and I enjoy it.
Perhaps your best defense would be to stop watching MST3K and use a VCR to
watch movies instead. This is certainly a viable alternative; more and
more 'classic' movies are available on video, so you can watch them in the
privacy of your own home, without interruption or the fear of some
drunken fool dropping popcorn down the back of your shirt.
--
Scott Fabbri #31643
"Bite me, it's fun." --Crow T. Robot
--
The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
internet: laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Bruce Gilbert
For one thing, his post actually had SOMETHING to say about MST3K, and
therefore, was germane to the discussion of this group (the same,
unfortunately, can't be said for a couple of recent threads).
Second, this isn't, strictly speaking, a "fan" discussion group, and
alternative viewpoints should be welcomed. After all, Joel & the 'bots
ARE an alternative viewpoint, so discouraging those with views different
from our own is not what the spirit of the show is about.
Third, his post raised one valid point...
In article <28lhkr$g...@aludra.usc.edu>, sgal...@aludra.usc.edu (Stuart Galbraith) writes:
<** Stuff deleted; he doesn't like MST3K because he believes it "insults
its audience". (My opinion: Let 'em insult away! But I digress)***>
> My wife and I recently attended a 24-hour sci-fi marathon, and were
> shocked to hear MST3K fans hooting GOOD movies like 20,000 LEAGUES
> UNDER THE SEA, the 1956 INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, and others.
> There were a lot of kids in the audience whose parents had obviously
> seen these same movies when THEY were kids, and wanted to share the experience.
> But what were the children to make of the rude, crude, often sexist and
> thoroughly inescapible behavior of their fellow patrons?
My belief is that, in the best of all possible worlds, anyone who persists
in talking aloud in a movie theatre when dialogue is taking place onscreen
should summarily be asked to leave the theatre. The only exceptions would
be shows like _Rocky Horror_ or special MST3k fan screenings where audience
participation is an understood, and advertised, part of the show. Interfering
with others' ability to watch a movie is no different than the football fan
who wanders onto the field, or someone at an art gallery who turns a painting
to the wall that is not to their taste.
The "fans" that Stu was subjected to, as well as Stu himself, have missed
a couple of subtle points about the show:
1. Joel and the 'bots are in a PRIVATE theatre. There is no one to offend
but themselves. Thus, their actions are equivalent to sitting at home
watching a movie, NOT to sitting in a public theatre and yelling at the
screen.
2. The premise of the show is that Joel is FORCED to watch the movies.
He would not watch the movies at all if this were not the case. People who
are in public theatres who do not like the movie they are watching have
another option; they should leave the theatre and demand their money back
from the management; they should NOT hang around and make everyone else
miserable.
Thus, Joel's task isn't at all equivalent to normal movie-watching, which
should be an enjoyable, or at least thought-provoking, experience that
allows one to temporarily escape from everyday existence. Joel's
predicament is that watching these turkeys is a job that he must
endure, the same as everyone else who "must hold down a job". Talking
back to the screen is a stream-of-consciousness defense mechanism, akin
to a worker cussing his boss in the car on the way home.
Unfortunately, not everyone has grasped these subtleties (this is, after
all, the age that gave rise to Beavis & whomever-head, a cartoon show
for those who can't grasp the subtleties of Andrew Dice Clay). I, for
one, think it would be a good idea if Best Brains did a public service
spot in which they stated that "MiStie"ing is an activity, like many
other delightful activities, which is designed to be pursued in the
comfort of one's own home.
I recognize, however, that most obnoxious people in theatres have never
heard of MST3k, and that blaming the creators of MST3K for the actions
of these "fans" is akin to blaming Jody Foster and Martin Scorcese(Sp?)
for the actions of John Hinckley. I trust Stu's letter to these two
worthies is in the mail.
Bruce Gilbert
Ms. Kim Collins
uptight to enjoy it. The point is not merely that the movies are bad. It's
the clever and often hysterical remarks that Joel and the Bots make. Don't
tell me you never watched a terrible movie on a Sunday afternoon and made fun
of it? MST3K fulfills this need on a mass scale.
And to answer your charge, "What happens when they run out of bad movies?"
THEY WON'T! Because there are just that many bad movies out there, in
desperate need of MSTing!
L'Angelo Misterioso
>Generally sincere efforts? What about "Manos the hands of fate", "Eegah!",
>"Teenagers from outer space", "the Killer Shrews", or "the Giant Gila Monster".
>Do you think Sandy Frank intended to make a masterpiece with his badly dubbed
>Japanese movies?
Yeah! And what about 'Wild Rebels', and the criminal misuse of
padding in the "climbing scene" in 'The Lost Continent', and anything
starring Rutherford B Hayes?
Oh yeah, and the Truck Farming short.
mike
L'Angelo Misterioso
>> presuming to know more than they do. I, for one, am smart enough to be
>> able to tell a good film from a bad one, etc....
Someone's been drinking Instant Karma..............
>> And what happens when MST3K runs out of "bad movies." Of course, the
>> answer is they already are. Not-bad movies like ROCKETSHIP X-M and
>> MAROONED have started to turn up. Could FORBIDDEN PLANET, 2001, and for that
>> matter, CITIZEN KANE and LA DOLCE VITA be far behind?
They will *never* run out of bad movies. Believe me. If USA
can find movies for 'Up All Night', MST can.
mike
John Reece
> Rather, what's happening here is that the generally sincere (if often
> misguided) efforts of various filmmakers are crassly being perverted;
> at the same time, the show's audience is being cheated out of its right
> to make aesthetic judgements on its own.
When the show was first aired the station reportedly received complaints
about the shadows across the bottom of the screen. This critique
seems only slightly less dense. In fact, the closest analogy I can think
of would be someone angrily stalking out of "Young Frankenstein" because
it was a `perversion' of, not a serious prequel to, "Frankenstein".
You just don't get it.
> MST3K insults its audience just as surely as the films it lampoons by
> presuming to know more than they do. I, for one, am smart enough to be
> able to tell a good film from a bad one, etc., only MST3K doesn't give
> ITS audience that much credit.
It's you who aren't giving *me* credit, to presume I that I take MST3K as
some sort of Holy Gospel of film criticism. I certainly don't take it
with same reverence you seem to hold towards anything ever committed to
celluloid.
> EVERY film--classics, turkeys and everything in between--derserve the chance
> to be seen objectively.
Fine. But NO film deserves to be 100% parody-free. Well, maybe SHOAH.
MST3K is a real-time parody show, not "The Movie of the Week". If
you can't take it any other way, don't watch it.
> And what happens when MST3K runs out of "bad movies." Of course, the
> answer is they already are. Not-bad movies like ROCKETSHIP X-M and
> MAROONED have started to turn up.
MAROONED always gets 1 star (out of 4) in every movie guide I've
seen. I saw it in the theater, and I wouldn't watch it again without
MST3K. I'd rather spend the time cleaning the toilet.
> Could FORBIDDEN PLANET, 2001, and for that
> matter, CITIZEN KANE and LA DOLCE VITA be far behind?
So what if they are? Their reputations have survived parodies by Mad magazine,
SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE, THE GROOVE TUBE, and Mel Brooks. I'm sure they could
survive MST3K. CITIZEN KANE is a little too talky for MST3K, though.
> It's as if the folks at MST3K aren't talented enough to make their
> own movies, and so make fun of the sincere efforts of others.
That's usually what people say of movie critics in general....
--
John Reece "This lifeboat is full"
KD6RXL
Not an Intel spokesman
James Craig Lowery
>Yeah, ROCKET SHIP X-M was such a great movie.
It was also the 13th to be MSTied (#201 and not including KTMA). How
many are there now?....70+? What does ole Stu mean "showing up
lately" and then mentioning RocketShip X-M? So much for his "Mr. Film
Critic" research on the show itself, which further reduces any
credibility his post may have had.
Folks, what we have here is someone who has been incapacitated by
their own inability to have a good time. Next thing you know, he'll
be telling us to "get a life!"
<Craig>
--
Craig Lowery inet: low...@csc.mc.edu
Dept of Math and Computer Science (601)925-3217
Mississippi College PO BOX 4025, Clinton, MS 39058
Mike Cohen
>I recognize, however, that most obnoxious people in theatres have never
>heard of MST3k, and that blaming the creators of MST3K for the actions
>of these "fans" is akin to blaming Jody Foster and Martin Scorcese(Sp?)
>for the actions of John Hinckley. I trust Stu's letter to these two
>worthies is in the mail.
>
> Bruce Gilbert
The most obnoxious movie patron I've ever experienced was about a year before
MST3K. Some idiot had a cellular phone which rang several times & he spent
most of the movie talking loudly on it.
I've also had a few movies ruined by screaming babies (or vomiting babies) &
the parents refused to take them out.
Scott Bowling
>>> And what happens when MST3K runs out of "bad movies." Of course, the
>>> answer is they already are. Not-bad movies like ROCKETSHIP X-M and
>>> MAROONED have started to turn up. Could FORBIDDEN PLANET, 2001, and for that
>>> matter, CITIZEN KANE and LA DOLCE VITA be far behind?
Face it, even they said so themselves (Joel), he said that there are
endless numbers of bad movies.
Scott Bowling
Terri M. Librande
What the hell is he doing on this net if he hates the show? Stuart,
get a life.
get a job.
Go away.
If you don't like, don't watch it.
Dickweed.
Terri in Cleveland
--
"Girls who have glasses have lots & lots of energy!" Al--Single Drop of Rain
Terri Librande aa...@cleveland.Freenet.edu--Assistant Sysop
The Science Fiction and Fantasy Sig--Go SCIFI
Rebecca R Ferris
group of friends in the theatre was seated directly behind a group of
about 10 teenaged girls who were gabbing away at each other as though
there was no movie at all. people on the other side of the theater
were disturbed. Then my best friend and i, two normally passive and
timid creatures, both got fed up and simultaneously leaned forward
and said "Would you please SHUT UP!!"
They were stunned. and silent thereafter. I felt like Wonder Woman!
becky "do what you want in the comfort of your own home but
keep your trap shut in the theater!"
--
_____________________________________________________
"What I say is that, if a fellow really likes
potatoes, he must be a pretty decent sort of fellow."
A.A. Milne
G. Galcik
>>> presuming to know more than they do. I, for one, am smart enough to be
>>> able to tell a good film from a bad one, etc....
What a weird, weird, weird point. I am having real difficultly following this
one. It's not like mst3k at any time gets preachy.
"We'll send him cheesy movies/The worst we can find" is only the premise for
the show, not the controlling theme. The point is to make amusing comments
about movies. Er...saying they insult the audience is really, really off-base.
I mean, he says he's smart enough to tell the difference between a good movie
and a bad movie. Does that mean, if he got on TV and told people his opinions,
he'd be insulting everyone's intelligence? I don't remember ever watching the
show and seeing "CONFORM...CONFORM...CONFORM..." played across the bottom.
Tenuous at best. I'd love to be able to have a serious conversation with this
guy about this topic (without all the poeple saying "well if you don't like it
turn it off!!!" since that's not really the point anyway). I'd have to see for
myself how this logic twists.
------------------------------ --- ------------------------------------
Greg Galcik | gal...@sinbad.navsses.navy.mil
An Equal Opportunity Annoyer. | tmbg - mst3k - zweblo (with umlaut)
-----------My Extremely Tiny FTP Server: spider.navsses.navy.mil-----------
HEDGEHOG
> gba...@hunter.win.net (Greg Bandy) writes:
> >I like the show. He doesn't. Fine. I'm not interested in trying
> >to get him to like it, or in explaining to him why I like it. I'm
> >also not interested in listening to him talk about why he thinks
> >it's so terrible.
>
> respond to because it's so obviously flawed on so many levels. Even
those
> who don't get the chance too often to administer a really good flaming
or
> ridicule can do so easily here - there's no threat of a withering
defense.
Actually it is kind of a weird post because Stu writes in a style that is
almost like Crow hopped up on goofballs.
HEDGEHOG
> gba...@hunter.win.net (Greg Bandy) writes:
> >to get him to like it, or in explaining to him why I like it. I'm
> >also not interested in listening to him talk about why he thinks
> >it's so terrible.
>
ksa...@news.delphi.com
hmm...just thought I'd point something out to everyone who thinks a
Citizen Kane parody is unworkable...possibly it would be too tough for
Joel & The Bts because of all the dialog...but has anyone else seen the
Tiny Toons episode entitled "Citizen Max"?
It's a classic.
david serchay
Agreed. It had great duplication/parody of several parts of CK, such as
Buster (as the Jed Leland character) asking the reporter if he had any
carrots on him. Or when we see the house, then the words "guest house"
and then next to it the real house about 10 time larger. Great stuff.
Dascoser
"But what did Monty mean when he said `acme'?"
dor...@cats.ucsc.edu
Pardon me, Stuart, but have you ever heard of the Rocky Horror Picture Show? Do
you perhaps think that Mr. Richard O'brien feels saddened that people parody and
talk back to his film? I hope you don't think that, because from what I know,
this is entirely not the case. In fact, I have a personal letter from the man
in which he doesn't seem in the slightest bit disturbed that I and many others
engaged in such activities. In fact, I believe he is very happy that his film
is still being shown around the world after 18 years in this non-original form.
I don't think he or any other filmmaker needs you to crusade for the sake of their
work. Granted, Rocky wasn't a MSTed movie, but I think it is still a relevant
example. MST3K's comments are a lot classier and often more intelligent and
humourous (IMHO) than those shouted at RHPS, and I am glad they are sent by
satellite smack-dab into the middle of my livingroom daily. At any rate, I
wouldn't expect someone with your opinions to have shown up in a newsgroup such
as this, and I also rue the day you should show up at RHPS and try to shush the
audience.
Sorry if I got off track.
-Little Miss Dorian
RHPS member #07551
MST3K member #32672
Lloyd Miller
> Wow, this is weird. By name, it *is* the same guy from Ann Arbor.
> Question one: What is he doing in CA?
> Question two: "MST3k sucks"? I don't *think* so. SGIII (or "stu")
> would *never* title his article that way.
>
> This is a verbatim (or close to it) repeat of his newspaper article.
> Someone on that system is having a little fun with us.
> To reply, anyway:
> The show isn't perverting or destroying anything - every movie they
> show is still available in its original form. If you don't like what they're
> doing, don't watch the show.
> As for the public thing, that behaviour is indeed inexcusable. I'm sure
> everyone at Best Brains would agree. Blaming the show for it is stupid,
> though.
> MST3k didn't make the people into assholes.
Yup, anyone who talks loudly in a movie should be silenced. In fact
anyone who laughs at the wrong places out loud in a movie theatre
should be instantainiously ejected from the theatre. I might go so far
as to say that anyone who makes any noise in a movie should be shot.
In fact people who shuffle their feet or rustle their candy wrappers
should have their whole families shot and their home town nuked.
Every word of every movie is sacred and handed down from God and
should no more be mocked than any other part of The Bible. Come to
think of it, this goes for TV too.
--
Lloyd Miller, Calgary
ll...@lfmcal.cuc.ab.ca
Lloyd_...@f57.n17.z1.fidonet.org
HEDGEHOG
writes:
People were rude, obnoxious, and talkative in movie theaters long before
MST3K was born. One might as well blame Rocky Horror or vaudeville
hecklers as to blame MST3K.
Face it, people like to talk. They talk at movie theaters and they talk
at ball games, zoos, and museums. If your fellow patrons talk so much
that you can't hear the movie, complain to the theater and get your money
back--don't slam some cable TV show.
Scott M. Fabbri
citation of his article (and the MiSTing thereof) briefly, but it was
killed before I could read it thoroughly. (By "working journalist," I mean
someone who makes his or her living writing for a periodical. _Hard Copy_
and their ilk do NOT count.)
My question is apropos of nothing. (Hmm. . . sounds suspicious. . .) :-)
Mr. Duality
this came out on the screen:
>work. Granted, Rocky wasn't a MSTed movie, but I think it is still a relevant
>example. MST3K's comments are a lot classier and often more intelligent and
>humourous (IMHO) than those shouted at RHPS, and I am glad they are sent by
>satellite smack-dab into the middle of my livingroom daily.
Yes, the RHPS lines are 'classic'-type lines... most people already
know them so they become like a folk-song or something along that line.
Actually, the first five people I ever tried to explain MST3K to said, "Oh,
you mean like Rocky Horror?!" (the other two tried to make allusions to
Beavis and Butt-Head, and I hit them for it.) With MST3K, it's like a
different Rocky every week! Hooray for that!
>At any rate, I wouldn't expect someone with your opinions to have shown up
>in a newsgroup such as this,
I think he was just trying to rile the masses, and he got the
responses that he wanted. He's just like a little second grader who wants
attention, and damned if he didn't get it.
>and I also rue the day you should show up at RHPS and try to shush the
>audience.
Actually, that happened in "Fame"... heeheehee... we also had someone
like that at a local Rocky showing once... after the movie, she said "It was
nice, but I really wish those people wouldn't talk all through it."
>
>Sorry if I got off track.
No problemo. It's nice to have intelligent discussions on UseNet for
once.
uh-oh, we got .sig sign!
Kris Talley
Scott....@launchpad.unc.edu writes:
>A quick query: Is Mr. Galbraith really a working journalist? I saw the
>citation of his article (and the MiSTing thereof) briefly, but it was
>killed before I could read it thoroughly. (By "working journalist," I
mean
>someone who makes his or her living writing for a periodical. _Hard Copy_
>and their ilk do NOT count.)
The Stuart Galbraith III byline has appeared regularly in the Ann Arbor
News. Haven't noticed if it's been in there recently, so I don't know if
he's up 'n' left for CA or what. It seems just as likely that a Stuart
Galbraith imposter (almost said wannabe but that was a little hard to
imagine) got ahold of his "Hopping Mad" article and wanted to stir things
up.
Jon Gordon
>
>My belief is that, in the best of all possible worlds, anyone who persists
>in talking aloud in a movie theatre when dialogue is taking place onscreen
>should summarily be asked to leave the theatre.
I have to disagree with you on this one. Of course, if you strike the
words "asked to leave the theatre," and replace them with "put to death
in the most interesting manner anyone else present at the theatre
proposes," then I'll be with you all the way.
Have a nice day.
Robert Henderson
Scott M. Fabbri <Scott....@launchpad.unc.edu> wrote:
>A quick query: Is Mr. Galbraith really a working journalist? I saw the
>citation of his article (and the MiSTing thereof) briefly, but it was
>killed before I could read it thoroughly. (By "working journalist," I mean
>someone who makes his or her living writing for a periodical. _Hard Copy_
>and their ilk do NOT count.)
Stuart Galbraith IV wrote movie reviews for the Ann Arbor News for several
years. After reading a couple of his reviews, which were every bit as
well thought out as his postings here, I gave up on the entire newspaper.
Funny, isn't it? Don't movie reviewers basically pass judgment on films,
attempting to convince people to see them, or not to see them, solely on
their word? Isn't this what Stu condemned MST for? Hmm...
--
RobH (or Rob Henderson, if you prefer) / ro...@grex.cyberspace.org
Now is the place where the crossroads meet. (Kate Bush)
He tried to kill me with a forklift! (MST3K)
Daniel Frank
L'Angelo Misterioso <v201...@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu> wrote:
> Yeah! And what about 'Wild Rebels', and the criminal misuse of
>padding in the "climbing scene" in 'The Lost Continent', and anything
>starring Rutherford B Hayes?
Yeah and what about Scarecrow's brains?!?!?!?
.
--
* Daniel Frank danf...@cs.utexas.edu danf...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu*
* Look out! There are llamas! - Monty Python *
* Look out for snakes. - MST3K *
The Voch
>Yeah and what about Scarecrow's brains?!?!?!?
"And what about LOVE?..." --Tom Servo
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Erik Kovach |"God help us...our lives are in the hands of
Kusch Mental Hospital| engineers." --Ian Malcolm, _Jurassic Park_
Bed #410D |----------------------------------------------------
Spam for Points | An Apple Newton recognized my name as Cruz Broccoli.
Matt Garretson
>In article <29bv58$2...@bashful.cc.utexas.edu> danf...@bashful.cc.utexas.edu (Daniel Frank) writes:
>>Yeah and what about Scarecrow's brains?!?!?!?
>
>"And what about LOVE?..." --Tom Servo
Ann and Nancy Wilson of the rock group Heart???
"I'm a magic man!"
--
Matt Garretson Linus: "What's wrong with patting birds on the head?"
bul...@rpi.edu Charlie Brown: "No one else does it!"
Albany NY, USA
Michael McAfee
>In article <29bv58$2...@bashful.cc.utexas.edu> danf...@bashful.cc.utexas.edu (Daniel Frank) writes:
>>Yeah and what about Scarecrow's brains?!?!?!?
>
>"And what about LOVE?..." --Tom Servo
"What about TOR-CHAR!?!"
--MST3K, "Teenagers from Outer Space"
Michael, the Chaotic
"It's...it's a GAZEBO!"
disclaimer: if you blame my employers for this post, you will
be slated for TOR-CHAR!!!
Scott M. Fabbri
Kris Talley <h0...@hosp.med.umich.edu> wrote:
[snip]
>The Stuart Galbraith III byline has appeared regularly in the Ann Arbor
>News. Haven't noticed if it's been in there recently, so I don't know if
>he's up 'n' left for CA or what. It seems just as likely that a Stuart
>Galbraith imposter (almost said wannabe but that was a little hard to
>imagine) got ahold of his "Hopping Mad" article and wanted to stir things
>up.
Mr. Galbraith sent me e-mail and said that yes, he is a "working
journalist" by my definition. This indicates he's also still reading the
newsgroup.
--
Scott Fabbri fab...@cna.org
Standard disclaimers apply.
"I want to decide who lives and who dies." -Crow
Siprelle
>In article <isisCEC...@netcom.com>, is...@netcom.com (Mike Cohen) writes...
>>Generally sincere efforts? What about "Manos the hands of fate", "Eegah!",
>>"Teenagers from outer space", "the Killer Shrews", or "the Giant Gila Monster".
>>Do you think Sandy Frank intended to make a masterpiece with his badly dubbed
>>Japanese movies?
> Yeah! And what about 'Wild Rebels', and the criminal misuse of
>padding in the "climbing scene" in 'The Lost Continent', and anything
>starring Rutherford B Hayes?
> Oh yeah, and the Truck Farming short.
YEAH! And what about Scarecrow's brain?
--
lyns...@techbook.COM Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
Public Access UNIX and Internet at (503) 220-0636 (1200/2400, N81)
-OR-l...@aol.com: "How can you be in two places at once when you're not
anywhere at all?"