From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V7 #461 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Monday, December 14 1998 Volume 07 : Number 461 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: fegmaniax-digest V7 #460 [edoxtato@ssax.com] Re: pac man fever [Joel Mullins ] Re: pac man fever [Eb ] Re: writing credits [MARKEEFE@aol.com] Mountainfo ["Matthew Knights" ] [Fwd: Re: writing credits] [Joel Mullins ] Re: Mostly Momus [Charles Gillett ] Re: succinctly [Capuchin ] Films [Michael Wolfe ] Polk [Michael Wolfe ] Fwd: (RH paragraph at the end if you wanna skip to it) [MARKEEFE@aol.com] Re: pac man fever [Capuchin ] this is the end... [dwdudic@erols.com (David W. Dudich)] Re: pac man fever [Eb ] Re: Films ["Capitalism Blows" ] Re: pac man fever [The Great Quail ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:38:12 -0600 From: edoxtato@ssax.com Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V7 #460 >I rarely take the piss (I did have one cup of beer last night -- woo!) And he became giddy and irresponsible. >I think Spirit's and Donovan's records have aged horribly In what regard? The vinyl has deteriorated? >and I don't care for Cake, :::burp!::: more for us then... I like the first album, with the exception of the "I Will Survive" cover. I dunno why it was included, other than it seemed to be one of those obligatory '70's covers. >Stan Ridgway I find Stan FUN. >The Violent Femmes (for basically the same reason). Aw, man... the Femmes are fun too. I really love the walking talking bassline on their first rekkid, too. Yeah, they're all teen-angsty and so forth... ..so? >Eb, who hasn't been appreciably drunk in years :) LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE HAVE HIT UPON THE PROBLEM. :::uploading a six of Chicago's own Eb beer to Eb::: When you're finished with that, you can watch cartoons. - -Doc, who's in a grouchy mood to-day. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:56:35 -0800 From: Joel Mullins Subject: Re: pac man fever i ask you, > fegs, has there ever been a decade in film history so dominated by any > one director(ial team)? How about that other Hitchcock in the 40's and 50's? - --Joel > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 15:16:20 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Re: pac man fever Eddie: >i ask you, >> fegs, has there ever been a decade in film history so dominated by any >> one director(ial team)? Aw, come on, Eddie. You can't assert that the Coens "dominate" this decade of film in any context, except in your own head. Eb (Spielberg in the '80s? Spielberg in the *'90s*?) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 18:07:45 EST From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Re: writing credits In a message dated 98-12-14 15:42:50 EST, you write: << Why they don't just put the name of the group, I don't know. >> I don't know as much about this kind of stuff as I ought to know. Mark G., what's the answer here? My *theory* is that, if you have separate names, then maybe an individual member of the band could lay claim to his/her certain part of that song (say, the keyboard part) and not have to pay royalties were s/he to use that part in a different context. This would kind of make sense, which means it probably isn't the real answer. Someone out there knows. So, what is it? - ------Michael K. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 23:47:07 -0000 From: "Matthew Knights" Subject: Mountainfo Eric mounted : Mountain LPs: Oh Yes ....Oh Yes. Years ago a UK TV current affairs chat show was broadcast every week on a Sunday. The show ran for about 10 years and was called Weekend World. Anyway it's theme tune was the incredibly eponymous track 'Mountain' off the album 'Mountain' by the group 'Mountain'. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:58:28 -0800 From: Joel Mullins Subject: [Fwd: Re: writing credits] Message-ID: <3675C224.6522@swbell.net> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:57:56 -0800 From: Joel Mullins Reply-To: skmull@swbell.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-SBXA (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Re: writing credits References: <177df89e.36759a41@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MARKEEFE@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 98-12-14 15:42:50 EST, you write: > > << Why they don't just put the name of the group, I don't know. >> > > I don't know as much about this kind of stuff as I ought to know. Mark > G., what's the answer here? My *theory* is that, if you have separate names, > then maybe an individual member of the band could lay claim to his/her certain > part of that song (say, the keyboard part) and not have to pay royalties were > s/he to use that part in a different context. This would kind of make sense, > which means it probably isn't the real answer. Someone out there knows. So, > what is it? Well, what if some songs on the album were written by 3 members of the group and other songs were written by all 4 or 5. Or what if they got a new bassist or something on the next album. For example, saying a song was written by the Eagles is not very specific. It's more specific to say a song was written by Glenn Frey and Don Henley or whatever. Saying the Eagles wrote Desperado is kind of misleading. Joe Walsh was an Eagle, but he didn't help in writing that song because he wasn't even in the band at that point. Anyway, those are just some ideas. - --Joel > > ------Michael K. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 18:54:44 -0600 From: Charles Gillett Subject: Re: Mostly Momus Sun, 13 Dec 1998 16:44:55 -0600, amadain wrote: >"Born To Be Adored", while it contains much of the peculiar wit that makes >Momus great, is pretty much a pale shadow. I think it has an unusual charm because, even though there's nothing in the lyrics to indicate it, I don't feel like the character of the song actually believes what he's saying. Sort of like rap boasting--everyone knew LL Cool J wasn't *that* bad, or even that flexible. >Actually I think this one is less of a novelty song than it first appears. Well, it has its novelty side. That "Munsters"-style riff certainly seems goofier than the other tunes on the album. >Obviously this is going to be subjective. But I for one, was really shocked >by it. Bitchiness I expect from Momus, but there's some deeper well of hatred >and resentment here that is fueled by something I don't understand. Hmmm...well, perhaps he's just overly protective of his sister. Perhaps Mr. K-tel's lack of discernible lips is too irritating for him to stand. I hear his sister is actually an actress, though I don't know her name. Mon, 14 Dec 1998 03:08:20 -0600, amadain wrote again: >The former I am very familiar with (17-24, btw :)), but reading through all >the archived lyrics I was unable to find the latter. Was it in one of the >columns or essays? Or are you having me on? It certainly SOUNDS like >something he'd have written. It's one of the brief bonus tracks on _Slender Sherbet_, along with "The Guitar Lesson" ("the pupil is 42/a blackbelt at judo...") and "Closer to You." - -- Charles ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 16:55:10 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: succinctly On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Eb wrote: > I > think Spirit's and Donovan's records have aged horribly and I don't care > for Cake, Stan Ridgway or the Violent Femmes (for basically the same > reason). You think Cake's records have aged horribly? You can't grasp that 1994 sound anymore? This loses me. On Mon, 14 Dec 1998 edoxtato@ssax.com wrote: > >I think Spirit's and Donovan's records have aged horribly > In what regard? The vinyl has deteriorated? Well, I'm with Eb here. I have that Sunshine whatever album from a big box of vinyl I picked up at a garage sale years ago. It's just semifolk drivel to these ears. > >and I don't care for Cake, > I like the first album, with the exception of the "I Will Survive" cover. > I dunno why it was included, other than it seemed to be one of those > obligatory '70's covers. Well, the "I Will Survive" cover is on their second album "Fashion Nugget". Their first album "Motorcade of Generosity" has, if I recall, no covers. All three of their albums have valuable material, I think. And I think their update of "I Will Survive" is valid. They did some fun things with the time signature... they gave it a dinstinctly male point of view... they used the word "fucking" where Gloria Gaynor would have if the times had allowed such a thing to get radio play. They also reinterpreted it... made it their own. It's not a screechy retro disco tune in their hands; it's a Cake song. Strictly musically, Cake has some really interesting things going on. There's something in there for everyone. I mentioned the time signatures. One of the coolest things about Cake, for me, is the way the vocalist sings out of time more often than not. He'll sing in 3/4 to a 4/4 diddy. The trumpet player performs similarly. I don't know... it's just pleasant. > >Stan Ridgway > I find Stan FUN. I think I'd rather listen to Mark Gloster. > Aw, man... the Femmes are fun too. I really love the walking talking > bassline on their first rekkid, too. Yeah, they're all teen-angsty and so > forth... I remember once in college, walking through the dorm TV lounge and seeing the femmes playing Blister In The Sun on 120 Minutes. I said, a bit too loudly, "Ah, the violent femmes: a band whose entire career is one record released in 1984." Some jock guy (who amazingly kept his position on the football team and as a fairly scholarly chem major without EVER leaving the TV lounge) laughed and said "Yeah!" I felt really bad. I didn't mean to bag on the femmes... I LIKE the femmes. I just hope that people will move on to their SECOND (and by all of my measures better) album and over play that for the next fifteen years. And if you haven't seen the femmes live, you should. Feeling sleepy and wondering what the hell was up with that Yahoo! Chat. Je. ________________________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 20:11:16 +0000 (GMT) From: Michael Wolfe Subject: Films The top-ten list I submitted actually does take into consideration Happiness. I saw it, and was blown away on several counts, but it just had such an emptiness for me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those critics that says that the purpose of art is to enrich and uplift or any of that nonsense. It's just that the film is so incredibly devoid of hope; Solondz's protestations to the contrary, the director seems to just be getting a kick out of seeing how messed up the character's lives can get. This is confirmed for me by the presence of some cheap laughs that he reaches for (e.g., the dog licking the mom's face at the end.) That he has convincingly set up his scenarios so that each character is his own worst enemy in his quest for "happiness" does little to grant it much fresh insight. Hell can also be, as Sartre put it, other people. I did not, unfortunately, see Beloved. I blinked, and it was out of theaters already. What the hell was up with that? Quite frustrating, as I think there's a good chance that it would be in the thick of things on the list. I had better get off my ass and go see Babe, Pig in the City, pronto. On a different note, it hadn't caught my attention before, but after seeing the trailer and being told that Tom Stoppard wrote the script, I'm really looking forward to Shakespeare in Love. And now I've learned that Antony Sher (a riot as the chief weasel in Terry Jones's Wind in the Willows) is in it! A Simple Plan was somewhat disappointing, won't kick anything off the list. Stunning and completely naturalistic turns from Thornton and Paxton can't overcome a few horribly stilted pieces of dialogue and a climax that at least partially dodges the issue. The pacing is an issue too. In addition to Storefront Hitchcock (which I am still desperately praying will have a Portland engagement) is anyone else curious about Slipping Down Life, the film that Robyn is supposed to have written songs for Guy Pearce to sing in? Any kind of synopsis or release dates known? Is this supposed to be a true independant, a hollywood independant (ie, what they are calling a medium or small budgeted film these days), or a major release? It'll be interesting to hear Robyn's words coming from someone else's mouth, that for sure. - -Michael Wolfe np: Simon and Garfunkel - Collected Works ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:39:39 +0000 (GMT) From: Michael Wolfe Subject: Polk >satire, but now that i sit down to think about it i can't come up with >any real proof.> > >well, the alternative is that it's a VERY *pro*-imperialism song, >which is pretty unthinkable. dontcha think? They Might Be Giants are lefties, after a fashion at least. They played their very first gig together at a Sandinista rally in Central Park under the moniker "El Grupo De Rock n' Roll." Now I happen to belong to the school of critical thought that throws the artist's original intention right out the window, but the Johns had this to say about the song on their website: This song was written with childhood friend Mr. Matthew Hill. Originally featured as a b-side, its legacy has grown with hardcore TMBG fans, and now has been resurrected in full hi-fi for "Factory Showroom." The lyrics are as factual as we could make them with the reference books handy. James Knox Polk, the 11th President of the U.S., was a dark horse candidate who unexpectedly won the Democratic nomination and the election based on his popularity in the South with his stated goal of annexing Texas, the Southwest, and the Oregon Territories. Once in office he fanned the flames of a dispute between the U.S. and Mexico to achieve part of this aim. (The Mexican War is still commemorated in the expression "Remember the Alamo!") Personally, we find his expansionist policies ruthless and unscrupulous, but the existence of the Western U.S. is largely due to him. The spooky sound halfway into this recording is a "singing saw," an actual metal saw stroked with a bow by Mr. Julian Koster. Personally, I see the song as a sort of parody of the types of songs that are generally written about alleged "great" figures of history (Lincoln being a prime example.) They could have just as easily written a song called Rutherford B. Hayes or Warren G. Harding, but those names don't fit into a good rhythm quite so easily. The core idea is the same, though: "much ado about no-one." When you also consider the juxtaposition between the lyrics that sound as if they were pulled straight of a 50's high school history text (when the pro-america propaganda was even more thinly veiled) and the (fairly, for TMBG anyway) rockin' tune that they are put to, you get the elements of satire. While I think that the lyrics themselves are fairly pro-Polk and sung earnestly, when you put them in the larger context it's not exactly flattering of him. It just happens to be more subtle than outright sarcasm, which is one thing that I appreciate about TMBG. That they don't feel the need to beat you over the head with their subtext (similarly with Robyn, actually. Both give the listeners some credit, and are willing to be oblique.) - -Michael Wolfe ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:40:24 EST From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Fwd: (RH paragraph at the end if you wanna skip to it) In a message dated 98-12-13 17:27:37 EST, you write: << Here's a question- how come Robyn Hitchcock isn't omnipresent? He's been out and about a little, this upcoming chat, a paragraph or so in "Rolling Stone", but nothing spectacular. Why is that? Are there going to be any singles from "Storefront"? Film clips on VH-1? Stuff like that? Why am I getting the feeling this whole "Storefront" thing is actually sort of a debacle? I didn't expect that it was going to break box-office records or bring in legions of new faithful, but I did expect to see a bit more than this, frankly. >> Well, I think we're fully into an age where there's a pretty big divide between "those who get exposure" and "those who should feel lucky just to have a major label deal at all." The former bunch get *tons* of exposure and play on radio, MTV, VH1 and all that while the rest squeak by on word of mouth and print reviews. Robyn's definitely in the latter category. It's not worth Warner Brothers' time or money (same thing) to try to create a whole lot of new Robyn fans, because they'd only ever get a small percentage of whatever audience they'd be marketing to to buy his stuff. The bigger marketing pushes are saved fo those artists from whom the likes of WB might hope to rake in some serious dough off of a mad buying frenzy from 14 to 21 year olds (or thereabouts). Also, I'm sure they'd rather save whatever RobynBucks they have for a proper studio album release, like "Jewels for Sophia," which has a greater likelihood of generating good sales. It's really rare for singles from live albums to do much of anything . . . and this is probably even more true in the CD single era, cuz CD singles don't even sell all that particularly well to begin with (except for Tori Amos and Bjork). This, at any rate, is my half-assed "industry insider" (i.e., I occasionally skim thru Billboard) perspective :-) - ------Michael K. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 17:11:36 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: pac man fever On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Eb wrote: > Eddie: > >i ask you, > >> fegs, has there ever been a decade in film history so dominated by any > >> one director(ial team)? > Aw, come on, Eddie. You can't assert that the Coens "dominate" this decade > of film in any context, except in your own head. Well, while I'm a huge Coen fan and put two of their films in my top five (Hudsucker and Miller's Crossing... and yeah, I still think eddie's missing the point of Barton Fink much like James K. Polk), I'll have to agree that they haven't "dominated" the decade. If I had to say who HAS dominated the film industry, I'd reluctantly say Quinten Tarantino. Certainly he has had more commercial success, spawned more imitators, created more critical bluster, and rerouted the thinking of more studio marketing departments than the Coens. And yeah, the Coens make better films. And yeah, Tarantino is largely a hack (he's done a couple three very cool things, tops). But if I had to pick, that's where I'd go. As far as advancing cinema as a narrative art? Well, I'm sure there are a few out there who would give the Coens a run within this decade as well... from Jarmusch to Sayles to Soderberg, etc. > Eb (Spielberg in the '80s? Spielberg in the *'90s*?) Spielberg? Fucking Spielberg? Spielberg hasn't made a film that inspired more than a single dinner conversation since 1978. He makes big schlocky films that appeal to as wide an audience as possible (insulting everyone else) with the most bland and generic morals available without a prescription. Pff. Spielberg. Stephen "Show 'em everything and spoon feed them that which you simply cannot show" Spielberg. Ick. The Duel and Amblin are possibly two of the dullest films I've ever sat through. I rather enjoyed Jaws the first time... but I was ten. J. ________________________________________________________ J A Brelin Capuchin ________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 01:28:04 GMT From: dwdudic@erols.com (David W. Dudich) Subject: this is the end... Hey ya'll. A reminder- Any Baltimore/DC fegs are invited out to see my band, number nine line, play what may be our final gig ever. After 3 years of being tossed around by the Baltimore 'rawk' scene and generally treated like the Soft Boys (which is to say, ignored in favor of screaming distorted wanna-be rawk star losers on heroin), our singer is stepping down. So, this thursday night at 10:30, we play our last show at the Brass Monkey in Fells Point. We were supposed to be playing with Bayards buddies and all around cool guys Volare, but the bartenders "forgot" to relay our frequent messages to the booking people about them. We were lucky to be playing our own gig! (After Spinal Tap-esque escapades like this, I can see why Robyn left music for a few years.) Come on out! We will go into the studio in Jan. to record "Only the stones" for the Next glass flesh!, and then thats it. The three remaining members of Nonl may go on, if we can find somebody else who can sing reasonably well, is NOT one of the aforementioned "screaming distorted"...etc., will actually sing the lyrics already written in the keys the songs are written in (NOT the Key of "X"- we had a little heroin hippie in the group for a while who, ON the night of a gig, refused to sing the songs we had practiced for months!!), and has a slightly bent view on reality. As I know that R obyn attracts a certain kind of person, if any of you my fellow fegs in the Balt/Wash area would be interested, please lemme know privately. thank you. -luther ObRobyn content: Does he still do 'Serpent at the gates of wisedom?" I always liked that tune... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:35:28 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Re: pac man fever Michael K: >It's really rare for singles >from live albums to do much of anything . . . and this is probably even more >true in the CD single era Well, regardless of singles, didn't the popularity of live albums take a huge irreversible dip when the CD (and its accompanying emphasis on fidelity issues) came to rule the marketplace? Seems like the only high-profile live albums in recent times have been the various MTV Unplugged discs. And there, we're talking about a much more intimate recording environment, with a small controlled audience, extensive television-quality miking, etc. Jeme: >> I think Spirit's and Donovan's records have aged horribly and I don't care >> for Cake, Stan Ridgway or the Violent Femmes (for basically the same >> reason). > >You think Cake's records have aged horribly? You can't grasp that 1994 >sound anymore? This loses me. No no no no...sorry for the confusing syntax. I meant that I don't like Cake, Stan Ridgway and Violent Femmes for the same reason (ie, too much smirk, not enough heart). "The same reason" wasn't referring to Spirit and Donovan. >If I had to say who HAS dominated the film industry, I'd reluctantly say >Quinten Tarantino. Certainly he has had more commercial success, spawned >more imitators, created more critical bluster, and rerouted the thinking >of more studio marketing departments than the Coens. I'd certainly agree with that (well, minus the misspelling). >Spielberg? Fucking Spielberg? Spielberg hasn't made a film that inspired >more than a single dinner conversation since 1978. I'm no major Spielberg fan (then again, I'm no major Tarantino fan either), but you can hardly dismiss "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan" as inspiring no more than "dinner conversation." Those were major impact films, and not just commercially. Culturally. While The Big Lebowski may be a better showcase of screenwriting and filmmaking, it poses no competition whatsoever in this "film-industry domination" context which Eddie introduced. >He makes big schlocky >films that appeal to as wide an audience as possible (insulting everyone >else) with the most bland and generic morals available without a >prescription. Pff. Spielberg. But he's also the dominant force in the film industry. Hell, he even has his hand in Animaniacs, fer chrissake. Eb, trying to remember why this thread is titled "pac man fever" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 20:31:48 PST From: "Capitalism Blows" Subject: Re: Films yes, you probably better had. i was somewhat confident that it would become a word-of-mouth semi-hit, but it looks like maybe that won't happen. especially with Prince Of Egypt opening up, it could very well get lost in the holiday shuffle. the funny thing is, it's just NOT a kids' movie at all. it's dark and horrific; and the dialog, i think, is a little too mature for the kiddies. and maybe that's why it's bombing: the kids don't get it, and the adults aren't aware that they're the ones who should be seeing it. it's a hell of a great movie, though. oh man, the weasels were just ALL OVER IT! from imdb: Status: Completed Last Updated: 02 December 1998 Note: Since this project is categorized as being in production, the data is subject to change or could be removed completely. Evie Decker, a shy young woman, falls in love with pop star Drumstrings Casey after hearing his voice on the radio. Summoning the courage to pursue the singer, Evie starts to break out of her shell... Summary written by Anonymous well, you could always check out the circle jerks' I Wanna Destroy You. but ELIXIR only shipped 21,000 copies. and he can't even keep his catalog in print. we're dealing with a cult artist here, whether we like it or not. i'm surprised he's on a major label at all. top five all time? wow! can't recall us ever having discussed the "point" of Barton Fink. i don't even know that i have an opinion about its point. i just think it's one of the most gut-wrenching (not to mention funny, well-acted/written, photgraphed, musiced, etc.) movies ever made, and it leaves me queasily paralyzed every time i watch it. sayles i can definitely give you. yes. with harmonica. usually quite well-received. i was not aware of this! were you, eb? while i'm not sure i intended it in the manner jeme posited (advancing the art of cinema,) i certainly didn't mean, box-office receipts or industry clout! even i am not *that* delusional. i think i was just getting at, basically, the number of great minutes put on screen. ok, "dominant" was probably the wrong word. by the way, while i have some issues with Schindler's List, it certainly can be argued that it's as fine a "showcase of filmmaking," as has been seen this decade. and eb, you've got interesting things to say about movies. i wish you'd venture into that arena more frequently. if you have to ask, then...FUCK you! KEN "Rugrats" THE KENSTER "i'm not any kind of pie. i'm a pig on a mission." ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Dec 98 23:45:07 -0500 From: The Great Quail Subject: Re: pac man fever Capuchin "If Eddie is Ernie I am Bert" writes, >If I had to say who HAS dominated the film industry, I'd reluctantly say >Quinten Tarantino. Certainly he has had more commercial success, spawned >more imitators, created more critical bluster, and rerouted the thinking >of more studio marketing departments than the Coens. Yes, yes, Whether you hate him or not, QT has got to be the most influential American director of the 1990s. For the same reasons Jeme outlined above. >And yeah, the Coens make better films. At the risk of having a cassette of "Blood Simple" crammed down my fucking throat by a certain fucking Coen fanatic, I don't agree. They Coens are GREAT, but I think many of their films suffer at times from a sense of preciousness as well as a certain unfocused-ness which is meant to be clever or homey; but only comes off as being, in my opinion, contrived. (The cowboy in "Big L" and the shrill reporter in "Hudsucker Proxy" come to mind.) I just am not really *moved* to watch a Coen film multiple times like I do for my favorites -- Kubrik, Scorsese, Coppola, Wenders, Greenaway, (early) Ridley Scott, Lynch, Tarantino. . . . >And yeah, Tarantino is largely a >hack !!!??? -- I love when Capuchin says things like that. He's so cute! >(he's done a couple three very cool things, tops). "Three very cool things?" Um, like "Reservoir Dogs," "Pulp Fiction," and "Jackie Brown," three of the top movies that came out in each year that they were issued? Three movies that are so damn good I won't even bother to defend them, as you either "get it or you don't?" I mean, golly, most "hacks" would give an eyeball or at least a kidney ort two just to have made *one* of those films! Plus QT wrote the screenplays for "Natural Born Killers" and "True Romance?" AND -- I know I am in the minority here - -- but the much maligned and underrated small gem that is "Four Rooms?" This is not the work of a "hack." You may dislike him personally, but really -- this is not the work of a hack. (If I keep saying it over and over again and click my shoes, I can go to a safe place away from such sentiments . . . maybe a place where Bach is wanking on a harpsichord -- D'oh!) >Spielberg? Fucking Spielberg? Spielberg hasn't made a film that inspired >more than a single dinner conversation since 1978. As Eb has already pointed out, that is so patently false I take it you are trolling. >He makes big schlocky >films that appeal to as wide an audience as possible (insulting everyone >else) with the most bland and generic morals available without a >prescription. Pff. Spielberg. Well . . . hmm. I agree that he pours on the schlock far, FAR too much -- and that he should put John Williams out to fucking pasture, ferchrissakes -- but come on. "Schindler's List, "Amistad" and "Saving Private Ryan" are three pretty worthy films, particularly the first and third. And hell, I *liked* "Jurassic Park!" Loads of fun, man. Dinosaurs, Jeme! Didn't you -- didn't you like the dinosaurs? >Stephen "Show 'em everything and spoon feed them that which you simply >cannot show" Spielberg. Ick. Did you watch the same scenes in "Schindler's List" and "Private Ryan" that I did? What do you want, a camera in the frikkin' oven? >The Duel and Amblin are possibly two of the dullest films I've ever sat >through. Never saw them. The only film I ever paid money for and walked out on was "Swing Shift." But I shoulda walked out on "Judge Dredd," but I was too drunk at the time, which explains why I was there, I suppose, or at least hope. >I rather enjoyed Jaws the first time... but I was ten. Insert Eb patented . Come on, that's a great bloody film, man! I only WISH Stevie could remember how to blend such humor, characterization, and thrills again in his monster movies! The Great "gonna need a bigger bee" Quail PS -- Yeah -- why is this thread named that? +---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+ The Great Quail, K.S.C. (riverrun Discordian Society) For fun with postmodern literature, New York vampires, and Fegmania, visit Sarnath: http://www.rpg.net/quail "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents." -- H.P. Lovecraft ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V7 #461 *******************************