The PANIC ROOM is magic

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Calista

unread,
Apr 5, 2002, 9:10:19 PM4/5/02
to
"_SpYmAn_" <blister...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<a8jovc$sfdhc$1...@ID-111971.news.dfncis.de>...
> Wow!! Just got back from a afternoon session- and man this is one great film
> that has to be seen on the big screen!!
> To be honest- I love David Finchers work- but I wouldn't go as far as saying
> this is his best film he has made(for me that goes to SEVEN). Still Jodie
> Foster puts in a tremendous performance(prob her best work since SoTL) and
> Forrest Whitaker is also good as one of the 3 'bad guys'.
> If you like films that make you crawl under your skin or eat away at you -
> then this is for you. Some great camera sequences in this - some of the
> shots inside the apartment blow you away....literary.


I truly agree. It sure blows my mind. This film is the best I've seen
in years. Truly original and breathtaking film. I thought Silence of
the Lambs is excellent, The Panic Room is truly magic.

FIVE DESERVING STARS * * * * * to the film and the stunning Jodie
Foster!

POTENTIAL BEST ACTRESS OSCAR for Jodie Foster

POTENTIAL BEST PICTURE/DIRECTOR OSCAR for David Finchers

Nicole Kidman indeed missed out on a chance to shine after Moulin
Rouge and The Others.

SpaceRook

unread,
Apr 5, 2002, 9:37:34 PM4/5/02
to
On 5 Apr 2002 18:10:19 -0800, calist...@hotmail.com (Calista)
wrote:

I thought it was the best movie so far this year, but I'm sure there
will be other movies that soon replace it. What impressed me was the
characters and the subtley. You'd think the concept of a whole movie
set in a house would be dull, but they really fleshed out the details.
I liked the relationship between the 3 criminals. There was a lot of
internal conflict between them, which made the movie more interesting
than it would have been if it was simply 3 bad guys VS 2 girls. The
movie also has that classic Fincher lighting, and his newer style of
CGI camera panning.

PETER BUONO

unread,
Apr 5, 2002, 10:39:15 PM4/5/02
to

"Calista" <calist...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e171adfd.02040...@posting.google.com...

Saw Panic Room last week...Great film - unfortunately with a totally
formulaic ending. Visually stunning, as David Finchner films usually are.


Parcells/Belichick fan

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 12:09:58 AM4/6/02
to
I doubt if this movie deserves alot of Oscars or anything, but yes, I agree 100%, this is definitely movie
magic at its best, and it definitely beats the pants out of most of everything else I've seen over the last
couple of years.

And yes, this was the best Jodie movie I've seen in YEARS(Am I sounding like "David Manning" or what?).

*sigh* if only we have more directors like Soderbergh and Fincher making "popcorn" flics(!).

yej

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 2:13:46 AM4/6/02
to
Okay, I didn't like Panic Room.
For reasons, visit http://youngmorrell.homestead.com/panicroom.html

-- John Young

"Calista" <calist...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e171adfd.02040...@posting.google.com...

Zox

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 2:45:11 AM4/6/02
to
Interesting review..

"yej" <y...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Kexr8.6865$bb.1...@news2.west.cox.net...

Dan Day

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 4:29:01 AM4/6/02
to
On Sat, 06 Apr 2002 07:13:46 GMT, "yej" <y...@cox.net> wrote:

>Okay, I didn't like Panic Room.
>For reasons, visit http://youngmorrell.homestead.com/panicroom.html

"A friend recommends a massive Brownstone in the Upper
West Side of Manhattan. Why anyone would want a gloomy,
three-story house for just two people is beyond me"

Actually, the film addresses that, specifically if a bit
obliquely. I can't quote the exact line of dialog, but
there's a line that makes the point of implying that
she's getting an outrageously expensive place to live
because her ex will have to pay for it, and it's a
bit of revenge for his having dumped her for a younger
woman.

Geoff

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 3:39:18 PM4/6/02
to
On Sat, 06 Apr 2002 09:29:01 GMT, d...@firstnethou.com (Dan
Day) deposited this nugget in this here newsgroup

Also, it puts them close to the ex-husband, so that his
daughter will have reasonable access to him.

Regards,
Geoff "Some good points in your review."

"Words, words. They're all we have to go on."
--Guildenstern, in Tom Stoppard's "Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead"

yej

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 6:07:43 PM4/6/02
to
Okay, maybe it's just me ...
but even if I had the money to buy an enormous house,
I wouldn't do so if it was just me and my daughter.
Especially one as gloomy and depressing as the one they decide on.

But that's just me.

-- John Young
visit The Movie Reviewing Teens --
http://youngmorrell.homestead.com

"Dan Day" <d...@firstnethou.com> wrote in message
news:3caebefd....@news-server.houston.rr.com...

Derek Janssen

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 6:49:37 PM4/6/02
to
Calista wrote:
>
> I truly agree. It sure blows my mind. This film is the best I've seen
> in years. Truly original and breathtaking film. I thought Silence of
> the Lambs is excellent, The Panic Room is truly magic.

And for the last time--
Yes, we know you're a gushy amateur, but assuming it's good, "The Panic
Room" is not "magic":

"Sleepless in Seattle" is "magic"...
"A League of Their Own" is "magic"...
"Panic Room" is "taut" "gripping", "suspenseful", etc.--GET IT RIGHT,
FER CRYIN' OUT LOUD!!!

(...I mean, sheesh, you don't see Joel Siegel blurbs in papers going
around saying "'Seven' is pure magic from the opening scenes! A bubbly,
energetic concoction I didn't want to see end! : D ")

Derek Janssen
dja...@ultranet.com

Ang

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 7:25:24 PM4/6/02
to
From: "yej" y...@cox.net:

>Okay, maybe it's just me ...
>but even if I had the money to buy an enormous house,
>I wouldn't do so if it was just me and my daughter.
>Especially one as gloomy and depressing as the one they decide on.

While on Larry King Jodie chalked her character's decision up to her lack of
confidence. Someone (the bitchy friend) talks her into it and her daughter
thinks it's "cool," so she does it, regardless of whether it's wise or prudent
to do so.

Personally I find the idea of a panic room intriguing, but I consider myself
too much of a minimalist to buy a house that's decked out with such extravagant
nonessentials.
...but that's just me.


***********
"Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence."

- Henrik Tikkanen

David Springthorpe

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 8:09:46 PM4/6/02
to
On Sat, 06 Apr 2002 23:07:43 GMT, "yej" <y...@cox.net> wrote:

>Okay, maybe it's just me ...
>but even if I had the money to buy an enormous house,
>I wouldn't do so if it was just me and my daughter.
>Especially one as gloomy and depressing as the one they decide on.
>
>But that's just me.

It's not reality, it's a film - location presumably chosen to ensure
maximum dramatic effect, to state the BBO.....

D.S.

Brad Snowder

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 10:22:34 PM4/6/02
to
Just saw it. Hey, when did Morse Code for S.O.S. become 4-2-4?

--
Brad Snowder
Western Washington University Planetarium
http://www.wwu.edu/~skywise


Dawn Taylor

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 10:00:48 PM4/6/02
to

Blade 2 ... now THAT was magic.

Dawn
(I laughed, I cried, I wanted to flay open my back and expose my
spine)


-------------------
It is absurd to divide people into good or bad. People are
either charming or tedious. -Oscar Wilde

Gary

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 11:10:33 PM4/6/02
to
I thought about Meg's (Jodie Foster) dismissal of the cops as kind of
ridiculous in the beginning. But I'm glad it happened as it has in the
film. If she did let the cops know about the situation, the film would be
very boring! Having her come up with a plan and execute them is way more
interesting to watch ... it's like the premise of HOME ALONE by an adult.


"yej" <y...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Kexr8.6865$bb.1...@news2.west.cox.net...

Gary

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 11:12:38 PM4/6/02
to
Come on now. The kid might have learned it wrong. She's just a kid. ;-)


"Brad Snowder" <sky...@NOSPAM.cc.wwu.edu> wrote in message
news:_XOr8.238099$q2.25264@sccrnsc01...

HudsonGrl

unread,
Apr 6, 2002, 11:34:56 PM4/6/02
to
>From: Derek Janssen dja...@ultranet.com
>Date: 4/6/02 5:49 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <3CAF8991.1F8AF3D9@u

>
>And for the last time--
>Yes, we know you're a gushy amateur, but assuming it's good, "The Panic
>Room" is not "magic":
>

IMO, it wasn't *good* at all. it was a waste of time and money...little
suspense or imagination.

Per Sandholt

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 7:11:06 AM4/7/02
to
COULD WE STOP SUCKING EACHOTHERS DICKS FOR A MOMENT!!!

Panic Room is surely Finchers worst film so far...

It has stunningly cinematography, the sound is working great, the acting is
good but not calling for an OSCAR.... the editing is stylised but at times
wierd, and the effects are fantastic. BUT BUT BUT it is not enough at all.

What about the characters and the story??? We almost don't get any back
story on any of the characters - the bit we do get does not make it possible
for the us to truly feel anything for them. At the end of the movie it
doesn't really feel that anybody learned anything from the hell they've just
been dragged through.
It's basic storytelling when you expose your maincharacters to something
that will change their lives or the way they look at their lives, but
Finchers has apparantly forgotten this, or maybe he just doesn't care.
(which is really to bad)

But OK!!! It could be much worse....! Fincher did turn the script into the
the best movie possible (considering the script)... I just don't understand
why he chose it, when he's one of the few people in Hollywood who can
actually choose between anything he wants.

Though I was entertained for 134 min, but I really don't think that it's a
movie that'll stick in my mind like "Se7en", "The Game" or "Fight Club did".

But go see it if you want some nonesense, beautiful entertainment for a
couple of hours... Which at times can be OK too!!!

--
Per


"Calista" <calist...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e171adfd.02040...@posting.google.com...

mildboy

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 9:42:41 AM4/7/02
to

"Per Sandholt" <delu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ePVr8.4911$o05.23...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...

> COULD WE STOP SUCKING EACHOTHERS DICKS FOR A MOMENT!!!
>
> Panic Room is surely Finchers worst film so far...

No it isn't Se7en or Fight Club (and that god it isn't the ludicrous The
Game). But it is an enjoyable outing from Fincher. Foster and Whittaker are
terrific, and while it won't win any nominations, its worth seeing.

And as usual, Fincher's credits rock!


Gargoyle #5

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 9:50:04 AM4/7/02
to
"Calista" <calist...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e171adfd.02040...@posting.google.com...
[snip]

>
> FIVE DESERVING STARS * * * * * to the film and the stunning Jodie
> Foster!
>
> POTENTIAL BEST ACTRESS OSCAR for Jodie Foster
>

I see Jodie Foster will be interviewed on Rove Live the week and I am
cringing in anticipation. What a mismatch of intellects that will be.

Marc Fleury

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 10:14:10 AM4/7/02
to
"Per Sandholt" <delu...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>We almost don't get any back
>story on any of the characters - the bit we do get does not make it possible
>for the us to truly feel anything for them. At the end of the movie it
>doesn't really feel that anybody learned anything from the hell they've just
>been dragged through.

Most of the movie takes place over 6 hours. What do you expect?

>Though I was entertained for 134 min, but I really don't think that it's a
>movie that'll stick in my mind like "Se7en", "The Game" or "Fight Club did".

Be happy then. You got an extra half-hour of entertainment that you
didn't pay for.


--
Marc.
aa #1971

Cadillac_Jones

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 12:57:05 PM4/7/02
to
On Sat, 06 Apr 2002 23:07:43 GMT, "yej" <y...@cox.net> wrote:

>Okay, maybe it's just me ...
>but even if I had the money to buy an enormous house,
>I wouldn't do so if it was just me and my daughter.
>Especially one as gloomy and depressing as the one they decide on.
>
>But that's just me.
>

Those poor, crappy Manhattan Brownstones. You can't even give those
things away anymore...

"I'm the luckiest man in the world. I have a cigarette
lighter and a wife...and they both work!"

Paulfxfoley

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 1:03:54 PM4/7/02
to
If by "magic" you mean "overblown."

Fincher's latest is an exercise in paranoia. And like all of his movies, it's
an exercise in excess. And like all his movies, it's depressingly
misanthropic.

The joyless theme, once again, is that the barbarians are at the gate, society
has broken down. The police are useless, they cannot protect rich people
living in mid town Manhattan (!) Yeah, right.

Everything in a Fincher movie is TOO MUCH. Blown out of proportion till it's
laughable... and yet devoid of humor. We're supposed to it all seriously.
That the threat of burglary is so omnipresent and dire that having a panic room
seems prudent. People built bomb shelters in their back yards during the Red
Scare days... and sensible people LAUGHED AT THEM.

"Panic Room" ought to have been a comedy. Like "Home Alone." Because it's not
fit to be taken seriously.


--Paul
------------------------------------
"Sooner is better than later."

ELMathews

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 2:11:33 PM4/7/02
to
>"Panic Room" ought to have been a comedy. Like "Home Alone." Because it's
>not
>fit to be taken seriously.
>

and neither are you, toolbag.

Dawn Taylor

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 2:00:14 PM4/7/02
to
On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 11:11:06 GMT, "Per Sandholt"
<delu...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>COULD WE STOP SUCKING EACHOTHERS DICKS FOR A MOMENT!!!

Err ... okay.


>
>Panic Room is surely Finchers worst film so far...
>

Not hardly. The man directed "Alien 3," for God's sake. And "The Game"
was just plain presposterous.

"Panic Room" is a very well-made film. It's a sort of unexceptional
film that offers nothing new -- and a bit of a let-down after "Fight
Club" -- but it's quite good. It's just not ... great.

After "Fight Club" I was hoping for great. It's certainly no "Alien
3," however. <shudder>

Dawn

Dan Day

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 3:56:31 PM4/7/02
to
On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 11:11:06 GMT, "Per Sandholt" <delu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>What about the characters and the story??? We almost don't get any back
>story on any of the characters

The "requirement" of back story is often overrated.

Bob

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 4:12:21 PM4/7/02
to

PETER BUONO wrote:

>
>
> Saw Panic Room last week...Great film - unfortunately with a totally
> formulaic ending. Visually stunning, as David Finchner films usually are.

So, you would have preferred to let the psycho kill mother and daughter, and
let Forrest W. get away with the 22 million?
Bob

Ronald O. Christian

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 4:19:28 PM4/7/02
to
On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 13:12:21 -0700, Bob <chil...@ix.netcom.com>
wrote:

It would have ended that way, had it been made 30 years earlier.


Ron
http://roc85.home.attbi.com
"If UN peacekeeping had been involved during the US civil war,
it'd still be going on today."

Paulfxfoley

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 4:50:37 PM4/7/02
to
elmathews wrote:


You annoy me; I ignore you.


--Paul

Jeff Coleman

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 5:14:39 PM4/7/02
to

"Dan Day" <d...@firstnethou.com> wrote in message
news:3caebefd....@news-server.houston.rr.com...

"Nice house. Your mom's rich?"

"Dad's rich. Mom's just mad."


Still, that seems like a pretty silly thing to quibble about in a review of
a movie. People buy big houses. I'd sooner question the far-fetchedness
of having a "Panic Room" in a house, but that's sort of the point of the
movie.

Jeff
--
www.progressions.org : Comics : "Urban adventure with a pop twist"
www.isaacpriestley.com : Music : Latest album "Days of Being Dumb"

Jeff Coleman

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 5:17:31 PM4/7/02
to

"Gary" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:a8oglv$u21cb$1...@ID-135848.news.dfncis.de...


> I thought about Meg's (Jodie Foster) dismissal of the cops as kind of
> ridiculous in the beginning. But I'm glad it happened as it has in the
> film. If she did let the cops know about the situation, the film would be
> very boring!

Especially with Jodie Foster having a dead daughter. It wasn't just for the
sake of the movie that she dismissed the cops--Raoul made it very clear that
he'd kill the girl if the cops came in the house.

But it's true that, as Hitchcock said, "They don't go to the police because
it's dull." So when you make a suspense movie you find ways to prevent the
cops from being effective.

Still, I especially liked the cop's subtle understanding of the situation,
and the way he tried to give her an out by blinking her eyes. It must have
made it even more difficult for her to resist that, but she alone knows that
her daughter will be killed if they try to help her.

>Having her come up with a plan and execute them is way more
> interesting to watch ... it's like the premise of HOME ALONE by an adult.

Definitely. Very satisfying movie. I liked when she smashed the cameras,
and Raoul says "Why didn't WE do that..."

NMacphe421

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 5:23:50 PM4/7/02
to
>magic
>From: "Jeff Coleman" jcol...@NOSPAMhandofgod.com

> Why anyone would want a gloomy,
>> three-story house for just two people is beyond me"
>>
>> Actually, the film addresses that, specifically if a bit
>> obliquely. I can't quote the exact line of dialog, but
>> there's a line that makes the point of implying that
>> she's getting an outrageously expensive place to live
>> because her ex will have to pay for it, and it's a
>> bit of revenge for his having dumped her for a younger
>> woman.
>
>"Nice house. Your mom's rich?"
>
>"Dad's rich. Mom's just mad."
>
>
>Still, that seems like a pretty silly thing to quibble about in a review of
>a movie. People buy big houses. I'd sooner question the far-fetchedness
>of having a "Panic Room" in a house, but that's sort of the point of the
>movie.
>
>Jeff

People buy big houses but Jodie Foster gives off too much of a
scholastic/monastic vibe at the beginning of Panic Room to seem like one of
those people. It wouldn't have been a problem with Nicole Kidman--who would've
done a better job of communicating the whole, "I'm sticking it to my rich ex"
angle. It is a silly thing to quibble about but there's so many silly things
to quibble about in Panic Room that they begin to add up.

Ronald O. Christian

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 5:32:47 PM4/7/02
to
On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 21:17:31 GMT, "Jeff Coleman"
<jcol...@NOSPAMhandofgod.com> wrote:
>But it's true that, as Hitchcock said, "They don't go to the police because
>it's dull."

Ever see Experiment in Terror? (1962, Blake Edwards directing.)

yej

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 6:20:09 PM4/7/02
to
I wasn't quibbling about that fact.
I was just merely stating my opinion, which is, afterall, what a review is.

The fact that she buys that depressing house had no affect on whether I
liked or disliked the movie.

-- John Young
visit The Movie Reviewing Teens --
http://youngmorrell.homestead.com

"Jeff Coleman" <jcol...@NOSPAMhandofgod.com> wrote in message
news:3F2s8.9377$QC1.8...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

yej

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 6:22:27 PM4/7/02
to
The bad guys in the panic room CANNOT hear what Jodie Foster says to the
police. She could have told the police EVERYTHING, and tell them they
couldn't come in or her daughter would be killed. Then at least Foster
would have professionals on her side if anything happens.

-- John Young
visit The Movie Reviewing Teens --
http://youngmorrell.homestead.com

"Jeff Coleman" <jcol...@NOSPAMhandofgod.com> wrote in message

news:LH2s8.9381$QC1.8...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

Richard Steven Hack

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 7:08:29 PM4/7/02
to
On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 21:17:31 GMT, "Jeff Coleman"
<jcol...@NOSPAMhandofgod.com> wrote:

>
>
>"Gary" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:a8oglv$u21cb$1...@ID-135848.news.dfncis.de...
>> I thought about Meg's (Jodie Foster) dismissal of the cops as kind of
>> ridiculous in the beginning. But I'm glad it happened as it has in the
>> film. If she did let the cops know about the situation, the film would be
>> very boring!
>
>Especially with Jodie Foster having a dead daughter. It wasn't just for the
>sake of the movie that she dismissed the cops--Raoul made it very clear that
>he'd kill the girl if the cops came in the house.
>
>But it's true that, as Hitchcock said, "They don't go to the police because
>it's dull." So when you make a suspense movie you find ways to prevent the
>cops from being effective.
>
>Still, I especially liked the cop's subtle understanding of the situation,
>and the way he tried to give her an out by blinking her eyes. It must have
>made it even more difficult for her to resist that, but she alone knows that
>her daughter will be killed if they try to help her.

Did you notice the fact that she resolutely did NOT blink her eyes for
several seconds? Why do you think the cop came back? He KNEW there
was a problem when she did NOT blink her eyes for almost thirty
seconrds! She was fighting him too hard! That cop was a miracle - a
smart New York City cop! Or a very paranoid one...:-}
>
Richard Steven Hack
richa...@NOSPAMpcmagic.net


-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Ulimited downloads - 19 servers ==-----

David Springthorpe

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 7:29:23 PM4/7/02
to
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002 23:50:04 +1000, "Gargoyle #5" <re...@news.group>
wrote:

>I see Jodie Foster will be interviewed on Rove Live the week and I am
>cringing in anticipation. What a mismatch of intellects that will be.

Reckon he'll ask her if she's a lesbian.....?

D.S.

Per Sandholt

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 7:39:44 PM4/7/02
to
LOL!!!
"ELMathews" <elma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020407141133...@mb-dh.aol.com...

Derek Janssen

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 8:06:59 PM4/7/02
to

...So, people still ASK?

Derek Janssen
dja...@ultranet.com

Jeff Coleman

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 8:35:29 PM4/7/02
to

"Richard Steven Hack" <richa...@pcmagic.net> wrote in message
news:3cb0d0d9...@mammoth.usenet-access.com...


> On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 21:17:31 GMT, "Jeff Coleman"

> >Still, I especially liked the cop's subtle understanding of the
situation,
> >and the way he tried to give her an out by blinking her eyes. It must
have
> >made it even more difficult for her to resist that, but she alone knows
that
> >her daughter will be killed if they try to help her.
>
> Did you notice the fact that she resolutely did NOT blink her eyes for
> several seconds? Why do you think the cop came back? He KNEW there
> was a problem when she did NOT blink her eyes for almost thirty
> seconrds! She was fighting him too hard! That cop was a miracle - a
> smart New York City cop! Or a very paranoid one...:-}

I wouldn't want to suggest definitively that the cop understood that she was
signalling him by not blinking, but, like you said, the cop seemed pretty
smart, so that could be the case! It's a nice touch...

Jeff Coleman

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 8:35:30 PM4/7/02
to

"NMacphe421" <nmacp...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020407172350...@mb-ms.aol.com...


> People buy big houses but Jodie Foster gives off too much of a
> scholastic/monastic vibe at the beginning of Panic Room to seem like one
of
> those people. It wouldn't have been a problem with Nicole Kidman--who
would've
> done a better job of communicating the whole, "I'm sticking it to my rich
ex"
> angle. It is a silly thing to quibble about but there's so many silly
things
> to quibble about in Panic Room that they begin to add up.

It is indeed a silly thing to quibble about. Who cares? There's all kinds
of people in the world--I don't suppose you REALLY think that it would be
impossible to find a real-world example of someone "scholarly" who bought a
big house sticking it to their rich ex? But again, who cares?

She's a woman who bought a big house.

Robert Matthews

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 10:41:20 PM4/7/02
to
In article <20020407130354...@mb-cf.aol.com>,
paulf...@aol.com (Paulfxfoley) wrote:

> If by "magic" you mean "overblown."
>
> Fincher's latest is an exercise in paranoia. And like all of his movies, it's
> an exercise in excess. And like all his movies, it's depressingly
> misanthropic.
>
> The joyless theme, once again, is that the barbarians are at the gate,
> society has broken down. The police are useless, they cannot protect rich
> people living in mid town Manhattan (!) Yeah, right.
>
> Everything in a Fincher movie is TOO MUCH. Blown out of proportion till it's
> laughable... and yet devoid of humor.

Jesus. Charles Taylor of Salon, perhaps the bitterest critic working
nowadays, and now you.

"Panic Room" was hilarious. It was a funny, clever movie (not brilliant,
not his very best work, but still better than the great majority of movies on
the screens right now). Same with "The Game" and "Fight Club". "Alien 3" and
"Seven", okay, both very bleak movies. But Fincher most surely has a sense of
humour, and not even some rarefied ironic humour, either--it's right there on
the screen. Anybody who thinks Fincher's movies are "devoid of humor" doesn't
know how the fuck to watch a movie. They should be sitting at home watching
"Hee-Haw" re-runs.

Robert Matthews

Emanuel Brown

unread,
Apr 7, 2002, 10:47:14 PM4/7/02
to
Well, it's considered polite. Jodie's put a lot of effort into the
denials over the years, and people still try to respect that effort.
Emanuel
"Everybody wants a normal life and a cool car;
most people settle for the car." Chris Titus
http://home.att.net/~epbrown01/1966-rolls.jpg
http://home.att.net/~epbrown01/1983-porsche.jpg

Derek Janssen

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 12:45:16 AM4/8/02
to
Emanuel Brown wrote:
>
> >> >I see Jodie Foster will be interviewed on Rove Live the week and I am
> >> >cringing in anticipation. What a mismatch of intellects that will be.
> >>
> >> Reckon he'll ask her if she's a lesbian.....?
> >
> >...So, people still ASK?
> >
> Well, it's considered polite. Jodie's put a lot of effort into the
> denials over the years, and people still try to respect that effort.

But...well...."Contact"!

Derek Janssen (you'd think even her press agent would've given up by then!)
dja...@ultranet.com

Ang

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 2:56:14 AM4/8/02
to
>On Sun, 7 Apr 2002 23:50:04 +1000, "Gargoyle #5" <re...@news.group>
>wrote:
>
>>I see Jodie Foster will be interviewed on Rove Live the week and I am
>>cringing in anticipation. What a mismatch of intellects that will be.

Have a date and time for that appearance?


***********
"Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence."

- Henrik Tikkanen

Dan Day

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 3:25:03 AM4/8/02
to
On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 21:17:31 GMT, "Jeff Coleman" <jcol...@NOSPAMhandofgod.com>
wrote:

>
>But it's true that, as Hitchcock said, "They don't go to the police because
>it's dull." So when you make a suspense movie you find ways to prevent the
>cops from being effective.

Several years ago, someone wrote a very insightful (and funny)
article on talk.politics.guns which explained in detail,
with examples, why Hollywood will almost never show a
civilian-owned firearm being used for effective self defense,
either.

It boiled down to the same reason Hitchcock gave -- imagine
"Dirty Harry" if one of the serial killer's would-be victims
had shot him dead, or even wounded him and held him for
police, and Clint Eastwood had spent the rest of
the film filling out police paperwork.

Likewise for a lot of weapon use by the heros/villains, too,
which explains why so often in films thousands of machine-gun
rounds can be expended at someone near enough to hit with
a rotten tomato, and they all miss. Can't have the
movie end *too* soon now, can we?

Unfortunately, these "rules of drama" often leave me
yelling (internally) at the movie or TV screen, "you've
been stalked for days now by a deranged killer, WHY
ON EARTH HAVEN'T YOU ARMED YOURSELF AT ALL?" For god's
sake, buy some pepper spray at least.

The "oh, we're so helpless" routine gets old (and silly)
after a while, especially when it's clear that it's being
done entirely for "dramatic" reasons and not reasons of
common sense or ordinary behavior.

One of the few rare exceptions was the end of
"Jagged Edge", god bless 'em. Now that was a practical
woman in a film, for a change.

Ken Ream

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 8:10:36 AM4/8/02
to

"Dan Day" <d...@firstnethou.com> wrote in message
news:3cbe4208...@news-server.houston.rr.com...

> On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 21:17:31 GMT, "Jeff Coleman"
<jcol...@NOSPAMhandofgod.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >But it's true that, as Hitchcock said, "They don't go to the police
because
> >it's dull." So when you make a suspense movie you find ways to prevent
the
> >cops from being effective.
>
> Several years ago, someone wrote a very insightful (and funny)
> article on talk.politics.guns which explained in detail,
> with examples, why Hollywood will almost never show a
> civilian-owned firearm being used for effective self defense,
> either.
>
> It boiled down to the same reason Hitchcock gave -- imagine
> "Dirty Harry" if one of the serial killer's would-be victims
> had shot him dead, or even wounded him and held him for
> police, and Clint Eastwood had spent the rest of
> the film filling out police paperwork.

Then we'd have a Charles Bronson movie.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

V01TeK

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 10:37:23 AM4/8/02
to
film so far...
> >
> Not hardly. The man directed "Alien 3," for God's sake. And "The Game"
> was just plain presposterous.

Alien 3 IS terrible ... but the Game?
--
"Let's be Superheroes."
Chris


Richard Steven Hack

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 11:54:55 AM4/8/02
to
On Mon, 08 Apr 2002 07:25:03 GMT, d...@firstnethou.com (Dan Day) wrote:

>
>The "oh, we're so helpless" routine gets old (and silly)
>after a while, especially when it's clear that it's being
>done entirely for "dramatic" reasons and not reasons of
>common sense or ordinary behavior.
>
>One of the few rare exceptions was the end of
>"Jagged Edge", god bless 'em. Now that was a practical
>woman in a film, for a change.
>

Best use of a gun was in the animated movie "Wizards". The whole
movie was about how bad technology is - then at the end the good
wizard tells his brother, "I'm glad you changed your name, you
son-of-a-bitch" - and pulls out a gun and blows him away! Awesome
climax!
The Master
"Whatever does not kill me makes me stronger"
- and YOU have not killed me!

Kid Rouge

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 1:00:48 PM4/8/02
to
I agree that it is too bad Nicole lost a chance to another
blockbuster. but I think Jodie is a good choice for the film too
because she has that mannish - tough woman quality. Kidman did a tough
woman role in DEAD CALM but Jodie just seems like a macho woman in
real life


calist...@hotmail.com (Calista) wrote in message
> Nicole Kidman indeed missed out on a chance to shine after Moulin
> Rouge and The Others.

Dawn Taylor

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 12:58:46 PM4/8/02
to
On Mon, 08 Apr 2002 14:37:23 GMT, "V01TeK" <pal...@kooee.com.au>
wrote:

>film so far...
>> >
>> Not hardly. The man directed "Alien 3," for God's sake. And "The Game"
>> was just plain presposterous.
>
>Alien 3 IS terrible ... but the Game?

Yeah -- The Game is terrible.

<spoilers below, so if you've never seen the film ... blahblahblah>


Most of the film is built on absolutely ridiculous coincidence and
happenstance. Considering that it's ostensibly about an elaborate
"game" that's planned with military-level precision, that so much is
left to sheer chance is ludicrous. And, frankly, kind of insulting to
the viewer.

As just one example: The clown dummy Douglas finds in his driveway,
lying in the same spot as his father's suicide. He drags it into the
house, props it up in the chair in his study, and turns on the news.
During the broadcast, a live feed breaks in with the newscaster
talking directly to Douglas; we soon see that there's a hidden camera
in the clown that can survey the entire room. A cute trick, and a
clever idea.

Except it brings up a lot of pesky questions. Let's say, for the sake
of argument, that the folks running the game knew that Douglas ALWAYS
spent EVERY evening in his study, watching ONLY that news station.
Some people really are that anal, so I'll grant that as a possibility.

But for the trick to work, they also had to know that:

a) Douglas would bring the dummy into the study with him, and not dump
it in the front hall or toss it in a closet;
b) Douglas would position the dummy in such a way that the camera
could see the entire room (what if he'd laid it face-down on the
floor?);
c) or that Douglas wouldn't just, say, leave the thing where he found
it and call the cops because he's a very wealthy man and *someone left
a scary freakin' clown dummy in the same place his dad killed
himself.*

And that's just *one* segment of the film. The entire movie is full of
that sort of absolutely ridiculous coincidence, masquerading as a
spooky master plan.

Fincher did a nice job with the actors and the visuals. The script
just doesn't work.

Dawn


-------------------
It is absurd to divide people into good or bad. People are
either charming or tedious. -Oscar Wilde

Robert Matthews

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 3:56:59 PM4/8/02
to
In article <3cb2c8b...@news.newsguy.com>,
dawn...@pacifier.com (Dawn Taylor) wrote:

> On Mon, 08 Apr 2002 14:37:23 GMT, "V01TeK" <pal...@kooee.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> >film so far...
> >> >
> >> Not hardly. The man directed "Alien 3," for God's sake. And "The Game"
> >> was just plain presposterous.
> >
> >Alien 3 IS terrible ... but the Game?
>
> Yeah -- The Game is terrible.
>
> <spoilers below, so if you've never seen the film ... blahblahblah>
>
> Most of the film is built on absolutely ridiculous coincidence and
> happenstance. Considering that it's ostensibly about an elaborate
> "game" that's planned with military-level precision, that so much is
> left to sheer chance is ludicrous. And, frankly, kind of insulting to
> the viewer.

You're not wrong, but some films just exist in a world all their own, where
a sort of dream logic rules, and "The Game" is one of them. "Dressed to Kill" is
another; if you actually sit down and think about it it makes no sense whatever
(how did the murderous blonde know that Angie Dickinson would return to the
floor she'd just left?), but it's so well-made that it doesn't matter--you just
sit back and let it carry you along.

I like a film to make sense, but if it's stylish and clever enough I can
forgive it almost anything, even the most appalling lapses in logic. For me,
"The Game" is so perfectly effective that I don't care that, in the end, it
doesn't make a particle of sense.

Robert Matthews

Marc Fleury

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 6:20:20 PM4/8/02
to
dawn...@pacifier.com (Dawn Taylor) wrote:

>Most of the film is built on absolutely ridiculous coincidence and
>happenstance.

> **SPOILER**

>As just one example: The clown dummy Douglas finds in his driveway,
>lying in the same spot as his father's suicide. He drags it into the
>house, props it up in the chair in his study, and turns on the news.
>During the broadcast, a live feed breaks in with the newscaster
>talking directly to Douglas; we soon see that there's a hidden camera
>in the clown that can survey the entire room. A cute trick, and a
>clever idea.
>
>Except it brings up a lot of pesky questions.

You're forgetting that near the end of the film, one of the "actors"
says "If you hadn't jumped, I was supposed to push you."

You are assuming that everything *had* to go exactly the way that it
did. That isn't the case.

>a) Douglas would bring the dummy into the study with him, and not dump
>it in the front hall or toss it in a closet;

If his tv started broadcasting from inside his closet or the front
hall, he would have found that weird, don't you think? So, no
difference there.

>b) Douglas would position the dummy in such a way that the camera
>could see the entire room (what if he'd laid it face-down on the
>floor?);

Then he'd see his own carpet on tv. Same effect.

>c) or that Douglas wouldn't just, say, leave the thing where he found
>it and call the cops because he's a very wealthy man and *someone left
>a scary freakin' clown dummy in the same place his dad killed
>himself.*

I'm sure that they have back-up plans in case the "victims" of the
game call the police. The phones tapped, etc. Phony cops.

>And that's just *one* segment of the film. The entire movie is full of
>that sort of absolutely ridiculous coincidence, masquerading as a
>spooky master plan.

Obviously, it wouldn't be quite the same in real life -- no
corporation like the company that runs The Game would really exist.
They'd get sued to no end. But the movie requires some suspension of
disbelief. Like, say ... all movies.

--
Marc.
aa #1971

Dawn Taylor

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 6:14:07 PM4/8/02
to
On Mon, 08 Apr 2002 16:56:59 -0300, Robert Matthews
<pyr...@nospam.mac.deleteme.com> wrote:

>In article <3cb2c8b...@news.newsguy.com>,
> dawn...@pacifier.com (Dawn Taylor) wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 08 Apr 2002 14:37:23 GMT, "V01TeK" <pal...@kooee.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >film so far...
>> >> >
>> >> Not hardly. The man directed "Alien 3," for God's sake. And "The Game"
>> >> was just plain presposterous.
>> >
>> >Alien 3 IS terrible ... but the Game?
>>
>> Yeah -- The Game is terrible.
>>
>> <spoilers below, so if you've never seen the film ... blahblahblah>
>>
>> Most of the film is built on absolutely ridiculous coincidence and
>> happenstance. Considering that it's ostensibly about an elaborate
>> "game" that's planned with military-level precision, that so much is
>> left to sheer chance is ludicrous. And, frankly, kind of insulting to
>> the viewer.
>
> You're not wrong, but some films just exist in a world all their own, where
>a sort of dream logic rules, and "The Game" is one of them. "Dressed to Kill" is
>another; if you actually sit down and think about it it makes no sense whatever
>(how did the murderous blonde know that Angie Dickinson would return to the
>floor she'd just left?), but it's so well-made that it doesn't matter--you just
>sit back and let it carry you along.

You know ... I hate "Dressed to Kill," too. Partly for the above
reason, but also because of DePalma's assumption tat the audience is
too stupid to follow the plot unless he either provides a flashback to
a previous plot or has characters discuss what just happened in th
previous scene.

> I like a film to make sense, but if it's stylish and clever enough I can
>forgive it almost anything, even the most appalling lapses in logic. For me,
>"The Game" is so perfectly effective that I don't care that, in the end, it
>doesn't make a particle of sense.

See, and I can't do that. My feeling is that a script goes through so
many revisons and has so many opportunities for the logic holes to be
corrected that they SHOULD be corrected by the time it hits the
screen.

It's one thing to suspend disbelief ... it's another to present a film
full of absurdities and inconsistancies, with the assumption that the
audience will just swallow 'em, no questions asked.

Per Sandholt

unread,
Apr 8, 2002, 8:37:42 PM4/8/02
to
Your point is fine, but it doesn't bother me. I still think "The Game" is
way more entertaining than "Panic Room" - And the end kicks ass the first
tim you watch "The Game".... The end of "Panic Room" will always suck no
matter how many times you watch it.

--
per
"Dawn Taylor" <dawn...@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:3cb2c8b...@news.newsguy.com...

Nip

unread,
Apr 9, 2002, 12:19:32 AM4/9/02
to

"Marc Fleury" <marcf...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:gh54buoi0rua72kie...@4ax.com...

> Obviously, it wouldn't be quite the same in real life -- no
> corporation like the company that runs The Game would really exist.
> They'd get sued to no end. But the movie requires some suspension of
> disbelief. Like, say ... all movies.

Very true. I like The Game. It isn't as strong as Seven or Fight Club, but
it is a very entertaining film. It doesn't make great sense, but who cares?
It kept me guessing all the way through it the first time I saw it.


Robert Matthews

unread,
Apr 9, 2002, 1:39:11 AM4/9/02
to
In article <3cb91540...@news.newsguy.com>,
dawn...@pacifier.com (Dawn Taylor) wrote:

Fair enough. I'm never unwilling to rip a movie apart for inconsistancies
and loopholes myself. I think I just divide movies into two categories; real
movies and movie movies. The second category contains movies that are so
obviously divorced from the real world that they transcend sense. "Videodrome",
for instance; it makes its own sense--it has an internal logic--but it's so
utterly demented that you can't analyze it rationally, as you would, say,
"American Beauty" (to grab two titles from my DVD shelf). "The Game" is a movie
movie, and so is "Moulin Rouge" (and most other musicals, really, except maybe
"Cabaret"). You get the idea.

Or more probably this is just my way of saying that there are some movies I
love so much, for whatever reason, that I don't feel the need to have them make
sense.

Robert Matthews

ELMathews

unread,
Apr 9, 2002, 2:23:11 AM4/9/02
to
>>Most of the film is built on absolutely ridiculous coincidence and
>>happenstance.
>

The Game is an allegory, not a documentary. Idiot.

ANIM8Rfsk

unread,
Apr 9, 2002, 2:55:27 AM4/9/02
to
<< The Game is an allegory, not a documentary. Idiot. >>

Uh huh.

Or maybe it's just a poorly made movie.

Trevor Gensch

unread,
Apr 9, 2002, 5:13:40 AM4/9/02
to
On Mon, 08 Apr 2002 16:58:46 GMT, dawn...@pacifier.com (Dawn Taylor)
wrote:

(removed some ridiculous crossposts)

>
>Yeah -- The Game is terrible.

No, its a great suspense thriller and a lot of fun to boot.

>
><spoilers below, so if you've never seen the film ... blahblahblah>
>
>
>Most of the film is built on absolutely ridiculous coincidence and
>happenstance.
>

>As just one example: The clown dummy Douglas finds in his driveway,
>lying in the same spot as his father's suicide. He drags it into the
>house, props it up in the chair in his study, and turns on the news.
>During the broadcast, a live feed breaks in with the newscaster
>talking directly to Douglas; we soon see that there's a hidden camera
>in the clown that can survey the entire room. A cute trick, and a
>clever idea.
>
>Except it brings up a lot of pesky questions. Let's say, for the sake
>of argument, that the folks running the game knew that Douglas ALWAYS
>spent EVERY evening in his study, watching ONLY that news station.
>Some people really are that anal, so I'll grant that as a possibility.
>
>But for the trick to work, they also had to know that:
>
>a) Douglas would bring the dummy into the study with him, and not dump
>it in the front hall or toss it in a closet;
>b) Douglas would position the dummy in such a way that the camera
>could see the entire room (what if he'd laid it face-down on the
>floor?);
>c) or that Douglas wouldn't just, say, leave the thing where he found
>it and call the cops because he's a very wealthy man and *someone left
>a scary freakin' clown dummy in the same place his dad killed
>himself.*

You probably are aware of the details questionairre he filled out at
one stage - even one of the questions he decides to query was similar
to a situation that happened later in the film.

>
>And that's just *one* segment of the film. The entire movie is full of
>that sort of absolutely ridiculous coincidence, masquerading as a
>spooky master plan.

As another poster has said - it went that way because that is what the
Douglas character did. If he had done something different with the
dummy I am sure they had something else in store for him.

I justify it by the way Douglas looks at the bill for the 'game' at
the end during his party - the raised eye brows means it must be large
even for a man of his means. I am sure the company had plenty of
things prepared that were never used.


--
Trev.

"Not the most controversial piss I have ever taken on television"
Newsgroup stats - http://www.geocities.com/newsgroupstats

ANIM8Rfsk

unread,
Apr 9, 2002, 9:13:15 AM4/9/02
to
<< >Yeah -- The Game is terrible.

No, its a great suspense thriller and a lot of fun to boot. >>

Except for the part where it's terrible, at the 'you end up yelling at the
screen because it's so damn stupid' level.

Mason Barge

unread,
Apr 9, 2002, 9:47:14 AM4/9/02
to
On 5 Apr 2002 18:10:19 -0800, calist...@hotmail.com (Calista)
wrote:

>"_SpYmAn_" <blister...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<a8jovc$sfdhc$1...@ID-111971.news.dfncis.de>...
>> Wow!! Just got back from a afternoon session- and man this is one great film
>> that has to be seen on the big screen!!
>> To be honest- I love David Finchers work- but I wouldn't go as far as saying
>> this is his best film he has made(for me that goes to SEVEN). Still Jodie
>> Foster puts in a tremendous performance(prob her best work since SoTL) and
>> Forrest Whitaker is also good as one of the 3 'bad guys'.
>> If you like films that make you crawl under your skin or eat away at you -
>> then this is for you. Some great camera sequences in this - some of the
>> shots inside the apartment blow you away....literary.
>
>
>I truly agree. It sure blows my mind. This film is the best I've seen
>in years. Truly original and breathtaking film. I thought Silence of
>the Lambs is excellent, The Panic Room is truly magic.
>
>FIVE DESERVING STARS * * * * * to the film and the stunning Jodie
>Foster!

I can't believe people actually criticize the Academy for its best
picture choices, when people rant and rave about a semi-coherent
thriller with good atmosphere and acting.

--
Mason Barge

"People who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like."
-- Abraham Lincoln

V01TeK

unread,
Apr 9, 2002, 10:27:20 AM4/9/02