Discussion:
Lords of War. Worst Cage movie ever?
(too old to reply)
Joe
2007-05-25 18:07:13 UTC
Permalink
What the heck happened to Nicholas Cage? I don't think he has done a good movie
for a very long time. Too bad. Good actor.
--
In a world of 35 MPH wildebeests and 36 MPH lions, it's good to be a hippo.
Hans
2007-05-26 13:03:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
What the heck happened to Nicholas Cage? I don't think he has done a good movie
for a very long time. Too bad. Good actor.
Here is another very very bad movie:

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1804383542/info






--This space available for a really clever sig
Luu
2007-05-26 17:59:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
What the heck happened to Nicholas Cage? I don't think he has done a
good movie for a very long time. Too bad. Good actor.
Actually, I think that's one of his better ones. He's done a lot worse.
--
luu
Joe
2007-05-27 19:49:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
What the heck happened to Nicholas Cage? I don't think he has done a
good movie for a very long time. Too bad. Good actor.
Actually, I think that's one of his better ones. He's done a lot worse.
I just thought the story was sappy and one of ten million lame political message
pieces intended to instruct the type of people who depend on the world of
entertainment for their realities. Maybe I should have looked past the story to
see how he was doing with that he had to work with. I wish he would get back to
"Leaving Las Vegas" or "Wild at Heart". I didn't get a chance to see "Ghost
Rider", I think that is the name Do you know if that was any good? It seemed to
disappear very quickly from public view.
--
In a world of 35 MPH wildebeests and 36 MPH lions, it's good to be a hippo.
Luu
2007-05-28 18:27:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
I didn't get a chance to see "Ghost
Rider", I think that is the name Do you know if that was any good?
It seemed to disappear very quickly from public view.
seeing the trailer was enough suckage for me.
--
luu
Joe
2007-05-29 01:40:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
I didn't get a chance to see "Ghost
Rider", I think that is the name Do you know if that was any good?
It seemed to disappear very quickly from public view.
seeing the trailer was enough suckage for me.
So Luu, what do we do for our entertainment value? I miss movies with big
screens. Even if the movie was mediocre at least they were big. I'm looking for
a good dialogue movie. Special effects are fun, but every once in a while...
--
In a world of 35 MPH wildebeests and 36 MPH lions, it's good to be a hippo.
Luu
2007-05-30 21:12:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
So Luu, what do we do for our entertainment value? I miss movies
with big screens. Even if the movie was mediocre at least they were
big. I'm looking for a good dialogue movie. Special effects are fun,
but every once in a while...
the last big Hollywood movie I liked was Casino Royale. It's a good
reboot of the Bond franchise. Nice adult dialogue (no stupid one-liners
and double-entendres only 12yos would think funny), an actual plot, best
Bond babe since Diana Rigg, and Daniel Craig is very believable as a
rougher Bond.

the last big special FX movie I liked was War of The Worlds. The part
with Tim Robbins drags, the kids are kinda annoying, and the ending is
sort of anti-climatic, but the opening is awesome (you need a big screen
and cranked up loudspeakers) and there are some nice scary moments
throughout. Say what you want about Spielberg, the man knows how to
direct action.

I saw Spiderman 3 b/c, well, it's sort of a civic duty :) It has
some nice moments, but It's a little too busy and the ending sort of
fizzles out. (I don't know what the deal is with Sandman; seems like he
and Spiderman could've just worked things out before going through all
that troubles.) But the whole trilogy is the best of all the comics, I
think. When I heard they cast Tobey Maguire as Spiderman, I was like
Tobey Maguire? But it turned how he's just right, and they did just the
right thing with the character. He's the most likable superhero since
Christopher Reeves' Superman.

I don't have any special desire to see Pirates 3, cute as Keira Knightley
is. Sucker for mindless action that I am, I want to see Transformers.
Too bad it's directed by Michael Bay, which means it's going have an
inane romance, bad dialogue, and worst of all, MTV style editing and no
shots lasting more than 5 secs (why why couldn't Spielberg direct it? I
guess he's too good for this crap).

Small rentals you may enjoy:

Junebug
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0418773/

All the Real Girls
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0299458/

The 4yo Virgin (you may as well get the uncut version)
--
luu
Joe
2007-05-30 22:32:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
So Luu, what do we do for our entertainment value? I miss movies
with big screens. Even if the movie was mediocre at least they were
big. I'm looking for a good dialogue movie. Special effects are fun,
but every once in a while...
the last big Hollywood movie I liked was Casino Royale. It's a good
reboot of the Bond franchise. Nice adult dialogue (no stupid one-liners
and double-entendres only 12yos would think funny), an actual plot, best
Bond babe since Diana Rigg, and Daniel Craig is very believable as a
rougher Bond.
That was the first Bond movie I liked since the very old ones. What about the
"Shaken or stirred", "What the hell do I care" exchange? This guy is a great
Bond. Hope there are more.
Post by Luu
the last big special FX movie I liked was War of The Worlds. The part
with Tim Robbins drags, the kids are kinda annoying, and the ending is
sort of anti-climatic, but the opening is awesome (you need a big screen
and cranked up loudspeakers) and there are some nice scary moments
throughout. Say what you want about Spielberg, the man knows how to
direct action.
I wish they had been a little more true to the story, although the special
effects came very close to nailing the book's description. Just seemed
uncecessary and nothing to gain on modernizing.
Post by Luu
I saw Spiderman 3 b/c, well, it's sort of a civic duty :) It has
some nice moments, but It's a little too busy and the ending sort of
fizzles out. (I don't know what the deal is with Sandman; seems like he
and Spiderman could've just worked things out before going through all
that troubles.) But the whole trilogy is the best of all the comics, I
think. When I heard they cast Tobey Maguire as Spiderman, I was like
Tobey Maguire? But it turned how he's just right, and they did just the
right thing with the character. He's the most likable superhero since
Christopher Reeves' Superman.
Haven't seen it, but as soon as it hits DVD..
Post by Luu
I don't have any special desire to see Pirates 3, cute as Keira Knightley
is. Sucker for mindless action that I am, I want to see Transformers.
Too bad it's directed by Michael Bay, which means it's going have an
inane romance, bad dialogue, and worst of all, MTV style editing and no
shots lasting more than 5 secs (why why couldn't Spielberg direct it? I
guess he's too good for this crap).
Junebug
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0418773/
I recognized no cast member. maybe a great little movie. I will check it out.
The description reminds me of "A Texas Funeral"
Post by Luu
All the Real Girls
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0299458/
This one...maybe not. Any time Flatulence is listed as a plot keyword...
Post by Luu
The 4yo Virgin (you may as well get the uncut version)
I saw 40 year old virgin. It seemed two people wrote it. Half was a great plot
and dialogue, really funny. half was fart jokes and played like The Office.

This is a convoluted plot older movie in a small setting
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0086979/
--
It is impossible to eat crunchy cereal and read at the same time. Capt'n Hippo
Bob
2007-05-31 07:07:24 UTC
Permalink
On 30 May 2007 14:12:37 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
So Luu, what do we do for our entertainment value? I miss movies
with big screens. Even if the movie was mediocre at least they were
big. I'm looking for a good dialogue movie. Special effects are fun,
but every once in a while...
the last big Hollywood movie I liked was Casino Royale. It's a good
reboot of the Bond franchise. Nice adult dialogue (no stupid one-liners
and double-entendres only 12yos would think funny), an actual plot, best
Bond babe since Diana Rigg, and Daniel Craig is very believable as a
rougher Bond.
the last big special FX movie I liked was War of The Worlds. The part
with Tim Robbins drags, the kids are kinda annoying, and the ending is
sort of anti-climatic, but the opening is awesome (you need a big screen
and cranked up loudspeakers) and there are some nice scary moments
throughout. Say what you want about Spielberg, the man knows how to
direct action.
I saw Spiderman 3 b/c, well, it's sort of a civic duty :) It has
some nice moments, but It's a little too busy and the ending sort of
fizzles out. (I don't know what the deal is with Sandman; seems like he
and Spiderman could've just worked things out before going through all
that troubles.) But the whole trilogy is the best of all the comics, I
think. When I heard they cast Tobey Maguire as Spiderman, I was like
Tobey Maguire? But it turned how he's just right, and they did just the
right thing with the character. He's the most likable superhero since
Christopher Reeves' Superman.
I don't have any special desire to see Pirates 3, cute as Keira Knightley
is. Sucker for mindless action that I am, I want to see Transformers.
Too bad it's directed by Michael Bay, which means it's going have an
inane romance, bad dialogue, and worst of all, MTV style editing and no
shots lasting more than 5 secs (why why couldn't Spielberg direct it? I
guess he's too good for this crap).
Junebug
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0418773/
All the Real Girls
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0299458/
The 4yo Virgin (you may as well get the uncut version)
I haven't seen "Casino Royale" yet, but it sounds like Daniel Craig may have
saved the James Bond franchise... so I'm looking forward to catching that on
Movies on Demand this weekend.

Tobey Maguire resulted in some initial head scratching, but the casting folks
definitely knew what they were doing as you mentioned. After seeing him in
"Spiderman 1 & 2", I can't think of another actor that would have done a better
job in the role. I haven't had an opportunity to see the 3rd installment, but
based on some of the feedback I've heard, it sounds like it may be the best of
the bunch.

My wife & I are both hooked on the "Pirates of the Caribbean" movies, so will
probably catch the 3rd film when we get some down time in between diaper changes
:) I'm not a huge Johnny Depp fan, but I think he's done a tremendous job with
the Jack Sparrow character. His next two projects... "Sweeney Todd" and "Sin
City 2" should be interesting also.

The "40 Year Old Virgin" was a hilarious film! Folks seem to either love or hate
Steve Carell, but he's been on a roll as of late. "The Office" is usually pretty
funny, and I thought he did a nice job with his performance in "Little Miss
Sunshine". Looking ahead he's slated to play Maxwell Smart in the remake of the
"Get Smart" television series, which may or may not be the best career move. If
done right, I could seem them stretching one film into a franchise, similar to
"Austin Powers"... or having it go the way of the "Dukes of Hazzard" or
"Bewitched" remakes.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Rich
2007-05-29 19:59:52 UTC
Permalink
On 27 May 2007 12:49:06 -0700, Joe wrote...
Post by Joe
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
What the heck happened to Nicholas Cage? I don't think he has done a
good movie for a very long time. Too bad. Good actor.
Actually, I think that's one of his better ones. He's done a lot worse.
I just thought the story was sappy and one of ten million lame political message
pieces intended to instruct the type of people who depend on the world of
entertainment for their realities. Maybe I should have looked past the story to
see how he was doing with that he had to work with. I wish he would get back to
"Leaving Las Vegas" or "Wild at Heart". I didn't get a chance to see "Ghost
Rider", I think that is the name Do you know if that was any good? It seemed to
disappear very quickly from public view.
I've liked some of his older movies, but now he's showing up in everything. I
guess it's not bad for an actor to be busy filming movies, but outside of
National Treasure I don't think I've seen any of his more recent ones. I'll give
"Ghost Rider" a chance, but thanks for the warning on "Lords of War".

Rich
--
NewsGuy Membership Drive
Spread The Word, Tell A Friend
http://newsguy.com/
Rich
2007-05-29 19:19:33 UTC
Permalink
On 26 May 2007 10:59:39 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
What the heck happened to Nicholas Cage? I don't think he has done a
good movie for a very long time. Too bad. Good actor.
Actually, I think that's one of his better ones. He's done a lot worse.
If National Treasure wasn't enough, it looks like he's filming the sequel t that
right now. Compared to other comic book based movies "Ghost Rider" had a lot of
hype when it first came out, but lost a lot of steam. Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )

Rich
Luu
2007-05-30 21:12:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
--
luu
Joe
2007-05-30 22:38:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
She is in a movie with Joaquin Phoenix that is a new release, "Reservation
Road". Cindy signed a release to let them use the image and name of one of our
web sites in the picture. We're waiting to see if it makes it past the cutting
room floor.

She really is a terrific actor, although I ignore The Hulk as a movie. She was
even good in Dark Water and great opposite Virginia Madsen in "The Hot Spot.
--
It is impossible to eat crunchy cereal and read at the same time. Capt'n Hippo
Cindy
2007-05-31 01:00:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
She is in a movie with Joaquin Phoenix that is a new release, "Reservation
Road". Cindy signed a release to let them use the image and name of one of our
web sites in the picture. We're waiting to see if it makes it past the cutting
room floor.
She really is a terrific actor, although I ignore The Hulk as a movie. She was
even good in Dark Water and great opposite Virginia Madsen in "The Hot Spot.
Just checked and here's a few pics from the set (including Ms. Connelly):

http://popsugar.com/52659

Cin
--
Help a Community by Participating in Ours. We donate your subscription fees to
the charity you choose - 100% of your first month, 10% thereafter.

newsguy.com/charity.asp
Bob
2007-05-31 07:07:30 UTC
Permalink
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Possibly the only bright spot within that entire film :) Not sure if it's an
issue of comic books not translating well to the big screen... special effects
limitations, pace, etc... but there seem to be more misses than hits in that
particular genre ("Hulk", "Fantastic Four", "Daredevil", etc.)

If you haven't seen the films already, Connelly is pretty good in "Mulholland
Falls", "A Beautiful Mind" and "Blood Diamond".

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Rich
2007-05-31 16:57:41 UTC
Permalink
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.

Rich
--
Newsguy.com - Unlimited Accounts
Now with 32 concurrent connections
Bob
2007-05-31 20:22:45 UTC
Permalink
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?

Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-01 12:14:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
--
I remember when buying a notebook for the new school year cost $1.99 - Rime of
an Ancient Hippo
Rich
2007-06-01 18:47:03 UTC
Permalink
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe wrote...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
I'd rather the original actors do a Starsky and Hutch walk on than try to relive
the original role. It gives them a little credit for what they did, but isn't
like Adam West trying to pull off Batman again.

Even if Ferrigno was in stellar form, I don't think his size would be at the
right scale for the movie. You have to be pretty big to bang around and toss a
couple of tanks. The younger kids probably didn't recognize him in the movie
though, so I might need an excuse to get the television show on DVD to show the
kids what they've missed. : )

Rich
--
Internet Access $9.95 / mo. or $79.95 / yr.
http://newsguy.com/allinone.htm
Bob
2007-06-02 16:18:21 UTC
Permalink
On 1 Jun 2007 11:47:03 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe wrote...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
I'd rather the original actors do a Starsky and Hutch walk on than try to relive
the original role. It gives them a little credit for what they did, but isn't
like Adam West trying to pull off Batman again.
Even if Ferrigno was in stellar form, I don't think his size would be at the
right scale for the movie. You have to be pretty big to bang around and toss a
couple of tanks. The younger kids probably didn't recognize him in the movie
though, so I might need an excuse to get the television show on DVD to show the
kids what they've missed. : )
Rich
I'm not sure if the rumors are true, but when they were making "Batman" in 1989,
Adam West was very upset that he was not considered for the lead role.

He was offered a cameo appearance as Bruce Wayne's father, but at 61, was a
little long in the tooth to be jumping around in a Batman costume.

He elected to turn down the cameo, in hopes that they'd reconsider him for the
Batman role, which ultimately went to Michael Keaton.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-02 17:13:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 11:47:03 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe wrote...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
I'd rather the original actors do a Starsky and Hutch walk on than try to relive
the original role. It gives them a little credit for what they did, but isn't
like Adam West trying to pull off Batman again.
Even if Ferrigno was in stellar form, I don't think his size would be at the
right scale for the movie. You have to be pretty big to bang around and toss a
couple of tanks. The younger kids probably didn't recognize him in the movie
though, so I might need an excuse to get the television show on DVD to show the
kids what they've missed. : )
Rich
I'm not sure if the rumors are true, but when they were making "Batman" in 1989,
Adam West was very upset that he was not considered for the lead role.
He was offered a cameo appearance as Bruce Wayne's father, but at 61, was a
little long in the tooth to be jumping around in a Batman costume.
He elected to turn down the cameo, in hopes that they'd reconsider him for the
Batman role, which ultimately went to Michael Keaton.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Ferigno had a reoccurring role in King of Queens as a neighbor. Pretty funny
guy. I just think I'd rather see humans than cartoon animation. Even the
original Superman theater series went to animation when Superman flew and was
eventually changed to a pudgy George Reeves in the TV and later movies.

The character played by Ferigno was threatening. When Banner got angry, the Hulk
started to appear and the villain got worried. The Hulk movie played down the
cause and effect of the transition and that hopping across the desert was just
silly. maybe it's just me but I have a hard time relating to a cartoon.

Adam West would have been wrong for the new Batman at any age. He never played
the role as a serious character, it was always tongue and cheek. I thought the
first new Batman was a very bold step, even in selection of Michael Keaton and
very much consistent with the original comic - dark.
Bob
2007-06-02 23:12:22 UTC
Permalink
On 2 Jun 2007 10:13:00 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 11:47:03 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe wrote...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
I'd rather the original actors do a Starsky and Hutch walk on than try to relive
the original role. It gives them a little credit for what they did, but isn't
like Adam West trying to pull off Batman again.
Even if Ferrigno was in stellar form, I don't think his size would be at the
right scale for the movie. You have to be pretty big to bang around and toss a
couple of tanks. The younger kids probably didn't recognize him in the movie
though, so I might need an excuse to get the television show on DVD to show the
kids what they've missed. : )
Rich
I'm not sure if the rumors are true, but when they were making "Batman" in 1989,
Adam West was very upset that he was not considered for the lead role.
He was offered a cameo appearance as Bruce Wayne's father, but at 61, was a
little long in the tooth to be jumping around in a Batman costume.
He elected to turn down the cameo, in hopes that they'd reconsider him for the
Batman role, which ultimately went to Michael Keaton.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Ferigno had a reoccurring role in King of Queens as a neighbor. Pretty funny
guy. I just think I'd rather see humans than cartoon animation. Even the
original Superman theater series went to animation when Superman flew and was
eventually changed to a pudgy George Reeves in the TV and later movies.
The character played by Ferigno was threatening. When Banner got angry, the Hulk
started to appear and the villain got worried. The Hulk movie played down the
cause and effect of the transition and that hopping across the desert was just
silly. maybe it's just me but I have a hard time relating to a cartoon.
Adam West would have been wrong for the new Batman at any age. He never played
the role as a serious character, it was always tongue and cheek. I thought the
first new Batman was a very bold step, even in selection of Michael Keaton and
very much consistent with the original comic - dark.
He wouldn't have been my first choice for Batman, but looking back on all of the
actors that have assumed the role since... Val Kilmer, George Clooney, Christian
Bale... I think Keaton's performance still ranks as the best.

Nickelson also did a great job as the Joker, and I'm glad they decided against
some of their initial selections for that character (Robin Williams, David Bowie
and James Woods). William Dafoe and John Lithgow were also considered for the
role... and they probably would have done a good job... but I think Nickelson
was born to play that character.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Bob
2007-06-01 18:47:07 UTC
Permalink
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
Huh, as it turns out Ferrigno shared his cameo with Stan Lee, the creator of the
Hulk & other Marvel Comics characters.
Post by Joe
From what I understand the film was in development for over 12 years, and they
initially wanted Johnny Depp to play the role of Bruce Banner. When Depp passed
on the project, Steve Buscemi, David Duchovny & Jeff Goldblum tested for the
role, but they ultimately went with Eric Bana.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-01 19:06:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
Huh, as it turns out Ferrigno shared his cameo with Stan Lee, the creator of the
Hulk & other Marvel Comics characters.
Post by Joe
From what I understand the film was in development for over 12 years, and they
initially wanted Johnny Depp to play the role of Bruce Banner. When Depp passed
on the project, Steve Buscemi, David Duchovny & Jeff Goldblum tested for the
role, but they ultimately went with Eric Bana.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I don't think the problem was the Banner character as much as how badly the Hulk
character was handled. It looked like a child's cartoon instead of the more
mature images normally associated with adults who read comic books :)
--
I remember when buying a notebook for the new school year cost $1.99 - Rime of
an Ancient Hippo
Bob
2007-06-02 16:18:28 UTC
Permalink
On 1 Jun 2007 12:06:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
Huh, as it turns out Ferrigno shared his cameo with Stan Lee, the creator of the
Hulk & other Marvel Comics characters.
Post by Joe
From what I understand the film was in development for over 12 years, and they
initially wanted Johnny Depp to play the role of Bruce Banner. When Depp passed
on the project, Steve Buscemi, David Duchovny & Jeff Goldblum tested for the
role, but they ultimately went with Eric Bana.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I don't think the problem was the Banner character as much as how badly the Hulk
character was handled. It looked like a child's cartoon instead of the more
mature images normally associated with adults who read comic books :)
Exactly! The problem is that it's difficult to take the appearance, mobility &
super powers that a hero has within the covers of an illustrated comic book, and
translate them to a live action movie.

They've been able to do a good job with some big screen transition (X-Men,
Spiderman, etc. ) while others have not fared so well (Hulk, Fantastic Four,
etc.)

The computer generated Hulk required 1165 muscle shapes, 200 designers, and over
2.5 million computer programming hours, but he still looked like a computer
generated character.

In the end movie audiences seemed to agree... as the film set a record for
largest second weekend box office drop for a film that opened at #1, with a
-69.7% drop. My guess is that an initial wave of theater goers saw the movie,
and came back telling friends & family not to waste their time.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-02 17:20:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:06:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
Huh, as it turns out Ferrigno shared his cameo with Stan Lee, the creator of the
Hulk & other Marvel Comics characters.
Post by Joe
From what I understand the film was in development for over 12 years, and they
initially wanted Johnny Depp to play the role of Bruce Banner. When Depp passed
on the project, Steve Buscemi, David Duchovny & Jeff Goldblum tested for the
role, but they ultimately went with Eric Bana.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I don't think the problem was the Banner character as much as how badly the Hulk
character was handled. It looked like a child's cartoon instead of the more
mature images normally associated with adults who read comic books :)
Exactly! The problem is that it's difficult to take the appearance, mobility &
super powers that a hero has within the covers of an illustrated comic book, and
translate them to a live action movie.
They've been able to do a good job with some big screen transition (X-Men,
Spiderman, etc. ) while others have not fared so well (Hulk, Fantastic Four,
etc.)
The computer generated Hulk required 1165 muscle shapes, 200 designers, and over
2.5 million computer programming hours, but he still looked like a computer
generated character.
In the end movie audiences seemed to agree... as the film set a record for
largest second weekend box office drop for a film that opened at #1, with a
-69.7% drop. My guess is that an initial wave of theater goers saw the movie,
and came back telling friends & family not to waste their time.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's just sad.
What's missing from much of the special effects is artistry. Most interesting
forms are based on nature and nature has lots and lots of subtleties. I think we
basically have programmers that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid
designs. CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art, digital
photography, geeks dancing.
Luu
2007-06-02 22:23:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's
just sad. What's missing from much of the special effects is
artistry. Most interesting forms are based on nature and nature has
lots and lots of subtleties. I think we basically have programmers
that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid designs.
CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art,
digital photography, geeks dancing.
yeah I don't know what the deal is with new car designs. they all look a
little too round, slightly bloated, and generally too much alike. I long
for lines and angles, some individuality.

Back to Hulk: aside from his fake plastic-y skin (a problem with all CGI
humans), he's too big and moves too fast for something his size. He just
violates our common sense of physics making it impossible to suspend
disbelief.
--
luu
Joe
2007-06-02 23:21:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's
just sad. What's missing from much of the special effects is
artistry. Most interesting forms are based on nature and nature has
lots and lots of subtleties. I think we basically have programmers
that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid designs.
CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art,
digital photography, geeks dancing.
yeah I don't know what the deal is with new car designs. they all look a
little too round, slightly bloated, and generally too much alike. I long
for lines and angles, some individuality.
Back to Hulk: aside from his fake plastic-y skin (a problem with all CGI
humans), he's too big and moves too fast for something his size. He just
violates our common sense of physics making it impossible to suspend
disbelief.
Yes on the cars. I think I am beginning to like the idea of fins again. I
haven't been able to differentiate one care from another since around 1972.

Right, physics and physical properties have to be taken into consideration. I
remember using an old animation program, 3D Studio, that had many setting for
bounce and resilience on contact. I think we have gone full circle with
animations where only some small parts are worked to show motion and the rest
looks pretty static like it was in the old Tom & Jerry cartoons. No one will
remember the reference.
Bob
2007-06-03 16:19:39 UTC
Permalink
On 2 Jun 2007 16:21:40 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's
just sad. What's missing from much of the special effects is
artistry. Most interesting forms are based on nature and nature has
lots and lots of subtleties. I think we basically have programmers
that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid designs.
CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art,
digital photography, geeks dancing.
yeah I don't know what the deal is with new car designs. they all look a
little too round, slightly bloated, and generally too much alike. I long
for lines and angles, some individuality.
Back to Hulk: aside from his fake plastic-y skin (a problem with all CGI
humans), he's too big and moves too fast for something his size. He just
violates our common sense of physics making it impossible to suspend
disbelief.
Yes on the cars. I think I am beginning to like the idea of fins again. I
haven't been able to differentiate one care from another since around 1972.
Right, physics and physical properties have to be taken into consideration. I
remember using an old animation program, 3D Studio, that had many setting for
bounce and resilience on contact. I think we have gone full circle with
animations where only some small parts are worked to show motion and the rest
looks pretty static like it was in the old Tom & Jerry cartoons. No one will
remember the reference.
I enjoyed watching "Tom & Jerry" on the weekends, so I absolutely remember their
cartoon exploits.

While Disney is often credited with having the largest impact on Saturday
morning cartoon viewers, it's difficult not to cast a vote for Hanna & Barbera,
the creators of "Tom & Jerry".

In addition to T & J, they produced some of the most widely watched cartoons
ever made... Huckleberry Hound, Yogi Bear, Flintstones, Jonny Quest & ScoobyDoo.

Not sure how well those cartoons would translate to today's sophisticated anime
audience, but they were definitely a memorable part of my childhood.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-03 17:37:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 16:21:40 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's
just sad. What's missing from much of the special effects is
artistry. Most interesting forms are based on nature and nature has
lots and lots of subtleties. I think we basically have programmers
that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid designs.
CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art,
digital photography, geeks dancing.
yeah I don't know what the deal is with new car designs. they all look a
little too round, slightly bloated, and generally too much alike. I long
for lines and angles, some individuality.
Back to Hulk: aside from his fake plastic-y skin (a problem with all CGI
humans), he's too big and moves too fast for something his size. He just
violates our common sense of physics making it impossible to suspend
disbelief.
Yes on the cars. I think I am beginning to like the idea of fins again. I
haven't been able to differentiate one care from another since around 1972.
Right, physics and physical properties have to be taken into consideration. I
remember using an old animation program, 3D Studio, that had many setting for
bounce and resilience on contact. I think we have gone full circle with
animations where only some small parts are worked to show motion and the rest
looks pretty static like it was in the old Tom & Jerry cartoons. No one will
remember the reference.
I enjoyed watching "Tom & Jerry" on the weekends, so I absolutely remember their
cartoon exploits.
While Disney is often credited with having the largest impact on Saturday
morning cartoon viewers, it's difficult not to cast a vote for Hanna & Barbera,
the creators of "Tom & Jerry".
In addition to T & J, they produced some of the most widely watched cartoons
ever made... Huckleberry Hound, Yogi Bear, Flintstones, Jonny Quest & ScoobyDoo.
Not sure how well those cartoons would translate to today's sophisticated anime
audience, but they were definitely a memorable part of my childhood.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
It's funny how so many cartoons were taken off the air because they were too
violent, Road Runner. Some where taken off because they were deemed politically
incorrect. Now kids only have to deal with angry robots destroying the earth, or
constant war between super heros and super villains. Yeah, I liked Tom and Jerry
also, and the wise ass Bugs Bunny, and...
Bob
2007-06-03 23:46:38 UTC
Permalink
On 3 Jun 2007 10:37:24 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 16:21:40 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's
just sad. What's missing from much of the special effects is
artistry. Most interesting forms are based on nature and nature has
lots and lots of subtleties. I think we basically have programmers
that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid designs.
CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art,
digital photography, geeks dancing.
yeah I don't know what the deal is with new car designs. they all look a
little too round, slightly bloated, and generally too much alike. I long
for lines and angles, some individuality.
Back to Hulk: aside from his fake plastic-y skin (a problem with all CGI
humans), he's too big and moves too fast for something his size. He just
violates our common sense of physics making it impossible to suspend
disbelief.
Yes on the cars. I think I am beginning to like the idea of fins again. I
haven't been able to differentiate one care from another since around 1972.
Right, physics and physical properties have to be taken into consideration. I
remember using an old animation program, 3D Studio, that had many setting for
bounce and resilience on contact. I think we have gone full circle with
animations where only some small parts are worked to show motion and the rest
looks pretty static like it was in the old Tom & Jerry cartoons. No one will
remember the reference.
I enjoyed watching "Tom & Jerry" on the weekends, so I absolutely remember their
cartoon exploits.
While Disney is often credited with having the largest impact on Saturday
morning cartoon viewers, it's difficult not to cast a vote for Hanna & Barbera,
the creators of "Tom & Jerry".
In addition to T & J, they produced some of the most widely watched cartoons
ever made... Huckleberry Hound, Yogi Bear, Flintstones, Jonny Quest & ScoobyDoo.
Not sure how well those cartoons would translate to today's sophisticated anime
audience, but they were definitely a memorable part of my childhood.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
It's funny how so many cartoons were taken off the air because they were too
violent, Road Runner. Some where taken off because they were deemed politically
incorrect. Now kids only have to deal with angry robots destroying the earth, or
constant war between super heros and super villains. Yeah, I liked Tom and Jerry
also, and the wise ass Bugs Bunny, and...
I've been very surprised with the level of violence that kids are exposed to
when watching some contemporary cartoons, and I'd have to imagine that at a
minimum the visual imagery is not doing anything productive or beneficial for
their brains.

Cartoons like "South Park" or "Afro Samurai" are very graphic when it comes to
violence & language, and while they are promoted to an adult audience, kids are
often familiar with the cartoons as well.

Like anything else... books, television, movies, video games... it's important
for parents to know what their children are absorbing on a day to day basis.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-03 23:58:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 3 Jun 2007 10:37:24 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 16:21:40 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's
just sad. What's missing from much of the special effects is
artistry. Most interesting forms are based on nature and nature has
lots and lots of subtleties. I think we basically have programmers
that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid designs.
CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art,
digital photography, geeks dancing.
yeah I don't know what the deal is with new car designs. they all look a
little too round, slightly bloated, and generally too much alike. I long
for lines and angles, some individuality.
Back to Hulk: aside from his fake plastic-y skin (a problem with all CGI
humans), he's too big and moves too fast for something his size. He just
violates our common sense of physics making it impossible to suspend
disbelief.
Yes on the cars. I think I am beginning to like the idea of fins again. I
haven't been able to differentiate one care from another since around 1972.
Right, physics and physical properties have to be taken into consideration. I
remember using an old animation program, 3D Studio, that had many setting for
bounce and resilience on contact. I think we have gone full circle with
animations where only some small parts are worked to show motion and the rest
looks pretty static like it was in the old Tom & Jerry cartoons. No one will
remember the reference.
I enjoyed watching "Tom & Jerry" on the weekends, so I absolutely remember their
cartoon exploits.
While Disney is often credited with having the largest impact on Saturday
morning cartoon viewers, it's difficult not to cast a vote for Hanna & Barbera,
the creators of "Tom & Jerry".
In addition to T & J, they produced some of the most widely watched cartoons
ever made... Huckleberry Hound, Yogi Bear, Flintstones, Jonny Quest & ScoobyDoo.
Not sure how well those cartoons would translate to today's sophisticated anime
audience, but they were definitely a memorable part of my childhood.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
It's funny how so many cartoons were taken off the air because they were too
violent, Road Runner. Some where taken off because they were deemed politically
incorrect. Now kids only have to deal with angry robots destroying the earth, or
constant war between super heros and super villains. Yeah, I liked Tom and Jerry
also, and the wise ass Bugs Bunny, and...
I've been very surprised with the level of violence that kids are exposed to
when watching some contemporary cartoons, and I'd have to imagine that at a
minimum the visual imagery is not doing anything productive or beneficial for
their brains.
Cartoons like "South Park" or "Afro Samurai" are very graphic when it comes to
violence & language, and while they are promoted to an adult audience, kids are
often familiar with the cartoons as well.
Like anything else... books, television, movies, video games... it's important
for parents to know what their children are absorbing on a day to day basis.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I understand the adult cartoons for people with this taste in entertainment, but
the same problem permeates daytime cartoon channels intended for children.
Bob
2007-06-04 19:39:33 UTC
Permalink
On 3 Jun 2007 16:58:50 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 3 Jun 2007 10:37:24 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 16:21:40 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Luu
Post by Joe
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's
just sad. What's missing from much of the special effects is
artistry. Most interesting forms are based on nature and nature has
lots and lots of subtleties. I think we basically have programmers
that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid designs.
CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art,
digital photography, geeks dancing.
yeah I don't know what the deal is with new car designs. they all look a
little too round, slightly bloated, and generally too much alike. I long
for lines and angles, some individuality.
Back to Hulk: aside from his fake plastic-y skin (a problem with all CGI
humans), he's too big and moves too fast for something his size. He just
violates our common sense of physics making it impossible to suspend
disbelief.
Yes on the cars. I think I am beginning to like the idea of fins again. I
haven't been able to differentiate one care from another since around 1972.
Right, physics and physical properties have to be taken into consideration. I
remember using an old animation program, 3D Studio, that had many setting for
bounce and resilience on contact. I think we have gone full circle with
animations where only some small parts are worked to show motion and the rest
looks pretty static like it was in the old Tom & Jerry cartoons. No one will
remember the reference.
I enjoyed watching "Tom & Jerry" on the weekends, so I absolutely remember their
cartoon exploits.
While Disney is often credited with having the largest impact on Saturday
morning cartoon viewers, it's difficult not to cast a vote for Hanna & Barbera,
the creators of "Tom & Jerry".
In addition to T & J, they produced some of the most widely watched cartoons
ever made... Huckleberry Hound, Yogi Bear, Flintstones, Jonny Quest & ScoobyDoo.
Not sure how well those cartoons would translate to today's sophisticated anime
audience, but they were definitely a memorable part of my childhood.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
It's funny how so many cartoons were taken off the air because they were too
violent, Road Runner. Some where taken off because they were deemed politically
incorrect. Now kids only have to deal with angry robots destroying the earth, or
constant war between super heros and super villains. Yeah, I liked Tom and Jerry
also, and the wise ass Bugs Bunny, and...
I've been very surprised with the level of violence that kids are exposed to
when watching some contemporary cartoons, and I'd have to imagine that at a
minimum the visual imagery is not doing anything productive or beneficial for
their brains.
Cartoons like "South Park" or "Afro Samurai" are very graphic when it comes to
violence & language, and while they are promoted to an adult audience, kids are
often familiar with the cartoons as well.
Like anything else... books, television, movies, video games... it's important
for parents to know what their children are absorbing on a day to day basis.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I understand the adult cartoons for people with this taste in entertainment, but
the same problem permeates daytime cartoon channels intended for children.
It does permeate to daytime programming, and what's worse is that younger
audiences are very familiar with the adult cartoons (South Park, etc.) so
somehow they're gaining access to that content as well.

Cigarette companies took a lot of flack for incorporating cartoon characters
into their promotional campaigns... and they should have... but I don't see how
that's much different from cartoons that feature mature themes, language, etc.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Bob
2007-06-03 00:04:19 UTC
Permalink
On 2 Jun 2007 10:20:12 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:06:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
Huh, as it turns out Ferrigno shared his cameo with Stan Lee, the creator of the
Hulk & other Marvel Comics characters.
Post by Joe
From what I understand the film was in development for over 12 years, and they
initially wanted Johnny Depp to play the role of Bruce Banner. When Depp passed
on the project, Steve Buscemi, David Duchovny & Jeff Goldblum tested for the
role, but they ultimately went with Eric Bana.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I don't think the problem was the Banner character as much as how badly the Hulk
character was handled. It looked like a child's cartoon instead of the more
mature images normally associated with adults who read comic books :)
Exactly! The problem is that it's difficult to take the appearance, mobility &
super powers that a hero has within the covers of an illustrated comic book, and
translate them to a live action movie.
They've been able to do a good job with some big screen transition (X-Men,
Spiderman, etc. ) while others have not fared so well (Hulk, Fantastic Four,
etc.)
The computer generated Hulk required 1165 muscle shapes, 200 designers, and over
2.5 million computer programming hours, but he still looked like a computer
generated character.
In the end movie audiences seemed to agree... as the film set a record for
largest second weekend box office drop for a film that opened at #1, with a
-69.7% drop. My guess is that an initial wave of theater goers saw the movie,
and came back telling friends & family not to waste their time.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's just sad.
What's missing from much of the special effects is artistry. Most interesting
forms are based on nature and nature has lots and lots of subtleties. I think we
basically have programmers that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid
designs. CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art, digital
photography, geeks dancing.
When used as a component of a film, the programmed effects can serve a purpose,
but nowadays they seem to develop an entire movie around those effects. The
story, dialog, acting, etc., are all secondary so at times it feels like you're
sitting in front of a video game as opposed to a film.

I can appreciate older Disney movies for their animation & artistry, because
they're not pretending to be anything more than what they are... a cartoon...
but some contemporary films try to recreate reality with computer generated
effects and it's difficult for folks to buy into the illusion because the final
product simply looks cheesy.

Everything is so mass produced these days... cars, furniture, homes, art... that
they lack emotion or life. Looking at art as an example, I cannot think of any
contemporary artists that will leave a mark or a legacy like a Renoir,
Rembrandt, Michelangelo, etc.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-03 00:30:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:20:12 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:06:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
Huh, as it turns out Ferrigno shared his cameo with Stan Lee, the creator of the
Hulk & other Marvel Comics characters.
Post by Joe
From what I understand the film was in development for over 12 years, and they
initially wanted Johnny Depp to play the role of Bruce Banner. When Depp passed
on the project, Steve Buscemi, David Duchovny & Jeff Goldblum tested for the
role, but they ultimately went with Eric Bana.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I don't think the problem was the Banner character as much as how badly the Hulk
character was handled. It looked like a child's cartoon instead of the more
mature images normally associated with adults who read comic books :)
Exactly! The problem is that it's difficult to take the appearance, mobility &
super powers that a hero has within the covers of an illustrated comic book, and
translate them to a live action movie.
They've been able to do a good job with some big screen transition (X-Men,
Spiderman, etc. ) while others have not fared so well (Hulk, Fantastic Four,
etc.)
The computer generated Hulk required 1165 muscle shapes, 200 designers, and over
2.5 million computer programming hours, but he still looked like a computer
generated character.
In the end movie audiences seemed to agree... as the film set a record for
largest second weekend box office drop for a film that opened at #1, with a
-69.7% drop. My guess is that an initial wave of theater goers saw the movie,
and came back telling friends & family not to waste their time.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's just sad.
What's missing from much of the special effects is artistry. Most interesting
forms are based on nature and nature has lots and lots of subtleties. I think we
basically have programmers that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid
designs. CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art, digital
photography, geeks dancing.
When used as a component of a film, the programmed effects can serve a purpose,
but nowadays they seem to develop an entire movie around those effects. The
story, dialog, acting, etc., are all secondary so at times it feels like you're
sitting in front of a video game as opposed to a film.
I can appreciate older Disney movies for their animation & artistry, because
they're not pretending to be anything more than what they are... a cartoon...
but some contemporary films try to recreate reality with computer generated
effects and it's difficult for folks to buy into the illusion because the final
product simply looks cheesy.
Everything is so mass produced these days... cars, furniture, homes, art... that
they lack emotion or life. Looking at art as an example, I cannot think of any
contemporary artists that will leave a mark or a legacy like a Renoir,
Rembrandt, Michelangelo, etc.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I even miss Andy Warhol.
Bob
2007-06-03 17:24:48 UTC
Permalink
On 2 Jun 2007 17:30:59 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:20:12 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:06:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
Huh, as it turns out Ferrigno shared his cameo with Stan Lee, the creator of the
Hulk & other Marvel Comics characters.
Post by Joe
From what I understand the film was in development for over 12 years, and they
initially wanted Johnny Depp to play the role of Bruce Banner. When Depp passed
on the project, Steve Buscemi, David Duchovny & Jeff Goldblum tested for the
role, but they ultimately went with Eric Bana.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I don't think the problem was the Banner character as much as how badly the Hulk
character was handled. It looked like a child's cartoon instead of the more
mature images normally associated with adults who read comic books :)
Exactly! The problem is that it's difficult to take the appearance, mobility &
super powers that a hero has within the covers of an illustrated comic book, and
translate them to a live action movie.
They've been able to do a good job with some big screen transition (X-Men,
Spiderman, etc. ) while others have not fared so well (Hulk, Fantastic Four,
etc.)
The computer generated Hulk required 1165 muscle shapes, 200 designers, and over
2.5 million computer programming hours, but he still looked like a computer
generated character.
In the end movie audiences seemed to agree... as the film set a record for
largest second weekend box office drop for a film that opened at #1, with a
-69.7% drop. My guess is that an initial wave of theater goers saw the movie,
and came back telling friends & family not to waste their time.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's just sad.
What's missing from much of the special effects is artistry. Most interesting
forms are based on nature and nature has lots and lots of subtleties. I think we
basically have programmers that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid
designs. CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art, digital
photography, geeks dancing.
When used as a component of a film, the programmed effects can serve a purpose,
but nowadays they seem to develop an entire movie around those effects. The
story, dialog, acting, etc., are all secondary so at times it feels like you're
sitting in front of a video game as opposed to a film.
I can appreciate older Disney movies for their animation & artistry, because
they're not pretending to be anything more than what they are... a cartoon...
but some contemporary films try to recreate reality with computer generated
effects and it's difficult for folks to buy into the illusion because the final
product simply looks cheesy.
Everything is so mass produced these days... cars, furniture, homes, art... that
they lack emotion or life. Looking at art as an example, I cannot think of any
contemporary artists that will leave a mark or a legacy like a Renoir,
Rembrandt, Michelangelo, etc.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I even miss Andy Warhol.
Warhol comes off as a genius when compared to some of today's "artists". Two
recent examples come to mind, but there are others that I can't recall at the
moment...

- An artist creates a juvenile painting of an American flag in a toilet bowl,
with the caption "T'anks to Mr. Bush!". Neither his message nor his technical
skills are particularly compelling, but California's State Attorney General
decides to display the painting in the Department of Justice building in
Sacramento

- A New York artist creates an anatomically correct nude sculpture of Jesus
Christ out of 200 pounds of chocolate, which in all his wit, he titles "Sweet
Jesus". The sculpture was going to be unveiled the day after Palm Sunday... 4
days before Christians mark the crucifixion of Jesus on Good Friday... and was
going to be displayed through Easter Sunday. The exhibit hall decided not to
move forward with the unveiling when it was brought to their attention that the
desecration of religious figures & events might not sit well with some folks.
The artist is best known for painting a Manhattan hotel room in melted
mozzarella & spraying five tons of pepper jack cheese on a Wyoming home.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-03 18:12:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 17:30:59 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:20:12 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:06:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 05:14:16 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 09:57:41 -0700, Rich said...
Post by Rich
On 30 May 2007 14:12:43 -0700, Luu wrote...
Post by Luu
Post by Rich
Since I broke down to rent
the Hulk, I figure it can't be much worse than that. : )
Anything with Jennifer Connelly has redeeming values :)
Hard to pass up a "good" Nick Nolte flick : ) but Jennifer Connelly was one of
the few redeeming qualities. I guess the plot was so intriguing that I didn't
realize Lou Ferrigno was in the movie. Surprisingly he didn't play the big green
ugly guy he did on the television series, but I'm surprised I didn't catch that
earlier.
Rich
As cheesy as it was, I was a big fan of "The Hulk" television series, and don't
recall Ferrigno's appearance in "The Hulk" movie. What role did he play, or what
scene did he show up in?
Considering that he didn't go out of his way to showcase himself in the movie,
he may have already formulated an opinion about the film while they were
shooting it :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Yup, he did a Starsky and Hutch walk on.
Huh, as it turns out Ferrigno shared his cameo with Stan Lee, the creator of the
Hulk & other Marvel Comics characters.
Post by Joe
From what I understand the film was in development for over 12 years, and they
initially wanted Johnny Depp to play the role of Bruce Banner. When Depp passed
on the project, Steve Buscemi, David Duchovny & Jeff Goldblum tested for the
role, but they ultimately went with Eric Bana.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I don't think the problem was the Banner character as much as how badly the Hulk
character was handled. It looked like a child's cartoon instead of the more
mature images normally associated with adults who read comic books :)
Exactly! The problem is that it's difficult to take the appearance, mobility &
super powers that a hero has within the covers of an illustrated comic book, and
translate them to a live action movie.
They've been able to do a good job with some big screen transition (X-Men,
Spiderman, etc. ) while others have not fared so well (Hulk, Fantastic Four,
etc.)
The computer generated Hulk required 1165 muscle shapes, 200 designers, and over
2.5 million computer programming hours, but he still looked like a computer
generated character.
In the end movie audiences seemed to agree... as the film set a record for
largest second weekend box office drop for a film that opened at #1, with a
-69.7% drop. My guess is that an initial wave of theater goers saw the movie,
and came back telling friends & family not to waste their time.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Now knowing the effort that went into the animation, well, that's just sad.
What's missing from much of the special effects is artistry. Most interesting
forms are based on nature and nature has lots and lots of subtleties. I think we
basically have programmers that work in a geometric world attempting more fluid
designs. CAD-CAM has resulted in artists being replaced by algorithms and it
isn't working - see new cars, furniture, home design, movies, art, digital
photography, geeks dancing.
When used as a component of a film, the programmed effects can serve a purpose,
but nowadays they seem to develop an entire movie around those effects. The
story, dialog, acting, etc., are all secondary so at times it feels like you're
sitting in front of a video game as opposed to a film.
I can appreciate older Disney movies for their animation & artistry, because
they're not pretending to be anything more than what they are... a cartoon...
but some contemporary films try to recreate reality with computer generated
effects and it's difficult for folks to buy into the illusion because the final
product simply looks cheesy.
Everything is so mass produced these days... cars, furniture, homes, art... that
they lack emotion or life. Looking at art as an example, I cannot think of any
contemporary artists that will leave a mark or a legacy like a Renoir,
Rembrandt, Michelangelo, etc.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I even miss Andy Warhol.
Warhol comes off as a genius when compared to some of today's "artists". Two
recent examples come to mind, but there are others that I can't recall at the
moment...
- An artist creates a juvenile painting of an American flag in a toilet bowl,
with the caption "T'anks to Mr. Bush!". Neither his message nor his technical
skills are particularly compelling, but California's State Attorney General
decides to display the painting in the Department of Justice building in
Sacramento
- A New York artist creates an anatomically correct nude sculpture of Jesus
Christ out of 200 pounds of chocolate, which in all his wit, he titles "Sweet
Jesus". The sculpture was going to be unveiled the day after Palm Sunday... 4
days before Christians mark the crucifixion of Jesus on Good Friday... and was
going to be displayed through Easter Sunday. The exhibit hall decided not to
move forward with the unveiling when it was brought to their attention that the
desecration of religious figures & events might not sit well with some folks.
The artist is best known for painting a Manhattan hotel room in melted
mozzarella & spraying five tons of pepper jack cheese on a Wyoming home.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I appreciate Warhol more for his bigger than life personality and drawing
attention to the idea of art. He specialized in weird. The religious attacks are
boring and done by people who are extending themselves when they make an effort
to understand a fart joke. I don't get it. I was taught to never criticize a
person's religion and to try to learn as much about others. I wouldn't think of
making a joke of or denigrating another religion and when I hear it from people
of a different faith I assume there is a flaw in the basis or organization of
that religion or a person who is using their religion for another purpose.
What's the difference between decimating the image of Jesus and decimating a
Synagogue or a Mosque ? How did burning a black church become a greater crime
than burning a church with a white congregation ? I watched that movie "Man of
the Year" last night. it was a terrible, terrible...terrible movie, but there
was a great deal of truth in some of the dialogue. I don't think the movie was
intended to really disparage both parties as extreme liberal references were
shouted in a positive fashion throughout, but if even by accident, there were
some very good points.

The world is becoming one giant pile of crap. The attorney who has TB has
extended the defense, it is perfectly normal for a person to pick their life
over the lives of strangers. Selfishness is normal. I guess he doesn't watch the
news very much.

The liberal line on Fred Thompson, the chant I heard throughout the day
yesterday, was that he is lazy. The foundation for the comments is that Thompson
said, when he left Congress, that he did not want to put in 16 hour days
struggling with irrelavent issues. I don't think he was complaining about the
work.

The news will be filled with egg throwing for the next 18 months and we are
going to see and hear the worst of the worst.
Bob
2007-05-29 19:04:57 UTC
Permalink
On 25 May 2007 11:07:13 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
What the heck happened to Nicholas Cage? I don't think he has done a good movie
for a very long time. Too bad. Good actor.
I think "Matchstick Men" (2003) was the last decent Nicolas Cage film that I sat
through. He's made several films since then... "National Treasure", "Lords of
War", "The Wicker Man", "Ghost Rider"... but only had a chance to see "National
Treasure", which wasn't exactly an example of his best work :)

The trailers for "Ghost Rider" looked okay, but I figured I'd wait for that to
hit Movies on Demand or regular cable, rather than see it in the theaters. Was
it just Cage that was bad in "Lords of War", or was the story bad as well?

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-05-29 19:23:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 25 May 2007 11:07:13 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
What the heck happened to Nicholas Cage? I don't think he has done a good movie
for a very long time. Too bad. Good actor.
I think "Matchstick Men" (2003) was the last decent Nicolas Cage film that I sat
through. He's made several films since then... "National Treasure", "Lords of
War", "The Wicker Man", "Ghost Rider"... but only had a chance to see "National
Treasure", which wasn't exactly an example of his best work :)
The trailers for "Ghost Rider" looked okay, but I figured I'd wait for that to
hit Movies on Demand or regular cable, rather than see it in the theaters. Was
it just Cage that was bad in "Lords of War", or was the story bad as well?
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the rest of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot" where street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to find masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap to third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
--
In a world of 35 MPH wildebeests and 36 MPH lions, it's good to be a hippo.
jrogow
2007-05-29 22:55:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the rest of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot" where street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to find masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap to third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.

Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
Joe
2007-05-29 23:13:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the rest of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot" where street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to find masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap to third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in some great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been believable in the
role.
--
In a world of 35 MPH wildebeests and 36 MPH lions, it's good to be a hippo.
jrogow
2007-05-29 23:23:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the rest of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot" where street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to find masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap to third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in some great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been believable in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Joe
2007-05-30 00:10:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the rest of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot" where street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to find masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap to third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in some great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been believable in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
--
It is impossible to eat crunchy cereal and read at the same time. Capt'n Hippo
jrogow
2007-05-30 01:06:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the
rest
of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot"
where
street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to
find
masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap
to
third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in
some
great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been
believable
in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
Many times you see a film and later look it up on the IMDb to find out who
played a certain role. Generally you are surprised to see who it was as
they had transformed themselves into the character.

With Cage, you never need do so as he is always recognizable.
Joe
2007-05-30 01:25:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the
rest
of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot"
where
street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to
find
masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap
to
third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in
some
great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been
believable
in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
Many times you see a film and later look it up on the IMDb to find out who
played a certain role. Generally you are surprised to see who it was as
they had transformed themselves into the character.
With Cage, you never need do so as he is always recognizable.
Ah yes. Got it.
--
It is impossible to eat crunchy cereal and read at the same time. Capt'n Hippo
Rich
2007-05-30 16:34:40 UTC
Permalink
On 29 May 2007 18:06:25 -0700, jrogow wrote...
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the
rest
of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot"
where
street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to
find
masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap
to
third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in
some
great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been
believable
in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
Many times you see a film and later look it up on the IMDb to find out who
played a certain role. Generally you are surprised to see who it was as
they had transformed themselves into the character.
With Cage, you never need do so as he is always recognizable.
Probably has to do with the number of moviews he's appeared in but it is hard
not to recognize him. I heard he was trying out for the last Superman movie, but
its tough to pull off Clark Kent when the first thing people would think is,
"Hey that's Nicolas Cage".

Rich
--
NewsGuy Membership Drive
Spread The Word, Tell A Friend
http://newsguy.com/
jrogow
2007-05-30 17:12:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich
On 29 May 2007 18:06:25 -0700, jrogow wrote...
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the
rest
of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot"
where
street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to
find
masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap
to
third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using
the
same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in
some
great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been
believable
in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
Many times you see a film and later look it up on the IMDb to find out who
played a certain role. Generally you are surprised to see who it was as
they had transformed themselves into the character.
With Cage, you never need do so as he is always recognizable.
Probably has to do with the number of movies he's appeared in but it is
hard
not to recognize him. I heard he was trying out for the last Superman movie, but
its tough to pull off Clark Kent when the first thing people would think is,
"Hey that's Nicolas Cage".
I suspect it has more to do with his acting ability.

Films like "National Treasure" are perfect for his limited range.
Bob
2007-05-31 07:04:42 UTC
Permalink
On 29 May 2007 18:06:25 -0700, jrogow said...
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the
rest
of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot"
where
street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to
find
masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap
to
third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in
some
great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been
believable
in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
Many times you see a film and later look it up on the IMDb to find out who
played a certain role. Generally you are surprised to see who it was as
they had transformed themselves into the character.
With Cage, you never need do so as he is always recognizable.
Absolutely! I don't know if it's his voice, his mannerisms, or both... but
irregardless of the movie, it always Nick Cage playing Nick Cage.

I really enjoyed his performances in movies like "Wild at Heart", "Raising
Arizona", and "Leaving Las Vegas"... but even in those films his character
remains relatively the same. The only film I can think of where you see the
character rather than Cage, is "Kiss of Death" with Helen Hunt and David Caruso.
I can't put my finger on it, but it wasn't a typical performance for him.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-05-31 14:19:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 29 May 2007 18:06:25 -0700, jrogow said...
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the
rest
of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot"
where
street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to
find
masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap
to
third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in
some
great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been
believable
in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
Many times you see a film and later look it up on the IMDb to find out who
played a certain role. Generally you are surprised to see who it was as
they had transformed themselves into the character.
With Cage, you never need do so as he is always recognizable.
Absolutely! I don't know if it's his voice, his mannerisms, or both... but
irregardless of the movie, it always Nick Cage playing Nick Cage.
I really enjoyed his performances in movies like "Wild at Heart", "Raising
Arizona", and "Leaving Las Vegas"... but even in those films his character
remains relatively the same. The only film I can think of where you see the
character rather than Cage, is "Kiss of Death" with Helen Hunt and David Caruso.
I can't put my finger on it, but it wasn't a typical performance for him.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Hey, wonder what happened to Helen Hunt? She did that bad tornado movie, but did
really well with that Jack Nickelson OCD movie. Then she sort of disappeared.
--
It is impossible to eat crunchy cereal and read at the same time. Capt'n Hippo
Rich
2007-05-31 16:57:48 UTC
Permalink
On 31 May 2007 07:19:51 -0700, Joe wrote...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 29 May 2007 18:06:25 -0700, jrogow said...
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the
rest
of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot"
where
street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to
find
masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any
company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap
to
third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in
some
great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been
believable
in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
Many times you see a film and later look it up on the IMDb to find out who
played a certain role. Generally you are surprised to see who it was as
they had transformed themselves into the character.
With Cage, you never need do so as he is always recognizable.
Absolutely! I don't know if it's his voice, his mannerisms, or both... but
irregardless of the movie, it always Nick Cage playing Nick Cage.
I really enjoyed his performances in movies like "Wild at Heart", "Raising
Arizona", and "Leaving Las Vegas"... but even in those films his character
remains relatively the same. The only film I can think of where you see the
character rather than Cage, is "Kiss of Death" with Helen Hunt and David Caruso.
I can't put my finger on it, but it wasn't a typical performance for him.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Hey, wonder what happened to Helen Hunt? She did that bad tornado movie, but did
really well with that Jack Nickelson OCD movie. Then she sort of disappeared.
The last one I remember was "What Women Want" and was definitely a chick flick.
Mel Gibson was in that one too and it was okay. That was the last movie I
remember seeing her in.

Rich
--
Newsguy's Help-A-Community Program
Help a community by participating in ours!
http://newsguy.com/charity.asp
Bob
2007-05-31 18:49:35 UTC
Permalink
On 31 May 2007 07:19:51 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 29 May 2007 18:06:25 -0700, jrogow said...
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the
rest
of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot"
where
street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to
find
masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any
company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap
to
third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in
some
great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been
believable
in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
Many times you see a film and later look it up on the IMDb to find out who
played a certain role. Generally you are surprised to see who it was as
they had transformed themselves into the character.
With Cage, you never need do so as he is always recognizable.
Absolutely! I don't know if it's his voice, his mannerisms, or both... but
irregardless of the movie, it always Nick Cage playing Nick Cage.
I really enjoyed his performances in movies like "Wild at Heart", "Raising
Arizona", and "Leaving Las Vegas"... but even in those films his character
remains relatively the same. The only film I can think of where you see the
character rather than Cage, is "Kiss of Death" with Helen Hunt and David Caruso.
I can't put my finger on it, but it wasn't a typical performance for him.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Hey, wonder what happened to Helen Hunt? She did that bad tornado movie, but did
really well with that Jack Nickelson OCD movie. Then she sort of disappeared.
Yep, I thought she turned in great leading role performances in "Twister" and
"As Good As It Gets" (the Nickelson film), but these days she seems to show up
in smaller supporting roles.

Since 2001 she's only appeared in a handful of films... "Bobby", "A Good Woman",
"Curse of the Jade Scorpion", "One Night at McCool's"... but haven't caught any
of those movies. It looks like she has a film in production that costars Matthew
Broderick and Bette Midler, but I couldn't find much detail on the film.

In some respects she reminds of Jodie Foster... they both had a string of
noteworthy performances in recent years... but have sort of disappeared off the
radar as of late.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-05-31 19:43:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 07:19:51 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 29 May 2007 18:06:25 -0700, jrogow said...
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the
rest
of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot"
where
street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to
find
masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any
company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap
to
third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage
container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in
some
great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been
believable
in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
Many times you see a film and later look it up on the IMDb to find out who
played a certain role. Generally you are surprised to see who it was as
they had transformed themselves into the character.
With Cage, you never need do so as he is always recognizable.
Absolutely! I don't know if it's his voice, his mannerisms, or both... but
irregardless of the movie, it always Nick Cage playing Nick Cage.
I really enjoyed his performances in movies like "Wild at Heart", "Raising
Arizona", and "Leaving Las Vegas"... but even in those films his character
remains relatively the same. The only film I can think of where you see the
character rather than Cage, is "Kiss of Death" with Helen Hunt and David Caruso.
I can't put my finger on it, but it wasn't a typical performance for him.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Hey, wonder what happened to Helen Hunt? She did that bad tornado movie, but did
really well with that Jack Nickelson OCD movie. Then she sort of disappeared.
Yep, I thought she turned in great leading role performances in "Twister" and
"As Good As It Gets" (the Nickelson film), but these days she seems to show up
in smaller supporting roles.
Since 2001 she's only appeared in a handful of films... "Bobby", "A Good Woman",
"Curse of the Jade Scorpion", "One Night at McCool's"... but haven't caught any
of those movies. It looks like she has a film in production that costars Matthew
Broderick and Bette Midler, but I couldn't find much detail on the film.
In some respects she reminds of Jodie Foster... they both had a string of
noteworthy performances in recent years... but have sort of disappeared off the
radar as of late.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think she got a good boost from the TV sitcom, then maybe some not good films.
I generally didn't like her character on TV, but I really liked her performance
in "As Good As It Gets". I even liked Jack Nickelson in that one.
--
I remember when buying a notebook for the new school year cost $1.99 - Rime of
an Ancient Hippo
Bob
2007-06-01 15:35:46 UTC
Permalink
On 31 May 2007 12:43:36 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 31 May 2007 07:19:51 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 29 May 2007 18:06:25 -0700, jrogow said...
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Post by jrogow
Post by Joe
Too big of a story for too short of a time frame to work in and the
rest
of the
characters were so unrealistic. It was like watching "On the Lot"
where
street
gang members look more like fraternity brothers. If they wanted to
find
masters
of war, they could have filmed the GE building, or GM, or almost any
company in
China or France. They wanted to make arms dealers who spread the crap
to
third
world nations at discount about a guy working out of an old storage
container
with a total absence of political subsidy. If they wanted to capture that
particular person's life, they probably shouldn't have tried using the
same
image Nicholas Cage has in all of his movies.
Nick Cage is ever and always Nick Cage.
Some actors can lose themselves in a role, NC is incapable of so doing.
In that case, Nick Cage would make a lousy gun runner. He has been in
some
great
movies, comedy and drama. I think Bill Clinton would have been
believable
in the
role.
Have you ever seen one of his movies and asked "who played . . ." at the
end?
Elucidate please.
Many times you see a film and later look it up on the IMDb to find out who
played a certain role. Generally you are surprised to see who it was as
they had transformed themselves into the character.
With Cage, you never need do so as he is always recognizable.
Absolutely! I don't know if it's his voice, his mannerisms, or both... but
irregardless of the movie, it always Nick Cage playing Nick Cage.
I really enjoyed his performances in movies like "Wild at Heart", "Raising
Arizona", and "Leaving Las Vegas"... but even in those films his character
remains relatively the same. The only film I can think of where you see the
character rather than Cage, is "Kiss of Death" with Helen Hunt and David Caruso.
I can't put my finger on it, but it wasn't a typical performance for him.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Hey, wonder what happened to Helen Hunt? She did that bad tornado movie, but did
really well with that Jack Nickelson OCD movie. Then she sort of disappeared.
Yep, I thought she turned in great leading role performances in "Twister" and
"As Good As It Gets" (the Nickelson film), but these days she seems to show up
in smaller supporting roles.
Since 2001 she's only appeared in a handful of films... "Bobby", "A Good Woman",
"Curse of the Jade Scorpion", "One Night at McCool's"... but haven't caught any
of those movies. It looks like she has a film in production that costars Matthew
Broderick and Bette Midler, but I couldn't find much detail on the film.
In some respects she reminds of Jodie Foster... they both had a string of
noteworthy performances in recent years... but have sort of disappeared off the
radar as of late.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think she got a good boost from the TV sitcom, then maybe some not good films.
I generally didn't like her character on TV, but I really liked her performance
in "As Good As It Gets". I even liked Jack Nickelson in that one.
Yep, "Mad About You" was a really popular show, and I didn't realize that it was
on the air for 8 seasons! In addition to Helen Hunt fading into the background,
Paul Reiser... her costar on the TV show... has done a disappearing act since
the show went off the air. He's made a couple minor film appearances since the
TV show wrapped up in 1998, but that's about it.

I also liked Nickelson in "As Good As It Gets", and unlike many of his films, I
didn't feel like I was watching Jack playing Jack. He didn't overshadow the
character or the film, and he had good onscreen chemistry with Hunt.

I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I really liked
the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in great performances...
but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really over-the-top, almost a caricature
of himself. Al Pacino has also suffered from this problem in some of his newer
films. They're both amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of
the problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their persona/image
from the characters that they're playing.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Luu
2007-06-01 16:02:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
--
luu
Joe
2007-06-01 16:22:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
He did a good job with Hoffa. Maybe altering his facial features took the
opportunity of being jack away from him. I really liked his early stuff when he
was a more subtle sly dog. Five Easy Pieces and Carnal Knowledge were great
movies, as was The Last Detail. Missouri Breaks was probably at the edge, and
Going South was decent. He's a great actor, but he's a little like Michael Cain.
He works all of the time so luck of the draw in quality of movie and role run
from great to really bad.
--
I remember when buying a notebook for the new school year cost $1.99 - Rime of
an Ancient Hippo
Bob
2007-06-01 18:47:16 UTC
Permalink
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.

After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".

Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-01 19:15:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
--
I remember when buying a notebook for the new school year cost $1.99 - Rime of
an Ancient Hippo
Bob
2007-06-02 16:18:41 UTC
Permalink
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".

"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.

I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-02 17:24:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
Bob
2007-06-03 00:04:24 UTC
Permalink
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.

I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.

Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.

In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-03 00:29:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.
I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.
Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.
In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
The only problem I had with Find Me Guilty is that the actual person was so over
the top is looked liked the role was acted over the top. It was a different kind
of role for for Diesel. These Fast and Furious movies remind of me the old days
of drag racing when terrible movies were produced. I watch a bit of Two Lane
Black Top last night, James Taylor's movie debut and conclusion and it was soooo
bad and so inaccurate and the Chevy was so slow.
Bob
2007-06-03 16:32:30 UTC
Permalink
On 2 Jun 2007 17:29:49 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.
I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.
Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.
In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
The only problem I had with Find Me Guilty is that the actual person was so over
the top is looked liked the role was acted over the top. It was a different kind
of role for for Diesel. These Fast and Furious movies remind of me the old days
of drag racing when terrible movies were produced. I watch a bit of Two Lane
Black Top last night, James Taylor's movie debut and conclusion and it was soooo
bad and so inaccurate and the Chevy was so slow.
James Taylor... As in "Sweet Baby James", once married to Carly Simon, James
Taylor? I can't picture him as an actor, so I'll have to track down a copy of
"Two Lane Black Top" online.

While the numbers don't include merchandise, DVD sales, and several other
revenue sources... if the general box-office numbers are any indication... it
would be as those "Fast and Furious" has faded with each new release...

The Fast and the Furious (2001) - $144,512,310
2 Fast 2 Furious (2003) - $127,083,765
The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) - $62,494,975

Next up for Diesel, is a directing & acting stint in "Hannibal the Conqueror", a
movie about the Carthaginian general who scrapped with the Romans.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-03 17:51:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 17:29:49 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.
I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.
Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.
In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
The only problem I had with Find Me Guilty is that the actual person was so over
the top is looked liked the role was acted over the top. It was a different kind
of role for for Diesel. These Fast and Furious movies remind of me the old days
of drag racing when terrible movies were produced. I watch a bit of Two Lane
Black Top last night, James Taylor's movie debut and conclusion and it was soooo
bad and so inaccurate and the Chevy was so slow.
James Taylor... As in "Sweet Baby James", once married to Carly Simon, James
Taylor? I can't picture him as an actor, so I'll have to track down a copy of
"Two Lane Black Top" online.
While the numbers don't include merchandise, DVD sales, and several other
revenue sources... if the general box-office numbers are any indication... it
would be as those "Fast and Furious" has faded with each new release...
The Fast and the Furious (2001) - $144,512,310
2 Fast 2 Furious (2003) - $127,083,765
The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) - $62,494,975
Next up for Diesel, is a directing & acting stint in "Hannibal the Conqueror", a
movie about the Carthaginian general who scrapped with the Romans.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
It will be interesting to see what he does with the story and if they go with
the second or third Punic war where Rome decided Carthage needed to go. The
story of Carthage in interesting. Who knows, maybe he will do justice to history
in an effort to turn it into an action hero movie.

It seems every time an epic story is brought to the screen and adjusted for
political correctness and playing field leveling, all ancient generals were gay
and tended to date their troops rather than lead them. For all of the greatness
of the times and achievements, producers, directors and screenwriters can't seem
to get past the trivial details of where the lead characters genetals spent most
of its time. Troy was a joke and what was done to the original work was for no
good purpose other than people didn't like the original and decided to reinvent
history. Even new text books are lame. They tend to follow the author's
imagination and social preferences rather than the historical foundation.
Bob
2007-06-03 23:46:41 UTC
Permalink
On 3 Jun 2007 10:51:53 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 17:29:49 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.
I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.
Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.
In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
The only problem I had with Find Me Guilty is that the actual person was so over
the top is looked liked the role was acted over the top. It was a different kind
of role for for Diesel. These Fast and Furious movies remind of me the old days
of drag racing when terrible movies were produced. I watch a bit of Two Lane
Black Top last night, James Taylor's movie debut and conclusion and it was soooo
bad and so inaccurate and the Chevy was so slow.
James Taylor... As in "Sweet Baby James", once married to Carly Simon, James
Taylor? I can't picture him as an actor, so I'll have to track down a copy of
"Two Lane Black Top" online.
While the numbers don't include merchandise, DVD sales, and several other
revenue sources... if the general box-office numbers are any indication... it
would be as those "Fast and Furious" has faded with each new release...
The Fast and the Furious (2001) - $144,512,310
2 Fast 2 Furious (2003) - $127,083,765
The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) - $62,494,975
Next up for Diesel, is a directing & acting stint in "Hannibal the Conqueror", a
movie about the Carthaginian general who scrapped with the Romans.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
It will be interesting to see what he does with the story and if they go with
the second or third Punic war where Rome decided Carthage needed to go. The
story of Carthage in interesting. Who knows, maybe he will do justice to history
in an effort to turn it into an action hero movie.
It seems every time an epic story is brought to the screen and adjusted for
political correctness and playing field leveling, all ancient generals were gay
and tended to date their troops rather than lead them. For all of the greatness
of the times and achievements, producers, directors and screenwriters can't seem
to get past the trivial details of where the lead characters genetals spent most
of its time. Troy was a joke and what was done to the original work was for no
good purpose other than people didn't like the original and decided to reinvent
history. Even new text books are lame. They tend to follow the author's
imagination and social preferences rather than the historical foundation.
Yep, they took some major creative liberties with "Troy", and apparently Peter
O'Toole was not a big fan of the final product... he reportedly hated working
with director Wolfgang Petersen & refused to watch the completed film.

Possibly a sign of things to come, Petersen intentionally dropped the Greek Gods
from the story line (Zeus, Hera, etc.) claiming that they were silly and
unnecessary to the story :)

The details for the "Hannibal" film are vague as they are still in production,
but from what I gathered they are going to focus on the second Punic War, which
finds Hannibal marching elephants & soldiers over the Alps & into Italy.

If Hollywood stays true to the current trend of historical rewrites, I'm sure
audiences will be treated to Vin Diesel trekking across the Alps in Humvees
equipped with rocket launchers because they simply look cooler.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-04 00:01:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 3 Jun 2007 10:51:53 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 17:29:49 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.
I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.
Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.
In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
The only problem I had with Find Me Guilty is that the actual person was so over
the top is looked liked the role was acted over the top. It was a different kind
of role for for Diesel. These Fast and Furious movies remind of me the old days
of drag racing when terrible movies were produced. I watch a bit of Two Lane
Black Top last night, James Taylor's movie debut and conclusion and it was soooo
bad and so inaccurate and the Chevy was so slow.
James Taylor... As in "Sweet Baby James", once married to Carly Simon, James
Taylor? I can't picture him as an actor, so I'll have to track down a copy of
"Two Lane Black Top" online.
While the numbers don't include merchandise, DVD sales, and several other
revenue sources... if the general box-office numbers are any indication... it
would be as those "Fast and Furious" has faded with each new release...
The Fast and the Furious (2001) - $144,512,310
2 Fast 2 Furious (2003) - $127,083,765
The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) - $62,494,975
Next up for Diesel, is a directing & acting stint in "Hannibal the Conqueror", a
movie about the Carthaginian general who scrapped with the Romans.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
It will be interesting to see what he does with the story and if they go with
the second or third Punic war where Rome decided Carthage needed to go. The
story of Carthage in interesting. Who knows, maybe he will do justice to history
in an effort to turn it into an action hero movie.
It seems every time an epic story is brought to the screen and adjusted for
political correctness and playing field leveling, all ancient generals were gay
and tended to date their troops rather than lead them. For all of the greatness
of the times and achievements, producers, directors and screenwriters can't seem
to get past the trivial details of where the lead characters genetals spent most
of its time. Troy was a joke and what was done to the original work was for no
good purpose other than people didn't like the original and decided to reinvent
history. Even new text books are lame. They tend to follow the author's
imagination and social preferences rather than the historical foundation.
Yep, they took some major creative liberties with "Troy", and apparently Peter
O'Toole was not a big fan of the final product... he reportedly hated working
with director Wolfgang Petersen & refused to watch the completed film.
Possibly a sign of things to come, Petersen intentionally dropped the Greek Gods
from the story line (Zeus, Hera, etc.) claiming that they were silly and
unnecessary to the story :)
The details for the "Hannibal" film are vague as they are still in production,
but from what I gathered they are going to focus on the second Punic War, which
finds Hannibal marching elephants & soldiers over the Alps & into Italy.
If Hollywood stays true to the current trend of historical rewrites, I'm sure
audiences will be treated to Vin Diesel trekking across the Alps in Humvees
equipped with rocket launchers because they simply look cooler.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Or he will kill one of his captains who mistreats and elephant. There is a show
I watched briefly on Fox, a contest for a film making contract. All they do is
reward the crap that comes the closest to what the producers have made. I like
Carrie Fisher, but what are her credentials to judge film ? They keep making
reference to Star Wars.
Bob
2007-06-04 19:39:35 UTC
Permalink
On 3 Jun 2007 17:01:48 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 3 Jun 2007 10:51:53 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 17:29:49 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.
I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.
Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.
In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
The only problem I had with Find Me Guilty is that the actual person was so over
the top is looked liked the role was acted over the top. It was a different kind
of role for for Diesel. These Fast and Furious movies remind of me the old days
of drag racing when terrible movies were produced. I watch a bit of Two Lane
Black Top last night, James Taylor's movie debut and conclusion and it was soooo
bad and so inaccurate and the Chevy was so slow.
James Taylor... As in "Sweet Baby James", once married to Carly Simon, James
Taylor? I can't picture him as an actor, so I'll have to track down a copy of
"Two Lane Black Top" online.
While the numbers don't include merchandise, DVD sales, and several other
revenue sources... if the general box-office numbers are any indication... it
would be as those "Fast and Furious" has faded with each new release...
The Fast and the Furious (2001) - $144,512,310
2 Fast 2 Furious (2003) - $127,083,765
The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) - $62,494,975
Next up for Diesel, is a directing & acting stint in "Hannibal the Conqueror", a
movie about the Carthaginian general who scrapped with the Romans.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
It will be interesting to see what he does with the story and if they go with
the second or third Punic war where Rome decided Carthage needed to go. The
story of Carthage in interesting. Who knows, maybe he will do justice to history
in an effort to turn it into an action hero movie.
It seems every time an epic story is brought to the screen and adjusted for
political correctness and playing field leveling, all ancient generals were gay
and tended to date their troops rather than lead them. For all of the greatness
of the times and achievements, producers, directors and screenwriters can't seem
to get past the trivial details of where the lead characters genetals spent most
of its time. Troy was a joke and what was done to the original work was for no
good purpose other than people didn't like the original and decided to reinvent
history. Even new text books are lame. They tend to follow the author's
imagination and social preferences rather than the historical foundation.
Yep, they took some major creative liberties with "Troy", and apparently Peter
O'Toole was not a big fan of the final product... he reportedly hated working
with director Wolfgang Petersen & refused to watch the completed film.
Possibly a sign of things to come, Petersen intentionally dropped the Greek Gods
from the story line (Zeus, Hera, etc.) claiming that they were silly and
unnecessary to the story :)
The details for the "Hannibal" film are vague as they are still in production,
but from what I gathered they are going to focus on the second Punic War, which
finds Hannibal marching elephants & soldiers over the Alps & into Italy.
If Hollywood stays true to the current trend of historical rewrites, I'm sure
audiences will be treated to Vin Diesel trekking across the Alps in Humvees
equipped with rocket launchers because they simply look cooler.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Or he will kill one of his captains who mistreats and elephant. There is a show
I watched briefly on Fox, a contest for a film making contract. All they do is
reward the crap that comes the closest to what the producers have made. I like
Carrie Fisher, but what are her credentials to judge film ? They keep making
reference to Star Wars.
We caught two episodes of "On The Lot", and we were left with the same
impression. One team recreated the stop-motion video effect that was popular a
few years ago in films like "Matrix" & "Swordfish". Aside from the special
effect, there was no story, no character development... yet their peers and
judges couldn't give their clip enough praise.

I actually thought that Ben Affleck & Matt Damon did a better job with the
"finding the next Hollywood director" concept when they put together their
Project Greenlight TV series. It was a little hokey at times, but far better
than "On The Lot" IMHO.

Best regards,
***@newsguy.com
NewsGuy.Com
--
Earn 50% Commissions on Your NewsGuy Referrals!
More Details - http://newsguy.com/newsguys.htm
Joe
2007-06-05 05:54:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
On 3 Jun 2007 17:01:48 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 3 Jun 2007 10:51:53 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 17:29:49 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.
I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.
Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.
In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
The only problem I had with Find Me Guilty is that the actual person was so over
the top is looked liked the role was acted over the top. It was a different kind
of role for for Diesel. These Fast and Furious movies remind of me the old days
of drag racing when terrible movies were produced. I watch a bit of Two Lane
Black Top last night, James Taylor's movie debut and conclusion and it was soooo
bad and so inaccurate and the Chevy was so slow.
James Taylor... As in "Sweet Baby James", once married to Carly Simon, James
Taylor? I can't picture him as an actor, so I'll have to track down a copy of
"Two Lane Black Top" online.
While the numbers don't include merchandise, DVD sales, and several other
revenue sources... if the general box-office numbers are any indication... it
would be as those "Fast and Furious" has faded with each new release...
The Fast and the Furious (2001) - $144,512,310
2 Fast 2 Furious (2003) - $127,083,765
The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) - $62,494,975
Next up for Diesel, is a directing & acting stint in "Hannibal the Conqueror", a
movie about the Carthaginian general who scrapped with the Romans.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
It will be interesting to see what he does with the story and if they go with
the second or third Punic war where Rome decided Carthage needed to go. The
story of Carthage in interesting. Who knows, maybe he will do justice to history
in an effort to turn it into an action hero movie.
It seems every time an epic story is brought to the screen and adjusted for
political correctness and playing field leveling, all ancient generals were gay
and tended to date their troops rather than lead them. For all of the greatness
of the times and achievements, producers, directors and screenwriters can't seem
to get past the trivial details of where the lead characters genetals spent most
of its time. Troy was a joke and what was done to the original work was for no
good purpose other than people didn't like the original and decided to reinvent
history. Even new text books are lame. They tend to follow the author's
imagination and social preferences rather than the historical foundation.
Yep, they took some major creative liberties with "Troy", and apparently Peter
O'Toole was not a big fan of the final product... he reportedly hated working
with director Wolfgang Petersen & refused to watch the completed film.
Possibly a sign of things to come, Petersen intentionally dropped the Greek Gods
from the story line (Zeus, Hera, etc.) claiming that they were silly and
unnecessary to the story :)
The details for the "Hannibal" film are vague as they are still in production,
but from what I gathered they are going to focus on the second Punic War, which
finds Hannibal marching elephants & soldiers over the Alps & into Italy.
If Hollywood stays true to the current trend of historical rewrites, I'm sure
audiences will be treated to Vin Diesel trekking across the Alps in Humvees
equipped with rocket launchers because they simply look cooler.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
Or he will kill one of his captains who mistreats and elephant. There is a show
I watched briefly on Fox, a contest for a film making contract. All they do is
reward the crap that comes the closest to what the producers have made. I like
Carrie Fisher, but what are her credentials to judge film ? They keep making
reference to Star Wars.
We caught two episodes of "On The Lot", and we were left with the same
impression. One team recreated the stop-motion video effect that was popular a
few years ago in films like "Matrix" & "Swordfish". Aside from the special
effect, there was no story, no character development... yet their peers and
judges couldn't give their clip enough praise.
I actually thought that Ben Affleck & Matt Damon did a better job with the
"finding the next Hollywood director" concept when they put together their
Project Greenlight TV series. It was a little hokey at times, but far better
than "On The Lot" IMHO.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I'm sure there is a lot of creative work out there. Probably more on utube than
that show. I think the adventures of Newsguy can be a breakthough with some
sensitive dialogs.
Rich
2007-06-04 16:58:30 UTC
Permalink
On 2 Jun 2007 17:29:49 -0700, Joe wrote...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.
I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.
Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.
In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
The only problem I had with Find Me Guilty is that the actual person was so over
the top is looked liked the role was acted over the top. It was a different kind
of role for for Diesel. These Fast and Furious movies remind of me the old days
of drag racing when terrible movies were produced. I watch a bit of Two Lane
Black Top last night, James Taylor's movie debut and conclusion and it was soooo
bad and so inaccurate and the Chevy was so slow.
I remember watching that by accident once. It was before the Web and was trying
to figure out if that was really James Taylor. Been to a couple of his concerts
and they were good, but glad to see his movie career was short lived. : )

Rich
--
--
NewsGuy Membership Drive
Spread The Word, Tell A Friend
http://newsguy.com/
Joe
2007-06-05 00:19:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich
On 2 Jun 2007 17:29:49 -0700, Joe wrote...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.
I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.
Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.
In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
The only problem I had with Find Me Guilty is that the actual person was so over
the top is looked liked the role was acted over the top. It was a different kind
of role for for Diesel. These Fast and Furious movies remind of me the old days
of drag racing when terrible movies were produced. I watch a bit of Two Lane
Black Top last night, James Taylor's movie debut and conclusion and it was soooo
bad and so inaccurate and the Chevy was so slow.
I remember watching that by accident once. It was before the Web and was trying
to figure out if that was really James Taylor. Been to a couple of his concerts
and they were good, but glad to see his movie career was short lived. : )
Rich
He and his whole family were very popular in the late 60's and early 70's,
particularly a brother and sister. talented guy, interesting music.
Rich
2007-06-05 16:18:47 UTC
Permalink
On 4 Jun 2007 17:19:29 -0700, Joe wrote...
Post by Joe
Post by Rich
On 2 Jun 2007 17:29:49 -0700, Joe wrote...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 2 Jun 2007 10:24:28 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 12:15:14 -0700, Joe said...
Post by Joe
Post by Bob
On 1 Jun 2007 09:02:57 -0700, Luu said...
Post by Luu
Post by Bob
I can't say the same about his recent appearance in "Departed". I
really liked the film, and thought Matt Damon and Leonardo turned in
great performances... but in my humble opinion, Nickelson was really
over-the-top, almost a caricature of himself. Al Pacino has also
suffered from this problem in some of his newer films. They're both
amazing actors, don't get me wrong, but maybe that's part of the
problem... whhen they're onscreen it's hard to separate their
persona/image from the characters that they're playing.
yep, Mark Wahlberg and Alec Baldwin were great too. what an ensemble.
except for Jack, who did go over the top. Even the great Scorcese
couldn't stop Jack from being Jack.
You're absolutely right Luu, an amazing cast from top to bottom! Baldwin did a
good job, and while he didn't get as much screen time as DiCaprio or Damon,
Wahlberg turned in a great perfomance... probably his best to date.
After missing at the box office with "The Aviator", it was also nice to see
Scorsese bounce back with the "The Departed".
Wahlberg hooks up with another interesting ensemble... Joaquin Phoenix, Robert
Duvall, Eva Mendes... in the film "We Own the Night", which is set for release
in Fall 2007. Not sure if the film will be any good, but it'll be interesting to
see how those unique personalities mesh on screen.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.com
He is another actor who runs from really bad to really good depending on the
vehicle. "Four Brothers" was painful to watch. I think the Perfect Storm was
good. Boogie Nights was a good challenging role.
I think you nailed his best films to date... "Perfect Storm", "Boogie Nights"
and "The Departed".
"Four Brothers" was painful to sit through, as was "Shooter", the film that
followed "The Departed". One film earned him a best supporting actor nomination
at the Oscars, and the other film went straight to cable.
I suppose the primary focus for these folks is steady work & a steady pay check,
but even within those guidelines some actors seem to do a better job of picking
their projects than others. Vin Diesel is similar to Wahlberg in that for every
good movie he's appeared in, he has matched it with a film that most audiences
would like to forget.
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
I think the best Vin Diesel movie was Boiler Room, although I like the Riddick
series. I hate to say it, but I thought part of The Pacifier were funny. I can't
stand that Fast and Furious franchise.
"Boiler Room" was a really good film, and probably one of that last decent
performances I've seen from Ben Affleck and Giovanni Ribisi.
I also that "Find Me Guilty" was another good film for Diesel. It wasn't a box
office juggernaut, but the story was interesting, and he played a character that
was unlike anything else he's played up to this point.
Estrella is not a big sci-fi / horror film person, but she really liked the
Riddick films, and I thought they were well done also.
In the last installment of the "Fast & Furious" series, I recall cars sliding
around in empty parking garages, so I think they may have reached the end of the
road with that franchise :)
Best regards,
NewsGuy.Com
The only problem I had with Find Me Guilty is that the actual person was so over
the top is looked liked the role was acted over the top. It was a different kind
of role for for Diesel. These Fast and Furious movies remind of me the old days
of drag racing when terrible movies were produced. I watch a bit of Two Lane
Black Top last night, James Taylor's movie debut and conclusion and it was soooo
bad and so inaccurate and the Chevy was so slow.
I remember watching that by accident once. It was before the Web and was trying
to figure out if that was really James Taylor. Been to a couple of his concerts
and they were good, but glad to see his movie career was short lived. : )
Rich
He and his whole family were very popular in the late 60's and early 70's,
particularly a brother and sister. talented guy, interesting music.
I remember his son showing up at one of his concerts and performed a song with
him. His music is still holding up pretty well and puts on a good show.

Rich
--
NewsGuy Membership Drive
Spread The Word, Tell A Friend
http://newsguy.com/
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...