From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #8 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, January 9 2004 Volume 13 : Number 008 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: caretaking the legacy [Ken Weingold ] Re: Feelm [Eb ] Re: In an old age pensioner's cake... [fingerpuppets ] RE: Return of the King [Eb ] Re: In an old age pensioner's cake... [Ken Weingold ] RE: Return of the King ["Jonathan Fetter" ] RE: Feelm [Catherine Simpson ] RE: Feelm ["Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" ] Re: Feelm [Capuchin ] Re: Feelm [Capuchin ] do you remember post-rock n' roll radio? ["Natalie Jacobs" ] Frostburg ["Marc Holden" ] Re: Feelm [Jeff Dwarf ] RE: Feelm [Eb ] RE: Frostburg ["Rex.Broome" ] But I've never minded being oppressed by them (some crushing on redheads content) ["Rex.Broome" ] Re: In an old age pensioner's cake... [jlewis@gator.net] Re: Feelm [Christopher Gross ] Re: Feelm [Capuchin ] Re: Feelm [Eb ] Re: Heidi of the bells [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] Re: In an old age pensioner's cake... [Ken Weingold ] best damn giant spider I ever saw etc. ["ross taylor" ] Re: Feelm [Capuchin ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:13:30 -0500 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: caretaking the legacy On Fri, Jan 9, 2004, Eb wrote: > >It's official: 2003, the Year of the Offensive Udders, has ended on > >the Feglist. Welcome to the Year of the Groin. > > Firstly, it started long before 2003. Secondly, it's "Oppressive," > not "Offensive." Huh, then I might as well bring up that this song has been in my head all day: - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:15:42 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Re: Feelm > > "Cheaper by the Dozen," playing in the same complex. >> But am I nuts, or does that new Ashton Kutcher film >> actually sound somewhat interesting? > >Only to see Bonnie Hunt and Steve Martin playing off >one another. Too bad it's in one of the movies Martin >does to, as John Cleese put it, to buy a few >paintings. You seem to have gotten your signals crossed in this reply. I said the Ashton film looked somewhat interesting, not Cheaper by the Dozen. One other brief Return of the King impression: I don't remember how the wealth was distributed in the book, but it seemed somewhat imbalanced that Frodo, Sam and Took all came off as such rich, charismatic, wonderful characters, and then Pippin was just kinda the "oh yeah, the fourth one." Other than sitting between Miranda Otto's legs (tough gig!), he really didn't have much to do in ROTK. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:18:21 -0500 From: fingerpuppets Subject: Re: In an old age pensioner's cake... one time at band camp, jlewis@gator.net (jlewis@gator.net) said: >...I'm not taking the PATH train for just anyone's sake tonight... see you >at Maxwell's, folks. i'll be there for the late show and, if the stars align, which seems rather unlikely, the early show as well. with no competition from rocket from the tombs, i expect a full contingent of brroklyn fegs as well. hup hup! +w ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:18:19 -0800 From: Eb Subject: RE: Return of the King >Don't mean to complain, but can we continue marking emails that >contain spoilers with the word "spoiler" or some appropriate synonym. >I haven't had a chance to go see tRoK yet. Pssst. The ring gets destroyed in the end. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:31:46 -0500 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: In an old age pensioner's cake... On Fri, Jan 9, 2004, fingerpuppets wrote: > one time at band camp, jlewis@gator.net (jlewis@gator.net) said: > > >...I'm not taking the PATH train for just anyone's sake tonight... see you > >at Maxwell's, folks. > > i'll be there for the late show and, if the stars align, which seems > rather unlikely, the early show as well. with no competition from > rocket from the tombs, i expect a full contingent of brroklyn fegs > as well. hup hup! Right on. I'll be there for the late show. No RFTT tonight. And if there were, sorry Robyn.... - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:32:03 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan Fetter" Subject: RE: Return of the King Oh darn... the ring was my favorite character. > Pssst. The ring gets destroyed in the end. > > Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:39:14 -0800 From: Catherine Simpson Subject: RE: Feelm I think the confusion is coming from the fact that Ashton Kutcher also shows up in "Cheaper by the Dozen" as the vapid male-model boyfriend of Piper Perabo (playing Steve & Bonnie's eldest daughter). Or so I've read - don't think I could actually stomach the re-make itself... The OTHER Kutcher movie, though, does look like it has the potential to be interesting, but I'll wait until it hits video, just in case it's not good enough to NOT be spoiled by A.K. Catherine Eb said: >>You seem to have gotten your signals crossed in this reply. I said >>the Ashton film looked somewhat interesting, not Cheaper by the Dozen. - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:44:25 -0800 From: "Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" Subject: RE: Feelm > One other brief Return of the King impression: I don't remember how > the wealth was distributed in the book, but it seemed somewhat > imbalanced that Frodo, Sam and Took all came off as such rich, > charismatic, wonderful characters, and then Pippin was just kinda the > "oh yeah, the fourth one." Other than sitting between Miranda Otto's > legs (tough gig!), he really didn't have much to do in ROTK. I think you mean Merry when you wrote Pippin. Pippin's last name is Took. Anyway, I think Merry definitely got the spotlight. He stabbed the Nazgul in the back and saved Eowyn! But his transition to warrior Hobbit, which is well covered in the book, is given short shrift in the movie. He just sort of ends up fighting by default. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:51:51 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Feelm On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Eb wrote: > One other brief Return of the King impression: I don't remember how the > wealth was distributed in the book, but it seemed somewhat imbalanced > that Frodo, Sam and Took all came off as such rich, charismatic, > wonderful characters, and then Pippin was just kinda the "oh yeah, the > fourth one." Pippin is the Took -- Perregrin Took. But I didn't get any unbalanced impression from the film. Pippin went to Gondor as the "Prince of the Halflings" (which wasn't as explicit in the film, but whatever) and Merry went into battle with the Riders of Rohan. I've got my complaints about Return of the King, but that's not one of them. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:58:30 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Feelm On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Christopher Gross wrote: > I was a little worried during the (deliberately?) treacly false ending, > but after seeing the real ending, I felt he made the right decision. > And of course it was true to the book, which was a plus in my opinion. Huh? True to the book? No scouring of the shire, no tall hobbits, Bilbo and Frodo crossing into the east together, no Sam and Rosie at Bagg End living with Frodo, no Berregorn... (Now, the scene with the laughing on the bed is in the book, but has a completely different tone.) And I've come to understand that my biggest problem with the whole series of films is the failure to adequately describe the ring as the Ring of Power. It is ONLY the power to rule and that power corrupts regardless of who wields it. The main theme of the story is the distinction between power to rule and leadership. Big points to Jackson, however, for really nailing the subtheme of moving from adolescent British schoolboy homosexual relationships to the world of adults with obligations to marry and such (which Sam, the more attached as a boy, handles much better, in the end, than Frodo). J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:06:03 -0800 From: "Natalie Jacobs" Subject: do you remember post-rock n' roll radio? >Glad you liked that record. It's my second favorite Gastr... the Mirror >Repair EP being tops in my book (not a minute too long, and perfectly >sequenced). I almost burned that too, but wasn't sure if I'd like Upgrade & Afterlife, so I let it be. I suppose it's probably out of print now. Oh yeah, I guess I should've told y'all about the radio shows I did over Christmas break... I didn't manage to record them, unfortunately, but I can post a setlist for the first one if anyone's *really* interested. The first show featured a Jay Farrar/Wayne Coyne birthday celebration and the second show was dominated by a set entitled "Jim O'Rourke: Man or Machine?" (I eventually concluded that he was a machine, because I've never seen his belly-button.) Gastr del Sol's "Our Exquisite Replica of 'Eternity'" had some listeners begging for mercy. It was fun. n. np: Sonic Youth, Confusion is Sex (I've been on a big SY kick lately... I guess to get all the singer-songwriter stuff I've been listening to over the last year out of my system.) _________________________________________________________________ Working moms: Find helpful tips here on managing kids, home, work  and yourself. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/workingmom.armx ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:16:14 -0600 From: "Jay Lyall" Subject: Re: Return of the King well, its not so much destroyed as pawned and never claimed - ---------------------------------------- Jay Lyall - Houston, Texas "Those who are willing to lose some of their essential liberties in favour of security deserve neither and will lose both." - Thomas Jefferson http://www.clark04.com - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Fetter" To: "fgz" Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 2:32 PM Subject: RE: Return of the King > Oh darn... the ring was my favorite character. > > > Pssst. The ring gets destroyed in the end. > > > > Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:11:28 -0700 From: "Marc Holden" Subject: Frostburg >Eb, you'll probably find this as amazing as I did: when I saw ROTK, at a theatre in the small-ass college town of Frostburg, >MD (yeah, in my corner of WV you have to cross the state line to see *any* films), there was a total of exactly *one* trailer >(Spider-Man 2) on the front of it. Also no other ads and not even so much as a slideshow running when we entered the >theatre. Everyone else there knew each other and could be heard, I kid you not, swapping hunting stories until the film >rolled. Differ'nt world. Is that still a little single screen theatre? I spent a summer in Frostburg back when I was in high school. I took a course on invertebrate zoology, and spent far too much time half out of my mind. There wasn't much to do at night, so we'd get wobbly and go to the planetarium or movies (I remember seeing Escape from Alcatraz). I'm surprised I remember much of anything from that time, but quite a bit comes back to me. Nothing that I regret too much now, but would rather have avoided at the time. Later, Marc Helpful hint--grape juice and vodka don't go together too well. Helpful hint 2--If you throw up out a dormitory window, make sure there is no screen in place. (sorry about hint 2) To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no music, no choreography and the dancers hit each other. Jack Handey ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 13:15:34 -0800 (PST) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Feelm Eb wrote: >>> "Cheaper by the Dozen," playing in the same >>> complex. But am I nuts, or does that new Ashton >>> Kutcher film actually sound somewhat interesting? > > > >Only to see Bonnie Hunt and Steve Martin playing > >off one another. Too bad it's in one of the movies > >Martin does to, as John Cleese put it, to buy a few > >paintings. > > You seem to have gotten your signals crossed in this > reply. I said the Ashton film looked somewhat > interesting, not Cheaper by the Dozen. I didn't know he had another new film besides CBTD.... ===== "Life is just a series of dogs." -- George Carlin __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 13:15:34 -0800 From: Eb Subject: RE: Feelm > > One other brief Return of the King impression: I don't remember how >> the wealth was distributed in the book, but it seemed somewhat >> imbalanced that Frodo, Sam and Took all came off as such rich, >> charismatic, wonderful characters, and then Pippin was just kinda the >> "oh yeah, the fourth one." Other than sitting between Miranda Otto's >> legs (tough gig!), he really didn't have much to do in ROTK. > >I think you mean Merry when you wrote Pippin. Pippin's last name is >Took. Yeah, OK...when I wrote the post, I was wondering if I had the names wrong. Right, so "Merry" was shortchanged then. "Took" (Billy Boyd, I think?) has a wonderfully expressive face. I think these films will help his career a bunch. Can't say the same for Samwise and Merry, and Elijah Wood is such a "type" that he's already gone about as far as he can go. Aging will not be good for him. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 13:26:50 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: RE: Frostburg Marc: >>Is that still a little single screen theatre? I spent a summer in Frostburg >>back when I was in high school. I took a course on invertebrate zoology, >>and spent far too much time half out of my mind. There wasn't much to do >>at night, so we'd get wobbly and go to the planetarium or movies (I >>remember seeing Escape from Alcatraz). I'm surprised I remember much >>of anything from that time, but quite a bit comes back to me. Nothing that >>I regret too much now, but would rather have avoided at the time. Two screens now, but that dates back to when I was a kid-- it was already duplexed when I saw Superman: The Movie there. Hasn't changed a *bit* since then. Wow, weird. Yeah, then as now we had to go to either Frostburg or Cumberland (and hour and forty-five minutes drive away, respectively) to see films. Frostburg State did boast the only college radio station whose signal I could occasionally get, so I owe the institution a certain amount of gratitude for where I am now (namely, on this list). I remember the planetarium, too... that was an exotic field trip destination in those days. Cool! - -Rex, probably further earning the disdain of Miles by confessing to all this time spent across the Potomac... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 13:41:11 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: But I've never minded being oppressed by them (some crushing on redheads content) Gene: >>I think the ones to watch from That 70s Show are Topher Grace (he nailed >>it in Traffic) and of course it couldn't hurt to have Laura Prepon gracing >>the big screen a lot. I'd kinda like to see her sheepishly take her persona back to Alicia Witt and say, "Sorry, I was just borrowing it." Well, okay, she's not bad or anything, but I just really like Alicia Witt. (Sidenote for Miles, that's about as young as I can go without creeping myself out; she's not that young, really, but I still remember her as Alia in the David Lynch version of Dune, which would be creepy even if she hadn't been so young.) Vis a vis LOTR, I don't see much value in comparing the films against each other... they're like episodes in a miniseries, all of one piece, and that's pretty much how I'll view them in the future. When the first one was started, they knew how it ended. Nobody decided halfway through that what would make things really great would be introducing comical teddy bears to go kick Sauron's ass or anything. The probable Oscar will effectively be for the trilogy as a whole, despite the fact that the title of ROTK will be on the statue... anybody disagree on that front? Gnat the gnitter: >>What?? What about Lucinda Williams?? She's going to be devastated... >>she'll write a whole album about your defection... Well... she only loved me for those three days... Actually, I let Scott have Neko. So it's still Lucinda for me. Unless she needs the material for that album... I can pretend to leave her for Neko... but Neko has all those Boyfriends already... >>I mean, a song called "Drunken Angel"? Puh-leeze. She's a good >>enough songwriter so it never gets banal, but I almost feel like I don't >>really need to listen to this. Love... that... song. Sorry. I dunno, with her, it's all in the details. And the voice. Rrrrrowrrr... the voice. If it matters, though, as highly rated as that record is, lotsa folks will cite it as being too commercial and not raw enough, and thus a kind of career low point; you might still get something out of her two subsequent records. I like Car Wheels just fine myself, but I see that viewpoint... it's a really craftspersonlike album, but I don't mind those occasionally, when they hang together and have enough heart to still connect. You did sell me on Iron & Wine, though. >>Sonic Youth  Confusion is Sex >>An early SY record. Kinda thought this would be more "rocking" than it >>turned out to be Me too, when I first heard it waayyy back when. Interesting how that rep has maintained itself throughout the years. Wonder why? Eb: >>Firstly, it started long before 2003. Secondly, it's "Oppressive," >>not "Offensive." Shit. So it is. Or was. Now it's the Celebrated Groin! - -Rex, about to get the wife and kids back ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:39:54 -0600 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: Re: Feelm On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:58:30 -0800 (PST), "Capuchin" said: > Big points to Jackson, however, for really nailing the subtheme of moving > from adolescent British schoolboy homosexual relationships to the world > of > adults with obligations to marry and such (which Sam, the more attached > as > a boy, handles much better, in the end, than Frodo). Quibble: surely you mean "homosocial" not "homosexual"? I didn't read any *erotic* tension between the two characters - but clearly, their love and attachment is very strong. Now, if you're talking about the captain and the doctor in Master & Commander, that's another story... - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: Solipsism is its own reward :: :: --Crow T. Robot ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:26:02 -0500 (EST) From: jlewis@gator.net Subject: Re: In an old age pensioner's cake... Said Ken: > > Right on. I'll be there for the late show. No RFTT tonight. And if > there were, sorry Robyn.... > > I'll be at both sets. The set lists last time made me regret not going to both. Jon Lewis ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 17:32:35 -0500 (EST) From: Christopher Gross Subject: Re: Feelm On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Capuchin wrote: > > I was a little worried during the (deliberately?) treacly false ending, > > but after seeing the real ending, I felt he made the right decision. > > And of course it was true to the book, which was a plus in my opinion. > > Huh? True to the book? No scouring of the shire, no tall hobbits, Bilbo > and Frodo crossing into the east together, no Sam and Rosie at Bagg End > living with Frodo, no Berregorn... Well, sure, it wasn't true to every detail of the book. A lot was left out. But among the elements that were included, the general plot -- the four hobbits are honored as heroes and return to the Shire; they have been changed and have trouble fitting in; Sam, Pippin and Merry eventually become solid citizens, but Frodo realizes he can't stay and takes the last ship West -- is the same as in the book, whereas a simple happy ending right after the fall of Sauron would NOT have been. (And I think a lot of those missing elements, especially the Scouring of the Shire, *had* to be left out for reasons of length if nothing else. The whole movie, much as I liked it, could have been tightened up by half an hour or so.) - --Chris ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:37:27 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Feelm On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Fortissimo wrote: > On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:58:30 -0800 (PST), "Capuchin" > said: > > Big points to Jackson, however, for really nailing the subtheme of > > moving from adolescent British schoolboy homosexual relationships to > > the world of adults with obligations to marry and such (which Sam, the > > more attached as a boy, handles much better, in the end, than Frodo). > > Quibble: surely you mean "homosocial" not "homosexual"? I didn't read > any *erotic* tension between the two characters - but clearly, their > love and attachment is very strong. Not erotic so much as romantic. There is a tenderness and affection that goes beyond mere social attachment. There are times when it seems they're about to kiss. Those moments are heavy in the book as well. It's not sexual in the way that adolescent romance isn't really sexual, but definitely romantic affection. > Now, if you're talking about the captain and the doctor in Master & > Commander, that's another story... I didn't get that at all... just solid commeraderie and friendship. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:49:59 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Re: Feelm >the Scouring of the Shire I don't remember anymore. What did "the scouring of the Shire" entail? Eb ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 11:57:06 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Re: Heidi of the bells Rex, then me, then Rex: >>>>>"Carol of the Bells", "Patapan", "Lullay My Liking", "Bye Bye >>>>>Thou Little Tiny Child"... hey, that's kind of a lot. And that weird >>>>>Britten stuff, who knows what kind of key those are in. > >>>hm. never heard of any of them. > >I'd lay odds that, even if it's not as oft-played in NZ as here (or >presumably in the UK), you've probably heard Carol of the Bells at some >point. I found a mp3 of it on the web and listened. Nope, I've never heard it before, either here or when I was in the UK. - --- > *** My compulsive communing with the Goddess: I commune with her on the >celestial plane at least five times a week. I wonder who cleans up afterwards. James James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 18:00:10 -0500 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: In an old age pensioner's cake... On Fri, Jan 9, 2004, jlewis@gator.net wrote: > > I'll be at both sets. The set lists last time made me regret not going to > both. That's a wise choice since I was at both sets last time, but I'll never make the early show. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 18:14:23 -0500 From: "ross taylor" Subject: best damn giant spider I ever saw etc. Th' Retuna da King (thankya, thankya vurra much)-- I would agree w/ "impressive," particularly visually, but didn't find it terribly moving. Exciting, yes, really more so than the last installment. I think my favorite part is still the first, w/ this a close second. IMO the two most exciting parts were the 1st encounter w/ the Orcs in Part 1, & the - -- spoilers -- spider fight in part 3. I know, like everything else in those books, she had a name & I think she should have a spin-off series. She shouldn't be particularly sympathetic, most of the plot should revolve around her potential prey, who could be sympathetic or deserving of their fate. Robyn could do the theme song, but it should be a lot darker than "She Was Sinister But She Was Happy." Definitely worth while for all the sometimes sublime spectacle, but it alls seems so damn Jungian and, well, I'm more & more a humanist as I get older. Also it wants to focus so much on the bravery in battle thing, "No matter what comes through that door, remember that you are fighters of Rohan and you will etc." and I think *that* more than anything needs more grounding in everyday life, even if it's not *our* everyday life -- like the villagers in "Seven Samurai." In the 1st ring movie you had some of that, because the Shire was still a recent memory, but by the end of the 3rd you are so far off through magical mystery that focusing a lot on real human response to danger seems like a side track. That said, I'm surprised how effective as action and symbol the business of the journey over the mountain, the spider, & Mt. Doom was. The image of the big eye going down was powerful, not just in an adventure way, & I still think Gollum may be the best charactor. My daughter voiced the thing about multiple endings before I did. Our favorite idea was the four hobbits clanking their mugs together & that becoming a freeze-frame w/ the credits scrolling over it, like an episode of Cheers or something. Also, as a "layman" I feel subtly weird about the animation/effects. It's something I also felt about Toy Story & Monsters Inc. When I'm watching computer animation I believe the hell out of it, but when I think back on it later I remember it as somehow less convincing, a sort of "what did I see?" feeling. On the other hand, if I'm watching the Simpsons, I may get hung up on how simple some drawing is, but that vanishes in memory & I just enjoy remembering the witty details. I feel this most strongly about the Rings movies, probably because of effects being blended w/ live action. W/ Monsters Inc. I mostly just remember it as a traditional cartoon, but feel the difference when I see it again. I'm being vague, but this has got something to do w/ how these live in memory, which I think is an important part of a work of art. - --- The Chocolate Waistband -- I really got turned on to them by seeing them do "I Don't Want Your Loving" in the film Riot on Sunset Strip. Cheesy 1967 sorta un-hip youth exploitation film, w/ lots of stiff actors in long- hair wigs pretending to be groovy, and the Chocolate Watchband does a quick song where they twitch, fuck up, & generally drop a steaming load of chaos in the middle of the set. It's as though someone cut & pasted a chunk of reality into the middle of the film. THey make the Standells look normal. Ross Taylor Need a new email address that people can remember Check out the new EudoraMail at http://www.eudoramail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:15:11 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Feelm On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Eb wrote: > I don't remember anymore. What did "the scouring of the Shire" entail? When the hobbits get back to the Shire, it's been overrun by evil men (notably the bad guy from Bree whose name I can't recall at the moment) and the hobbits have been mostly enslaved. If you watched the extended DVD of The Two Towers, you'll see where Merry and Pippin find South Farthing pipe weed and food in Isengaard's stores, thus showing that Saruman's influence has spread there. You'll also recall in The Fellowship of the Ring where Frodo looks into Galadriel's mirror and sees Hobbiton burning and hobbits in chains. That wasn't just some bogus possible-future, but what really happens. The extended Two Towers film also shows Merry and Pippin drinking the Ent drafts and growing in height. And this new height is part of what allows these hobbits to be viewed as heroes when they return. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:21:03 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Feelm On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Christopher Gross wrote: > On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Capuchin wrote: [quoting Chris] > > > I was a little worried during the (deliberately?) treacly false > > > ending, but after seeing the real ending, I felt he made the right > > > decision. And of course it was true to the book, which was a plus in > > > my opinion. > > > > Huh? True to the book? No scouring of the shire, no tall hobbits, > > Bilbo and Frodo crossing into the east together, no Sam and Rosie at > > Bagg End living with Frodo, no Berregorn... > > Well, sure, it wasn't true to every detail of the book. A lot was left > out. But among the elements that were included, the general plot [snip] > is the same as in the book, whereas a simple happy ending right after > the fall of Sauron would NOT have been. Well, sure, but was there EVER any threat that the basic plot was going to be fucked with at all? I only recall three serious changes to the story (besides omissions) and they could all be considered minor to many (namely, the expansion of Arwen's character, Gandalf appearing to Merry and Pippin in the forest, and Aragorn falling off the cliff). The story wasn't muddled so much as it was butchered by omission. > (And I think a lot of those missing elements, especially the Scouring of > the Shire, *had* to be left out for reasons of length if nothing else. > The whole movie, much as I liked it, could have been tightened up by > half an hour or so.) Well, that's because they tried to stuff six books into three longish movies. Six two hour movies instead of three three hour movies would have been more appropriate... though an unprecedented thing for Hollywood. (One might argue that doing the appropriate thing is unprecedented for Hollywood, period.) J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #8 ******************************