To prove that Des talks bollocks

How destroying?

Sure, the time shifting technique probably makes the film a lot more
watchable and I'm sure it's far superior in this format. But, I think
it would be interesting to see it chronolgically presented. Not
interesting enough for me to do anything about it, but interesting.

 

Good point, but whenever I try to mentally rearrange the the segments I
never get it quite right (so to speak)

--
Dan L (Oldbloke)
My Bike 2000 Honda CB500
M'boy's Bike 1990 Suzuki TS50X (Heavily fortified)

BOTAFOT #140, DIAABTCOD #26

 

Ben Blaney posted:

Christ, what a sad bunch. Who goes to a film to try to find the
mistakes?

 

Er... look, some people can't help noticing things that are 'wrong'.

 

Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, Champ

Well last night down the pub he got a bit pissed and said "Actually, it
was a **** up. I was rat-arsed when I was editing. But don't tell
anyone, 'cos Travolta thought it was 'art'."

So there.

 

I never ever do. I think I'm quite a good film-watcher: I enjoy being
taken in, and enjoy the suspension of disbelief too much to be
spotting a gun firing more than its allotted number of bullets.

 

I become incredulous at more human aspects: when a character's speech
pattern, body language, emotional reaction is unlikely and unrealistic
then I'll start deeming it A Shit Film (and, of course, if it's got
goblins or spaceships in it - but that surely goes without saying).

I suppose that's why I like arthouse cinema, and continental cinema.
Without big budgets, you've just got films about people.

 

Thanks for that Ben. Of course, I'm not remotely interested, but now
at least I know what film it is I'm not interested in...

 

what, you mean when you get an email you don't get a huge spinning
ray-traced "E" on the screen like in "Disclosure"?

Or, when seated in front of an SGI box front-ending a Cray XMP, and a
dozen velociraptors are trying to break down the door, you just say
"It's a UNIX system! I know this!" and sort everything out?

Or, you can manage to do *anything* at all on a PC, whilst staring at
Halle Berry's tits?

or, etc...

 

Aye, I'm like that with literals. I spent a large part of my first couple
of years of work as a copy-editor for a book publisher. Ever since, I tend
to spot spelling and punctuation errors in newspapers, books, advertisements
and so on. If it's 'wrong', I simply cannot help noticing it, and being
offended by it. That could be why I feel so at home here on ukrm, where
rigorous adherence by all participants to the very highest standards of
written English is, shall we say, a sine qua non for quotidian
correspondence.

 

On the other hand, I spent 10 years or so copywriting for UK
mass-market magazines, and always had a sub-editor on hand to do
plebeian tasks like spell-checking. It gets in the way of being
creative, dahling.

and, again conversely, my "Life's too short to proof-read Usenet"
credo.

 

Ben Blaney posted:

Likewise - I'm there to be entertained, so I'll sit back, relax and let
the film do it's thing. I'm not going to sit there, on the edge of my
seat scanning every background detail to look for a shadow of a mic
boom, or the reflection of a camerman-under-a-tarp. I certainly
wouldn't make the effort to go and post it on the internet afterwards.

 

Which might, possibly, have something to do with the fact that I don't do
that no more. Mind-numbing, thankless and repetitive work, it was, but it
got one started on the ladder to ... somewhere.

Oh aye. 'Swhy I has never taken a pop at annyones' speling or puntcuation
hear - except where the result is funny, of course.

 

<AOL>

 

^^^^

*nice*

 

I'm exactly the opposite normally. IMO ~90% of all films are shite, so
it's rare that I actually sit down and watch them. When I do, I often
spend considerable portions of the time being irritated by the
unbelievability of them, particularly those where guns abound, and
it's made even worse when they're not even internally consistent.

'Suspension' of disbelief is something I can only do when it's
actually in a fantasy[1] setting.


[1] Not neccessarily d&d type 'fantasy' but something that's not
supposed to be in the real world as we know it.

 

Ace wrote

It must be horrible looking at the world through untinted glass.

When I go to the Kinema I go to be entertained not to waste my time
looking for errors. and who knows perhaps there was a jumbo jet in
Palestine when Moses was a local tour guide.

 

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the

I tend to get pissed off when the ignorance of technology becomes so
great as to make me think the director is a flake and is treating the
audience with contempt. Iow, he might be a know-nothing ****, but it
doesn't mean we all are.

I dunno - well done space opera is entertaining in a way. "Outland" is a
good example of that, where the spaceships and suns background is
incidental to the plot.

AOL. One of the most entertaining films I've seen recently was
"Chocolat". Just a nice little movie about people, and quirkily funny.

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19 COSOC#10

 

^^^^^^

This is just *so* you.

 

Champ wrote

chuckle



Interesting you should mention that.

Having had sufficient time to experience both the above and it's modern
cosy equivalent, I have to confess; I rather miss the atmosphere which
can only be engendered by a large crowd and well told tale.


The seats are a kin sight comfier these days though, which is a blessing
as you get older