Spider-Man: Worst Movie?
hi...@seark.net
they have ever watched. One guy said the recent Spider-Man movie was the
worst movie he has ever seen because "they made him a teenager". He didn't
like the fact that the movie made Spider-Man a teenager who was a geek with
problems.
The instructor explained that "they" made Spider-Man a teenager because it's
teenagers that go see the most movies.
Being a good fanboy, I had to explain that he was a teenager in the movie
because he was a teenager in the comics. The guy admitted that he wasn't
very familiar with the character, but stuck with his assessment that it was
the worst movie he has ever watched. He included both The Lord of the Rings
movies among his favorite movies along with Signs.
I can't believe that people actually don't know Spider-Man is suppossed to
be a teenager. And if he wasn't familiar enough with the character to know
that why would he hate the movie so much? Did he think Spider-Man was
suppossed to be a millionaire playboy or a military scientist? This is
almost as stupid as Roger Ebert's review of Spider-Man where he bitched that
Spidey landed to lightly when jumping and couldn't understand why Peter only
wanted to be Mary Jane's friend at the end of the movie.
HollandCL
>be a teenager. And if he wasn't familiar enough with the character to know
>that why would he hate the movie so much? Did he think Spider-Man was
>suppossed to be a millionaire playboy or a military scientist? This is
>almost as stupid as Roger Ebert's review of Spider-Man where he bitched that
>Spidey landed to lightly when jumping and couldn't understand why Peter only
>wanted to be Mary Jane's friend at the end of the movie.
>
There are some people who consider good movies as movies that are able to stand
on its own. In other words, if you have to do research, i.e. reading up on the
history of Spider-man comics, before seeing and appreciating the movie, then
something is not quite right. I like the Spider-man movie but I could also
understand why comments by Roger Evert and the film student were made.
James
wrote:
I think the guy was pretty moronic for hate the movie due to the fact
that "They made Peter Parker a geeky teenager".
That makes about as much sense as hating the first Superman film just
because, "They made him an alien from another planet...*geeeez*".
James
>I think the guy was pretty moronic for hate the movie due to the fact
>that "They made Peter Parker a geeky teenager".
hating.
...pretty moronic for hating the movie...
*grabbing a cup of coffee before I post again*
Stoneco864
>because, "They made him an alien from another planet...*geeeez*"
"they did that since Aliens go to movies"
Justin Bacon
>There are some people who consider good movies as movies that are able to
stand
>on its own. In other words, if you have to do research, i.e. reading up on the
>history of Spider-man comics, before seeing and appreciating the movie, then
>something is not quite right. I like the Spider-man movie but I could also
>understand why comments by Roger Evert and the film student were made.
If that's the case, how can you dislike a movie because they *MADE* him a
teenager? There's no way to defend the film student's position.
And Roger Ebert's comments have no basis in the comic book whatsoever, so I
basically don't know what crack you were smoking before posting.
JB
Andrew Ryan Chang
>they have ever watched. One guy said the recent Spider-Man movie was the
>worst movie he has ever seen because "they made him a teenager". He didn't
>like the fact that the movie made Spider-Man a teenager who was a geek with
>problems.
>
>The instructor explained that "they" made Spider-Man a teenager because it's
>teenagers that go see the most movies.
Obviously, both are idiots. However, ...
>This is
>almost as stupid as Roger Ebert's review of Spider-Man where he bitched that
>Spidey landed to lightly when jumping and couldn't understand why Peter only
I agree with Ebert here. The CGI leaping and swinging about did
not "feel" right. Everything in reality is affected by gravity, but the
film's FX did *not* convey that sense of real weight in how objects swung
about. It's not like doing it right would have required any more or less
screentime, and it could have made those sequences a lot more fun.
I liked the movie as a whole for story and acting, but the CGI
work was only between okay and disappointing.
--
Moe: [through door] Homer? It's Moe. Uh, look: some of the ghouls
and I are a little concerned the project isn't moving forward.
Homer: Can't murder now: eating.
Jerry B. Ray, Jr.
Andrew Ryan Chang <arc...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> I agree with Ebert here. The CGI leaping and swinging about did
>not "feel" right. Everything in reality is affected by gravity, but the
>film's FX did *not* convey that sense of real weight in how objects swung
>about. It's not like doing it right would have required any more or less
>screentime, and it could have made those sequences a lot more fun.
I thought the actual swinging scenes were fine, but the scene where he was
jumping from rooftop to rooftop (when he first discovered his powers) looked
pretty hokey. And I suppose a couple of the landing scenes looked a little
weak. But overall, I didn't mind the effects. Thought they were better than
all the goofy wire fighting in X-Men.
JRjr
--
%%%%% Jerry B. Ray, Jr. %%%%%%%% www.prism.gatech.edu/~jr70 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
"Some will shake off the sloth of faithlessness
While others simply languish in their sleep
Me, I just fight to stay awake..." -- VOL, "Black Cloud O'er Me"
Terrafamilia
hi...@seark.net wrote:
> In my film class tonight everyone was asked to name the best and worst movie
> they have ever watched. One guy said the recent Spider-Man movie was the
> worst movie he has ever seen because "they made him a teenager". He didn't
> like the fact that the movie made Spider-Man a teenager who was a geek with
> problems.
Such a question usually points out how few movies the students have watched or
remember.
Ciao,
Terrafamilia
hi...@seark.net
"HollandCL" <holl...@aol.cominmyface> wrote in message
news:20030116215409...@mb-cu.aol.com...
You didn't need to have any knowledge of the comic books to appreciate the
movie since everything you needed to know was onscreen. My classmate was
mad that they "made" Spider-Man a teenager so he obvously expected
Spider-Man to be someone else under the mask.
Ebert didn't understand that Peter couldn't be with Mary Jane because she
would be in danger. The movie showed how both Aunt May and Mary Jane were
threatened after Green Goblin learned Spidey's secret identity. It doesn't
take a genius to understand that he wanted to distance himself from other
people who get hurt if his enemies learned his secret identity.
hi...@seark.net
"Justin Bacon" <tria...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030117015145...@mb-ma.aol.com...
Ebert bitched about Peter not hooking up with MJ at the film's end because
he couldn't understand the point that Peter didn't want anyone close to him
to get hurt if another enemy learned his secret identity.
Ebert also expected Spidey to land with a thud as he leaped around, but we
all know that his powers allow him to land as softly as a cat. Now, I fully
expect The Hulk to make much noise as he bounds around in his movie this
summer.
hi...@seark.net
"Andrew Ryan Chang" <arc...@sfu.ca> wrote in message
news:b08o1a$t5m$1...@morgoth.sfu.ca...
> >In my film class tonight everyone was asked to name the best and worst
movie
> >they have ever watched. One guy said the recent Spider-Man movie was the
> >worst movie he has ever seen because "they made him a teenager". He
didn't
> >like the fact that the movie made Spider-Man a teenager who was a geek
with
> >problems.
> >
> >The instructor explained that "they" made Spider-Man a teenager because
it's
> >teenagers that go see the most movies.
>
> Obviously, both are idiots. However, ...
>
> >This is
> >almost as stupid as Roger Ebert's review of Spider-Man where he bitched
that
> >Spidey landed to lightly when jumping and couldn't understand why Peter
only
>
> I agree with Ebert here. The CGI leaping and swinging about did
> not "feel" right. Everything in reality is affected by gravity, but the
> film's FX did *not* convey that sense of real weight in how objects swung
> about. It's not like doing it right would have required any more or less
> screentime, and it could have made those sequences a lot more fun.
Spidey has super powers so he's not going to make much noise as he leaps
about.
>
> I liked the movie as a whole for story and acting, but the CGI
> work was only between okay and disappointing.
>
I'm sure they will do better with the second movie. I also hope the second
movie features Spidey cracking wise as he fights the bad guys. I don't
think the first movie really got that part of the character across. He had
a few wisecracks in the wrestling ring, but I want to see him joking with
all his enemies as well as the explanation that he jokes to mask his fear.
hi...@seark.net
"Terrafamilia" <terraf...@irtc.net> wrote in message
news:3E2825A3...@irtc.net...
My list of best movies I have ever watched included The Man Who Shot Liberty
Valence, The original Star Wars trilogy, Harvey, Arsenic & Old Lace, and
Raiders of the Lost Ark. I have many more favorites that could have made
the list, but I was trying to represent a wide range of genres rather than
to just list action movies.
My worst list included Glimmer Man and Speed 2. I'm sure I have seen much
worse than those, but I tend to forget the really bad movies. The 1990s
Captain America movie would likely have made my worst list.
Robert Vincent
>
> You didn't need to have any knowledge of the comic books to appreciate the
> movie since everything you needed to know was onscreen. My classmate was
> mad that they "made" Spider-Man a teenager so he obvously expected
> Spider-Man to be someone else under the mask.
Why is it I'm thinking of when Freddie Prinze Jr. said about not getting
the part something to the effect of , "Well, Tobey did a good job , I
guess, but I would have played him differently ... you know, not made him
such a geek." :)
RTHV
--
Elijah Snow : It's a strange world
Jakita Wagner : Let's keep it that way
Planetary #1
I think we've all learned something here! - Sam & Max
Andrew Ryan Chang
>should still be a parabola as gravity dictates. That was my problem, not
>the noise of the landing (which Ebert doesn't mention; IIRC the Ebert
>review is more about the overly floatly look of the jumps and swinging).
http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/2002/05/050303.html
"They seemed to possess weight, dimension and presence. Spider-Man
as he leaps across the rooftops is landing too lightly, rebounding
too much like a bouncing ball. He looks like a video game figure,
not like a person having an amazing experience. "
This isn't *because* it's CGI, and it's not about the sound
effects. It's about the floatiness of the CGI work. I can't explain any
more without resorting to pictures.
--
Oh, it's okay. I wouldn't remember me either.
-- Lester Burnham, AMERICAN BEAUTY (1999)
Andrew Ryan Chang
>"Andrew Ryan Chang" <arc...@sfu.ca> wrote in message
>> not "feel" right. Everything in reality is affected by gravity, but the
>> film's FX did *not* convey that sense of real weight in how objects swung
>> about. It's not like doing it right would have required any more or less
>> screentime, and it could have made those sequences a lot more fun.
>
>Spidey has super powers so he's not going to make much noise as he leaps
>about.
Super-powers affect how he jumps and lands, but the trajectory
should still be a parabola as gravity dictates. That was my problem, not
the noise of the landing (which Ebert doesn't mention; IIRC the Ebert
review is more about the overly floatly look of the jumps and swinging).
--
M.O.R
criticised it was on about, unless he is sick of all those crap teen movies
coming out with Freddy Prick Jr, but then again, who isn't?
MOR
"Justin Bacon" <tria...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030117015145...@mb-ma.aol.com...
M.O.R
"Robert Vincent" <du...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:b09ha9$mlv$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> (hi...@seark.net) writes:
> >
> > You didn't need to have any knowledge of the comic books to appreciate
the
> > movie since everything you needed to know was onscreen. My classmate
was
> > mad that they "made" Spider-Man a teenager so he obvously expected
> > Spider-Man to be someone else under the mask.
>
> Why is it I'm thinking of when Freddie Prinze Jr. said about not getting
> the part something to the effect of , "Well, Tobey did a good job , I
> guess, but I would have played him differently ... you know, not made him
> such a geek." :)
>
MOR
M.O.R
character's biggest achievement is scoring a 45. ( No seriously) it is the
worst , and I mean worst, comic book to film translation you are likely to
see, they couldn't even bother to get the costume right, and the jokes,
which are there as I have heard others say, are lame.
MOR
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:wEXV9.55649$wQ1.48590@fe01...
James
Vincent) wrote:
>Why is it I'm thinking of when Freddie Prinze Jr. said about not getting
>the part something to the effect of , "Well, Tobey did a good job , I
>guess, but I would have played him differently ... you know, not made him
>such a geek." :)
>
>RTHV
Oh yeah, that paragon of acting talent, Freddy Prinze Jr. The only
human being on the planet to owe his entire career to the fact that
his old man blew his own brains out.
Chuck, Tertiary Adjunct of Unimatrix 01
"James" <ma...@wwnet.net> wrote in message
news:nldh2vk3t727db5kf...@4ax.com...
Hammil. I mean, how can you get worse, short of failing to follow in Carrot
Top's 1-800-CALL-ATT commercials?
hi...@seark.net
"M.O.R" <pred...@esatclear.ie> wrote in message
news:b0acjk$knf$1...@dorito.esatclear.ie...
> If you wanna see worse than that film, watch Steel, with Shaq, where the
> character's biggest achievement is scoring a 45. ( No seriously) it is the
> worst , and I mean worst, comic book to film translation you are likely to
> see, they couldn't even bother to get the costume right, and the jokes,
> which are there as I have heard others say, are lame.
>
> MOR
It was pretty bad, but would have been fine as a tv movie. It may have not
followed the comics as well as other superhero movies, but I think it was
still more entertaining than the 1990s Captain America movie which I would
call the worst comic to film translation even though they did get the
costume right.
Cappy Morgan
Sounds like a pretty sharp group. Is it the remedial film class?
Scott McAllister
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:7kdW9.56569$wQ1.584@fe01...
> > If you wanna see worse than that film, watch Steel, with Shaq, where the
> > character's biggest achievement is scoring a 45. ( No seriously) it is
the
> > worst , and I mean worst, comic book to film translation you are likely
to
> > see, they couldn't even bother to get the costume right, and the jokes,
> > which are there as I have heard others say, are lame.
We had this conversation at the comic shop last week.Captain America,
Steel, and Fantastic Four were all bad movies, but we gave them bonus points
for _not_ going to the big screen. By our standards, Batman and Robin was
the worst because they dared to show it in theatres.
The film student probably hated the first Batman movie because they made
Bruce a millonaire.
Scott
Cappy Morgan
"Scott McAllister" <mis...@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:_JfW9.50990$L47.7...@read2.cgocable.net...
I somehow doubt it. It would mean the guy would have to watch a movie that
came out before last year.
hi...@seark.net
"Cappy Morgan" <losti...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:%vfW9.4166$FY4....@news1.central.cox.net...
Nope. But that first exercise where we discussed what we consider to be the
best and worse film was designed to break the ice and get us to argue over
movies. I expected someone would slam something I enjoyed, but I didn't
think they would go after Spidey since it is number four on the list of all
time money makeing movies. I thought I would have to defend Adam Sandler's
work.
Other worse movies named included Jeepers Creepers, Madonna's The Next Best
Thing, and Armageddon. Spidey just doesn't belong in that group.
hi...@seark.net
"Scott McAllister" <mis...@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:_JfW9.50990$L47.7...@read2.cgocable.net...
>
>
> > > If you wanna see worse than that film, watch Steel, with Shaq, where
the
> > > character's biggest achievement is scoring a 45. ( No seriously) it is
> the
> > > worst , and I mean worst, comic book to film translation you are
likely
> to
> > > see, they couldn't even bother to get the costume right, and the
jokes,
> > > which are there as I have heard others say, are lame.
>
> We had this conversation at the comic shop last week.Captain America,
> Steel, and Fantastic Four were all bad movies, but we gave them bonus
points
> for _not_ going to the big screen. By our standards, Batman and Robin was
> the worst because they dared to show it in theatres.
Well, you have to grade movies that hit the big screen by a bigger standard
than tv movies or straight to video releases.
I think Batman & Robin still had some good scenes. Superman IV went to
theatre and that's far harder to stomach than any of the Batman films.
>
> The film student probably hated the first Batman movie because they
made
> Bruce a millonaire.
>
Yes, he probably wanted Batman to be a waitress in New York, trying to get
her big break in show business.
I've never read the comic books that movies The Crow, The Mask, and Men In
Black were based upon, so I don't know how many changes were made from comic
to screen. So since I don't know, I'm not going to complain that "they made
The Crow a dead guy" or "they made The Mask crazy" or "they made Men In
Black be special agents dealing with aliens".
Even if the guy never read a comic and only saw the Spidey cartoons he
should have seen that Parker was a geeky student. He was always a college
student in the cartoons, but he does become a college student in the movie.
It could be that the guy remembers the 1970s Spider-Man tv show where Peter
Parker was apparently an adult and didn't really have many problems or a
sense of humor.
hi...@seark.net
Yep. I made a point to list classic movies, not just recent favorites. All
of my favorites were at least 20 years old.
I'm not sure if Spider-Man would make my list at all, but it's possible that
Superman: The Motion Picture could have if I had listed more movies. I
don't think any of the Batman movies would make my top 20 or so either.
Cappy Morgan
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:TVgW9.56897$wQ1.1499@fe01...
Well, if you have to defend Sandler's work, you will certainly be prepared
now, eh? : )
Your group really should make an effort to see something besides American
movies made in the last five years. There have been much worse movies made
since the dawn of film. It would make for much more interesting and
informed discussions.
I definitely agree that Spidey was not the worse film of all time. Or, even
last year. You classmate sounds like he might be in the wrong class.
Cappy Morgan
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:L3hW9.56902$wQ1.29404@fe01...
Agreed. Now, if I could just change your mind about Sandler : )
Cappy Morgan
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:41hW9.56899$wQ1.5226@fe01...
The Crow and Mask were much better than the movie versions, IMO.
> Even if the guy never read a comic and only saw the Spidey cartoons he
> should have seen that Parker was a geeky student. He was always a college
> student in the cartoons, but he does become a college student in the
movie.
What difference does it make? I'm not really sure he had a valid objection.
It sounds like he just liked to hear himself talk. I wouldn't worry too
much about his opinion...it appears uninformed.
> It could be that the guy remembers the 1970s Spider-Man tv show where
Peter
> Parker was apparently an adult and didn't really have many problems or a
> sense of humor.
Like I said, I doubt he. He obviously can't recall anything since this last
year. Pretty weak for a film class student.
Gosheven
>Steel, and Fantastic Four were all bad movies, but we gave them bonus points
>for _not_ going to the big screen. By our standards, Batman and Robin was
>the worst because they dared to show it in theatres.
Sadly, Steel did go to the theaters. WHile it wasn't the greatest comic to
movie translation, I actually liked it. It had a certain appeal to it and would
have been excellent as a TV movie as has been suggested.
Batman & Robin OTOH. That movie sucked so much crap! I would say that it ties
with Judge Dredd as the single worst comic book movie of all - time, no and in
the future. Neither one of those scripts should have been greenlighted. At
least everyone expected Steel, Captain America, and the Fantastic Four to suck,
but these two? What was done with these two movies was criminal.
> The film student probably hated the first Batman movie because they made
>Bruce a millonaire.
>
ROFLOL!!!!!!!
-Gosheven
Gosheven
>than tv movies or straight to video releases.
>
>I think Batman & Robin still had some good scenes. Superman IV went to
>theatre and that's far harder to stomach than any of the Batman films.
Not Batman & Robin. Superman IV was better than that and Judge Dredd. Despite
all of its flaws (and boy were there many, many flaws), the Quest for Peace
still had a sense of fun and nostalgia. B&R sucked on each and every level. It
sucked on levels I never even knew existed. It wasted every single star in the
film. This thread is bringing back nightmares, and don't even get me started on
Judge Dredd.
-Gosheven
Jim Connick
"Gosheven" <gosh...@aol.com> wrote :
: This thread is bringing back nightmares, and don't even get me started on
: Judge Dredd.
: -Gosheven
I agree, please, lets not start on Judge Dredd.
Jim
hi...@seark.net
The most recent movie scheduled for the class is A Beautiful Mind, the
second most recent is Malcolm X. The course focuses on biographical movies
with discussion on how the movies differ from real life. The overall course
discusses the movie making process: camera angles, editing, characters, etc.
I don't believe any of the movies are foreign films, but many of the
subjects of the movies are not Americans.
>
> I definitely agree that Spidey was not the worse film of all time. Or,
even
> last year. You classmate sounds like he might be in the wrong class.
>
Maybe he'll learn something about movies by being in the class.
I hate to admit it, but there are many classic movies (Maltese Falcon, The
Godfather, Gone With The Wind, Citizen Kane, etc.) that I have never
watched. Like most people I usually watch the most recent movies instead of
older classics. I think the class will help me develop a greater
appreciation for the classic films, so the next time I'm looking for
something to watch I may pass on the latest Vin Diesel or Michael Bay flick
and watch something by Hitchcock or Chaplin.
hi...@seark.net
No. Sandler is amusing. I will defend anyone who can get me to laugh out
loud, so I'll defend Sandler, Weird Al, Leslie Neilson, Conan O'Brien, The
South Park creators, The Simpsons creators, etc. even if they aren't as
popular as other performers.
hi...@seark.net
Well, everyone had to do this and we only had a few minutes to think about
it, so it could be that Spidey was the first thing to come to mind. I know
I had trouble thinking of the worse movies I had watched. I recalled
Glimmer Man because I turned that off after about half an hour of trying to
watch it and I rarely refuse to watch something I have rented.
>
>
> > It could be that the guy remembers the 1970s Spider-Man tv show where
> Peter
> > Parker was apparently an adult and didn't really have many problems or a
> > sense of humor.
>
> Like I said, I doubt he. He obviously can't recall anything since this
last
> year. Pretty weak for a film class student.
It's an introductory film class. None of use will likely end up making
movies, we are just studying them as you would novels in a literature
course. Consider it a film as literature course since we won't be actually
making movies.
Cappy Morgan
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:EmlW9.57170$wQ1.10682@fe01...
Good, good. I'd definitely recommend going straight out and renting the
classics that you mentioned (if you get Godfather, you have to get Godfather
2. It really plays like one long movie.) I'd also suggest Lawerence of
Arabia. That is my favorite film of all time.
Cappy Morgan
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:IplW9.57171$wQ1.41156@fe01...
I can certainly understand and appreciate your position. Yes, laughter is a
good meter...it just differs from person to person. I like most on your
list.
hi...@seark.net
"Gosheven" <gosh...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030118164146...@mb-fg.aol.com...
Michael Gough had a great scene in Batman & Robin with Clooney that really
showed us more about the relationship between Bruce and Alfred than the
comics ever have in over 60 years. That alone would save the film from
being the worst comic adaptation ever.
Judge Dredd was pretty Dreddful. I hate to Judge it so harshly, but it
sucked. The Return of Swamp Thing and The Punisher were also pretty bad,
and I believe both of those hit the theatres as did Mystery Men.
hi...@seark.net
> >We had this conversation at the comic shop last week.Captain America,
> >Steel, and Fantastic Four were all bad movies, but we gave them bonus
points
> >for _not_ going to the big screen. By our standards, Batman and Robin
was
> >the worst because they dared to show it in theatres.
>
> Sadly, Steel did go to the theaters. WHile it wasn't the greatest comic to
> movie translation, I actually liked it. It had a certain appeal to it and
would
> have been excellent as a TV movie as has been suggested.
>
> Batman & Robin OTOH. That movie sucked so much crap! I would say that it
ties
> with Judge Dredd as the single worst comic book movie of all - time, no
and in
> the future. Neither one of those scripts should have been greenlighted. At
> least everyone expected Steel, Captain America, and the Fantastic Four to
suck,
> but these two? What was done with these two movies was criminal.
I don't think Batman & Robin was that bad. Sure it was campy, but it wasn't
horrible. I've watched it six or seven times and while there's a lot wrong
with it, I have seen worse. Much much worse. Howard The Duck was hardly an
entertaining film experience.
Show of hands -- would you rather watch Batman & Robin, the 1990s Captain
America, or Judge Dredd? Just assume you are on a long airline flight and
the flight attendant is going to play one of those films and you have no
reading material and can't sleep or busy yourself in any other way so you're
going to have to watch one of them.
For the best film adaptation of a comic book or comic strip I would
nominate: Superman: The Motion Picture, The X-Men, Spider-Man, Teenage
Mutant Ninja Turtles, and Superman II. I'm not saying those movies were
100% faithful to the comics, because none of them were. I'm just saying out
of all the adaptations of comics, those were the most entertaining films
that faithful captured the important elements of the characters.
Runners Up would include: Batman (1989), Spawn, Flash Gordon (1980), Dick
Tracy, and Blade. Most of these were fairly faithful to the comics, but for
various reasons they just don't rise to the top. The Batman movies STILL
have not shown us a good film adaptation of Batman and Gordon's working
relationship and the movies spend more time on the villains than on Batman.
Dick Tracy is slowed down by the show tunes. Flash Gordon comes across so
cheesy that it's more a guilty pleasure than anything else. Spawn and Blade
were fairly basic action movies, with nothing to really make them stand out
as excellent movies.
M.O.R
over 60 or so years ago, you have to watch it over and over cos it's a crime
thriller, and when you wonder why did this character do that and such, you
see the reason after seeing it again. Really good film.
MOR
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:EmlW9.57170$wQ1.10682@fe01...
M.O.R
MOR
"Cappy Morgan" <losti...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:qElW9.6905$FY4....@news1.central.cox.net...
M.O.R
> with Judge Dredd as the single worst comic book movie of all - time, no
and in
> the future. Neither one of those scripts should have been greenlighted.
I expected this film to suck when they decided to have him remove his
helmet, and had his bike fly and got Sly Stallone. I mean organic
webshooters were to make Spider-man "realistic", in the fantasy world at
least, but why remove his helmet? i have never bothered to see this film as
it sounded so crap, but B & R, and Steel, dear god. Has anyone thought of
doing a series called " Where Films go BAD", or are they too afraid to
explore the worst films made? And I don't mean B-movies, I mean the grade A
crap.
MOR
M.O.R
and Chris O' Donnell in front of the camera, Joel Schumacher behind it?
Nuff Said.
MOR
Cappy Morgan
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:ztlW9.57176$wQ1.16818@fe01...
I did the same with Tomb Raider. The WORSE big budget movie of last year,
IMO.
CM
Anthony Abby
What? You mean you didn't like the nippled bat suits? LOL... :)
--
Anthony Abby - http://www.aplusdata.com
Comic Book Community News | Web Programming
Inventory Control, Auction, Management | Cold Fusion
PHP & ASP
Gosheven
Your expectations were not low enough. This movie did indeed suck, but far
worse than you could ever imagine.
> when they decided to have him remove his
>helmet, and had his bike fly and got Sly Stallone.
Believe me, those were the good parts.
>I mean organic
>webshooters were to make Spider-man "realistic", in the fantasy world at
>least, but why remove his helmet? i have never bothered to see this film as
>it sounded so crap, but B & R, and Steel, dear god. Has anyone thought of
>doing a series called " Where Films go BAD", or are they too afraid to
>explore the worst films made? And I don't mean B-movies, I mean the grade A
>crap.
ROFLOL!! I would be up for it. Kind of like that 25 Worst Videos That Can Never
Be Played On MTV Again thing they did some years ago with Denis Leary and Co. I
would definitely be up for doing something like that. In fact let's start now
by saying that "Daylight" was also one of the worst movies in the history of
the world.
-Gosheven
Gosheven
>and Chris O' Donnell in front of the camera, Joel Schumacher behind it?
>Nuff Said.
>
Because while Batman Forever had its faults (Jim Carrey being very
un-Riddlerish, that is if you count the B:TAS Riddler; Tommy Lee Jones being a
horrendous caricature of Two-Face ----was it just me, or were both he and
Carrey trying their darndest to upstage one another and put on the best
Nicholson impersonation they could?----the Bat-nipples, etc.)it was still
pretty decent and very true to the comics (moreso than Burton's version).
-Gosheven
hi...@seark.net
Lawrence of Arabia is scheduled for the course. It was on AMC today but I
passed on it since it had already started and I will get to watch it later.
I hate to admit it, but I rarely watch AMC or TCM, but I hate that AMC shows
commericals during the movie.
hi...@seark.net
"M.O.R" <pred...@esatclear.ie> wrote in message
news:b0cqps$gej$1...@dorito.esatclear.ie...
> The Third Man, with Orson Welles and Joseph Cotten. Great film made in
the
> over 60 or so years ago, you have to watch it over and over cos it's a
crime
> thriller, and when you wonder why did this character do that and such, you
> see the reason after seeing it again. Really good film.
The course is going to cover A Man For All Seasons, which features Orson
Welles in an acting role, but nothing directed by Welles is scheduled. It's
likely we will sample clips from some Orson Welles directed movies, such as
Citizen Kane, to learn more about the film making process.
I'd be interested in getting Citizen Kane, The Third Man, and Touch of Evil
on dvd -- if they are out on dvd.
hi...@seark.net
I saw a live Carrot Top performance several years ago and laughed my ass
off. His show was basically inspired by Gallagher without the melons. I
thought he worked well live since he knew how to play to the crowd.
However, everytime I see him onscreen he just comes across as very annoying.
hi...@seark.net
> But if you like Paulie Shore, then you should get a new funny bone.
>
We were talking about comedians. What does Paulie Shore have to do with
comedy?
Speaking of comedy, that Wanda Sykes special that aired on Comedy Central a
few weeks ago was hilarious.
hi...@seark.net
Somebody must have liked it since they have a sequel coming out. I didn't
really enjoy it either, but I managed to sit through it. I think that and
The Mummy Returns shows how hard it is to try to copy the great Indiana
Jones movies.
hi...@seark.net
I would be interested in seeing such a show, perhaps on Bravo or TCM. I
also want to see a show discussing actors who were considered but not cast
for famous movie roles.
hi...@seark.net
"Anthony Abby" <antho...@aplusdata.com> wrote in message
news:1042941356....@laptop.aplusdata.com...
>
> On Sat, 2003-01-18 at 19:58, M.O.R wrote:
> > Oh, why hasn't anyone mentioned Batman Forever? Jim Carrey, Tommy Lee
Jones
> > and Chris O' Donnell in front of the camera, Joel Schumacher behind it?
> > Nuff Said.
>
> What? You mean you didn't like the nippled bat suits? LOL... :)
>
Was there any point in putting nipples on the costumes? I know Joel
Schumacher is probably gay, but how could he convince everyone else involved
in the production that putting nipples on costumes in a movie aimed at least
partially at children is a good thing.
Cappy Morgan
I remember hearing there was a lot of friction on the set between Tommy Lee
Jones and Carrey. Apparantly, your assumption is correct. They were
described as trying to upstage eachother. They both played like villians
out of the old TV series. Personally, I thought all the films were
disapointing on various levels.
Magius
"Cappy Morgan" <losti...@cox.net> wrote in message news:cDlW9.6897
> ...and watch something by Hitchcock or Chaplin.
I'd also suggest Buster Keaton over Chaplin. I just found his films
funnier.
Lynley
Josh Dull
Sure it had some bad points, and dragged a little bit in the second act, but
they did a remarkably good job of translating the character to the screen.
Josh
Josh Dull
> Was there any point in putting nipples on the costumes? I know Joel
> Schumacher is probably gay, but how could he convince everyone else
involved
> in the production that putting nipples on costumes in a movie aimed at
least
> partially at children is a good thing.
Maybe since they had Batman set people on fire, get into S&M with Catwoman,
had a grotesque animalistic Penguin kidnapp kids with the intention of
drowning them,
and an unkillable Catwoman give Chris Walken a French kiss from Hell that at
this
point in the game nobody would be shocked by anything they did.
Josh
Cappy Morgan
"Magius" <mag...@netactive.co.za> wrote in message
news:3e2a8...@news1.mweb.co.za...
I actually took a film comedy class back in college. We saw many of their
films. I'd agree, I found Keaton to be highly under rated.
CM
Cappy Morgan
"Josh Dull" <cd...@woh.rr.com> wrote in message
news:VmBW9.27051$i73.5...@twister.neo.rr.com...
Hey, and Superman's Otis was in the movie too : ) He went straight from DC
to Marvel...without anyone noticing.
Scott McAllister
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:YfqW9.57407$wQ1.4504@fe01...
> Was there any point in putting nipples on the costumes? I know Joel
> Schumacher is probably gay, but how could he convince everyone else
involved
> in the production that putting nipples on costumes in a movie aimed at
least
> partially at children is a good thing.
Since I never sat through it, maybe someone can set me straight: even
though B&R had nipples on their outfits, Batgirl did _not_. Is that
correct? If so, that should tell you something right there.
Scott
W. Blaine Dowler
> Was there any point in putting nipples on the costumes? I know Joel
> Schumacher is probably gay, but how could he convince everyone else
> involved in the production that putting nipples on costumes in a movie
> aimed at least partially at children is a good thing.
I heard rumours that it was meant to set a precedent before the
introduction of Batgirl. Of course, it didn't work out that way, and it
would have made it more difficult to convince parents to take their
children to that movie. In retrospect, maybe they should have put nipples
on the costumes; it might have saved millions of children from the
psychological trauma of watching "Batman and Robin."
--
- Blaine
http://www.bureau42.com
XFW # 299792458, WM, SW, WNS, NRMTPB, FPSSG
SVS# 0.00729735308002..., CoC #36, SSUCS
W. Blaine Dowler
> Since I never sat through it, maybe someone can set me straight: even
> though B&R had nipples on their outfits, Batgirl did not. Is that
> correct? If so, that should tell you something right there.
They would have had the rating bumped a notch higher if they'd put nipples
on Batgirl's outfit, so they chose not to. (They needed to keep the
audience open to as many people as possible to make a dime of that movie.)
Incidentally, I worked in a theater for three years, and I've never seen
word of mouth work as effectively as it did for that movie. On opening
night (a Friday) we turned about 400 people away after selling out over
600 tickets. (We had two showings in a 315 seat theater.) Saturday
matinee, it sold out, but we didn't turn anyone away. On Saturday night,
the 7:00 show was 3/4 full, while the 9:00 show was about 1/4 full. By
Tuesday we were down to 30 people per showing.
hi...@seark.net
I recall watching some Harold Loydd on PBS when I was younger. He was
pretty amusing.
I've always been a fan of The Three Stooges. Those guys (even Shemp!) can
still crack me up.
hi...@seark.net
What would be his best work?
hi...@seark.net
Yep, Fancy Joel was too busy putting nipples and huge cod pieces on Batman
and Robin, to be bothered with Batgirl.
hi...@seark.net
"W. Blaine Dowler" <fiz...@bureau42.NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:1hDW9.70020$Yo4.4...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
> Scott McAllister wrote:
>
> > Since I never sat through it, maybe someone can set me straight:
even
> > though B&R had nipples on their outfits, Batgirl did not. Is that
> > correct? If so, that should tell you something right there.
>
> They would have had the rating bumped a notch higher if they'd put nipples
> on Batgirl's outfit, so they chose not to. (They needed to keep the
> audience open to as many people as possible to make a dime of that movie.)
>
> Incidentally, I worked in a theater for three years, and I've never seen
> word of mouth work as effectively as it did for that movie. On opening
> night (a Friday) we turned about 400 people away after selling out over
> 600 tickets. (We had two showings in a 315 seat theater.) Saturday
> matinee, it sold out, but we didn't turn anyone away. On Saturday night,
> the 7:00 show was 3/4 full, while the 9:00 show was about 1/4 full. By
> Tuesday we were down to 30 people per showing.
>
I went to see Star Wars Episode II this past summer for an 9 PM showing
about a week after it opened and I was the only person in the theatre.
W. Blaine Dowler
> I went to see Star Wars Episode II this past summer for an 9 PM showing
> about a week after it opened and I was the only person in the theatre.
The same thing happened to me with a 9PM showing of "Return of the Jedi:
Special Edition" a week later, but that was a Sunday. Friday, Saturday,
and Tuesday are the nights to judge a movie's performance by, especially
one that has a massive appeal to school-age people that comes out before
school ends.
Cappy Morgan
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:p3HW9.61095$wQ1.19686@fe01...
That would probably be The General. I'd also recommend Go West, The Boat
and The Goat. I believe you can actually rent or purchase a DVD with many
of his shorts on them.
My favorite Chaplin films are Modern Times, The Gold Rush and The Kid. A
must see is The Great Dictator. A very misunderstood film during its time.
I think Keaton had a more relatable persona on screen. But, they were both
geniuses in their art.
Cappy Morgan
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:%2HW9.61091$wQ1.9401@fe01...
Loyd had some great shorts and the Stooges are in a class by themselves.
What guy doesn't love the Stooges on some level? Well, when Curly was part
of the team. Not that imposter Curly Joe.
Cappy Morgan
> hi...@seark.net wrote:
>
> > I went to see Star Wars Episode II this past summer for an 9 PM showing
> > about a week after it opened and I was the only person in the theatre.
>
> The same thing happened to me with a 9PM showing of "Return of the Jedi:
> Special Edition" a week later, but that was a Sunday. Friday, Saturday,
> and Tuesday are the nights to judge a movie's performance by, especially
> one that has a massive appeal to school-age people that comes out before
> school ends.
Tuesday night is more popular than Sunday afternoons?
hi...@seark.net
Curly Joe was okay. Joe Besser was the one who wasn't fit to be a Stooge.
"Oh, Don't hit me! Oooooooooo."
M.O.R
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:e5HW9.61106$wQ1.60815@fe01...
oof worse, although at least he wasn't featured that much, so he remains
intact. What I can never understand is, with Batman the series being great,
how come the 3rd and 4th sucked so much more than the other 2, especially
when they had the series to look to for inspiration?
MOR
Cappy Morgan
<hi...@seark.net> wrote in message news:23IW9.61518$wQ1.18002@fe01...
Nope...didn't like either. I can appreciate Shemp, but Curly was the one
that I fondly remember. It was the Stooges at their finest. Nyuk, Nyuk,
Nyuck.
Cappy Morgan
Which series are you referring too? The cartoon, or the 60's TV series?
IMO, the cartoon was far superior to any of the Bat films. I hope we never
see the Bat rubber suit again. Nipples or no.
M.O.R
"animated series". D'oh! The way I look at it, is, to combine the best
parts of Batman the series, Batman 1, and Batman Forever, and that would be
a film. BTW, wasn't there supposed to be a film coming out based on Michael
Turner's Fathom, last I heard James cameron's company, lightstorm
Entertainment, had bought the rights, and that was years ago. I hope JC
doesn't get involved tho, his writing stinks.
MOr
"Cappy Morgan" <losti...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:k_IW9.11844$FY4....@news1.central.cox.net...
Menshevik
I sometimes suspect: Pretty much every guy who isn't American.
I guess you had to grow up with "The Three Stooges"...
Tilman
"Who wants to read something about this subject will find it in a book, the
title of which I've forgotten. But it's the 42nd chapter."
Professor Johann Georg August Galletti (1750-1828)
Magius
We've never had any 3 Stooges down in SA, except for some cartoon from the
60's or 70's. The only frame of reference we have is when someone in a TV
show or movie talks about 'em. Now if you're talking Laurel and Hardy...
Lynley
Cappy Morgan
"Menshevik" <mens...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030120031348...@mb-ma.aol.com...
> >> What guy doesn't love the Stooges on some level?
>
> I sometimes suspect: Pretty much every guy who isn't American.
> I guess you had to grow up with "The Three Stooges"...
Come on...if the Brits can produce Benny Hill then there are people even
there who appreciate the Stooges.
Cappy Morgan
Those two were brillant. Loved them as a kid. The Stooges cartoon?
Hmmm...somehow I don't think that would be a good reference. They were
slapstick. Lots of poking and slapping. However, there was some magical
chemistry between Larry, Curly and Moe...which made it work.
Menshevik
>>
>> I sometimes suspect: Pretty much every guy who isn't American.
>> I guess you had to grow up with "The Three Stooges"...
>
>Come on...if the Brits can produce Benny Hill then there are people even
>there who appreciate the Stooges.
I thought only non-Brits actually like Benny Hill... ;-)
But here in Germany the Stooges are practically unknown, AFAIK.
Cappy Morgan
> >> >> What guy doesn't love the Stooges on some level?
> >>
> >> I sometimes suspect: Pretty much every guy who isn't American.
> >> I guess you had to grow up with "The Three Stooges"...
> >
> >Come on...if the Brits can produce Benny Hill then there are people even
> >there who appreciate the Stooges.
>
> I thought only non-Brits actually like Benny Hill... ;-)
I will reserve my comments, but I will say that my British friends placed a
label on those who enjoyed such fare. I thought it was great when I was a
kid. I mean, you could watch PBS (people in America seem to mistake
anything British as being educational) see silliness and the occasional
boob. Perfect for the brain of a juvenile....might explain a lot about me
though : )
>
> But here in Germany the Stooges are practically unknown, AFAIK.
Who are considered the slapstick champs in Germany? I mean, base humor is
not strictly limited to one cotenant.
Menshevik
>I will reserve my comments, but I will say that my British friends placed a
>label on those who enjoyed such fare. I thought it was great when I was a
>kid. I mean, you could watch PBS (people in America seem to mistake
>anything British as being educational) see silliness and the occasional
>boob. Perfect for the brain of a juvenile....might explain a lot about me
>though : )
>
>>
>> But here in Germany the Stooges are practically unknown, AFAIK.
>
>Who are considered the slapstick champs in Germany? I mean, base humor is
>not strictly limited to one cotenant.
Well, Benny Hill and Mr. Bean have quite a few fans in
Germany, on a more "classic" level it's probably Laurel
& Hardy and the Marx Brothers. The Danish silent-era
comedic duo of Pat & Patachon (Cal Schenstroem & Harald
Madsen) also used to be very popular when they still regularly
showed silent films on TV. And there are of course those who
worship Jacques Tati.
Marc-Oliver Frisch
: >Who are considered the slapstick champs in Germany? I mean, base humor is
: >not strictly limited to one cotenant.
:
: Well, Benny Hill and Mr. Bean have quite a few fans in
: Germany, on a more "classic" level it's probably Laurel
: & Hardy and the Marx Brothers. The Danish silent-era
: comedic duo of Pat & Patachon (Cal Schenstroem & Harald
: Madsen) also used to be very popular when they still regularly
: showed silent films on TV. And there are of course those who
: worship Jacques Tati.
Sounds about right. Personally, I've always found the original, classic TOM
& JERRY cartoons to be insanely hilarious, from earliest childhood to the
present.
--Marc
hi...@seark.net
> >> >> What guy doesn't love the Stooges on some level?
> >>
> >> I sometimes suspect: Pretty much every guy who isn't American.
> >> I guess you had to grow up with "The Three Stooges"...
> >
> >Come on...if the Brits can produce Benny Hill then there are people even
> >there who appreciate the Stooges.
>
> I thought only non-Brits actually like Benny Hill... ;-)
>
> But here in Germany the Stooges are practically unknown, AFAIK.
>
It's not because they are all Jews who were quite vocal during WWII is it?
hi...@seark.net
> >
> >I will reserve my comments, but I will say that my British friends placed
a
> >label on those who enjoyed such fare. I thought it was great when I was
a
> >kid. I mean, you could watch PBS (people in America seem to mistake
> >anything British as being educational) see silliness and the occasional
> >boob. Perfect for the brain of a juvenile....might explain a lot about
me
> >though : )
> >
> >>
> >> But here in Germany the Stooges are practically unknown, AFAIK.
> >
> >Who are considered the slapstick champs in Germany? I mean, base humor
is
> >not strictly limited to one cotenant.
>
> Well, Benny Hill and Mr. Bean have quite a few fans in
> Germany, on a more "classic" level it's probably Laurel
> & Hardy and the Marx Brothers. The Danish silent-era
> comedic duo of Pat & Patachon (Cal Schenstroem & Harald
> Madsen) also used to be very popular when they still regularly
> showed silent films on TV. And there are of course those who
> worship Jacques Tati.
>
I would think that The Three Stooges would work great internationally since
the humor is mostly physical. You don't really need to understand the
language to appreciate the sight gags.
hi...@seark.net
And don't forget Shemp. Shemp was the brother of Curly and Moe and was an
original Stooge. Curly replaced Shemp right as the trio began to make
shorts. Shemp later came back to rejoin the group and make shorts. He was
replaced by Joe Besser who clearly did not belong. Years later Curly Joe
was brought in for the movies.
Mel Gibson produced an excellent tv movie about the life of The Three
Stooges that aired on ABC a few years ago. If you've ever been a fan of the
Stooges you HAVE to check out that movie.
Menshevik
>>
>
>It's not because they are all Jews who were quite vocal during WWII is it?
>
In a word: no.
I did not know that they were Jewish or that they had been
quite vocal during WW2, nor do I believe that would have been
a reason in itself a reason for them to be turned into
"un-persons" in Germany and remaining so for the next six
decades after the end of the war. Many Jewish[1] film-people
(some originally from the German movie industry) who were
involved in anti-Nazi films were and are famous and popular
in Germany, e.g. Ernst Lubitsch ("To Be or Not to Be") and
Fritz Lang ("Ministry of Fear", "Hangmen Also Die").
Charlie Chaplin, who was (incorrectly) branded a Jew by Nazi
propaganda,[2] remained popular even though had done
"Shoulder Arms" during WW1 and "The Great Dictator" during
WW2.
And I don't assume the Marx Brothers (who are extremely
popular in Germany) stayed silent during WW2...
The Stooges simply did not have what it took to make serious inroads
into the German market, but that also went e.g. for W.C. Fields
(who hated Jews and Blacks).
[1] Jewish by the Nazis' definition, which was not always the
way the people concerned saw themselves, but which is of
course the way at least a large segement of the German and
Austrian population would have seen them.
[2] Chaplin never publicly contradicted such claims, (possibly because
that could have been implied as accepting that having Jewish
ancestors was something to be ashamed of; the way I heard it,
the fact that his half-brother Sidney Chaplin did have Jewish
forbears may have had something to do with it).
Menshevik
>is
>> >not strictly limited to one cotenant.
>>
>> Well, Benny Hill and Mr. Bean have quite a few fans in
>> Germany, on a more "classic" level it's probably Laurel
>> & Hardy and the Marx Brothers. The Danish silent-era
>> comedic duo of Pat & Patachon (Cal Schenstroem & Harald
>> Madsen) also used to be very popular when they still regularly
>> showed silent films on TV. And there are of course those who
>> worship Jacques Tati.
Sorry, slight typo there, it should read Carl Schenstroem
(actually, the "oe" would be this Danish "slashed o" letter).
>
>I would think that The Three Stooges would work great internationally since
>the humor is mostly physical. You don't really need to understand the
>language to appreciate the sight gags.
>
Yes, but somehow they don't seem to work that way -- maybe
there is something about their humor that is too specific to
Americans (or, at least according to cliche, *male* Americans).
Cappy Morgan
> >> But here in Germany the Stooges are practically unknown, AFAIK.
> >>
> >
> >It's not because they are all Jews who were quite vocal during WWII is
it?
> >
>
> In a word: no.
> I did not know that they were Jewish or that they had been
> quite vocal during WW2, nor do I believe that would have been
> a reason in itself a reason for them to be turned into
> "un-persons" in Germany and remaining so for the next six
> decades after the end of the war.
Yeah, they were Jewish. They made a short that specifically mocked Hitler.
But, so did a lot of American comedies during that time period. Chaplin's
The Great Dictator is one that comes to mind. It was misundersood during
its time and all the thanks Chaplin got for his art is labled a communist
and ran out of Dodge.
Many Jewish[1] film-people
> (some originally from the German movie industry) who were
> involved in anti-Nazi films were and are famous and popular
> in Germany, e.g. Ernst Lubitsch ("To Be or Not to Be") and
> Fritz Lang ("Ministry of Fear", "Hangmen Also Die").
> Charlie Chaplin, who was (incorrectly) branded a Jew by Nazi
> propaganda,[2] remained popular even though had done
> "Shoulder Arms" during WW1 and "The Great Dictator" during
> WW2.
> And I don't assume the Marx Brothers (who are extremely
> popular in Germany) stayed silent during WW2...
No, I seem to recall the Marx doing a parody of the Nazis too.
>
> The Stooges simply did not have what it took to make serious inroads
> into the German market, but that also went e.g. for W.C. Fields
> (who hated Jews and Blacks).
I don't recall hearing this about W.C. Fields before. All new to me.
Menshevik
>> popular in Germany) stayed silent during WW2...
>
>No, I seem to recall the Marx doing a parody of the Nazis too.
Well, I wasn't sure if they did it during the war. But "A Night
in Casablanca" (post-war, but the villains led by Sig Rumann
are Nazis) is shown on German TV quite often.
>>
>> The Stooges simply did not have what it took to make serious inroads
>> into the German market, but that also went e.g. for W.C. Fields
>> (who hated Jews and Blacks).
>
>I don't recall hearing this about W.C. Fields before. All new to me.
Well, I read this in at least two places, but it was something
Fields kept to himself and which did not enter into his comedies.
Cappy Morgan
> >> And I don't assume the Marx Brothers (who are extremely
> >> popular in Germany) stayed silent during WW2...
> >
> >No, I seem to recall the Marx doing a parody of the Nazis too.
>
> Well, I wasn't sure if they did it during the war. But "A Night
> in Casablanca" (post-war, but the villains led by Sig Rumann
> are Nazis) is shown on German TV quite often.
> >>
> >> The Stooges simply did not have what it took to make serious inroads
> >> into the German market, but that also went e.g. for W.C. Fields
> >> (who hated Jews and Blacks).
> >
> >I don't recall hearing this about W.C. Fields before. All new to me.
>
> Well, I read this in at least two places, but it was something
> Fields kept to himself and which did not enter into his comedies.
The only thing I recall him hating in his comedies was a nagging wife and
kids. In the film class I took, we did get some of their backgrounds, but
this never came into play. We did discuss Fatty Arbuckle's unfortunate
situation.
Andrew Ryan Chang
>> The same thing happened to me with a 9PM showing of "Return of the Jedi:
>> Special Edition" a week later, but that was a Sunday. Friday, Saturday,
>> and Tuesday are the nights to judge a movie's performance by, especially
>> one that has a massive appeal to school-age people that comes out before
>> school ends.
>
>Tuesday night is more popular than Sunday afternoons?
Most places have discount Tuesdays.
--
"This frightens some in Washington, because they want the federal
government controlling the Social Security, like it's some kind of federal
program,"
--George W. Bush (Missouri speech, 11/03/00)
Martin Phipps
> I would think that The Three Stooges would work great internationally since
> the humor is mostly physical. You don't really need to understand the
> language to appreciate the sight gags.
You can test that theory by turning the sound down. Then you'll
notice it's just people hitting each other.
Martin
Cappy Morgan
"Martin Phipps" <phipps...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:df8f4cb4.03012...@posting.google.com...
Yeah, isn't base humor just grand.
Cappy Morgan
"Andrew Ryan Chang" <arc...@sfu.ca> wrote in message
news:b0j0qv$p4e$1...@morgoth.sfu.ca...
> Cappy Morgan <losti...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> The same thing happened to me with a 9PM showing of "Return of the
Jedi:
> >> Special Edition" a week later, but that was a Sunday. Friday,
Saturday,
> >> and Tuesday are the nights to judge a movie's performance by,
especially
> >> one that has a massive appeal to school-age people that comes out
before
> >> school ends.
> >
> >Tuesday night is more popular than Sunday afternoons?
>
> Most places have discount Tuesdays.
I didn't know that...at least, my local multiplex has never advertised this
fact. I'll have to check it out. I think I might have been missing
something. Thanks.
hi...@seark.net
"Martin Phipps" <phipps...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:df8f4cb4.03012...@posting.google.com...
It's not "just" that. Sometimes Moe will take a crowbar or a pair of pliers
to Curly's nose or maybe pull out a wad of Larry's hair. Then Curly has to
try to eat his clam chowder, but the clam keeps eating his crackers ends up
spitting the chowder at Curly.
It's all 100 times more amusing than anything Monty Python ever did.
M.O.R
they re-used jokes in the looney tunes, but they were still good. The Chuck
Jones Tom and Jerry were very funny too, but the Gene Deitch ones were
AWFUL, terrible animation, and not funny.
MOR
"Marc-Oliver Frisch" <Dersc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b0hf3d$qjp$02$1...@news.t-online.com...