From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #192 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, July 2 2004 Volume 13 : Number 192 Today's Subjects: ----------------- yet another poorly formatted post re. tinfoil and boobs ["Natalie Jane" <] congrats! [Jill Brand ] Re: Too Faust For You (AKA Amon Duul II You What You Did II Me) [steve ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #191 [James Dignan ] ookpik! (or maybe morepork?) [James Dignan ] Re: Health care costs going up? [Barbara Soutar ] Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? ["The Mammal Brain" ] Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? [] Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? [] Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? [Capuchin ] Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? ["Eb" ] Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? [Capuchin ] Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? [Capuchin ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 18:56:09 -0700 From: "Natalie Jane" Subject: yet another poorly formatted post re. tinfoil and boobs >recently: the visual equivalent > >of Tinfoil Thoths, original visual art by fegs... who else >does this > >kind of thing? Tinfoil Thoths ARE visual art by fegs... this feg, anyway. >Please welcome into the world Julian Earl Huddell, 7 lbs 9 oz, non-smoker, >likes breasts. I'm glad he likes breasts and not bottles. Congratulations! n. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 22:07:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Jill Brand Subject: congrats! Hey Brian, congrats on baby Julian. May he bring you lots of happiness and great surprises. Jill ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:37:56 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: Too Faust For You (AKA Amon Duul II You What You Did II Me) >> p.s. I haven't even got onto the French acts yet. Magma, Richard >> Pinhas.... On Jul 1, 2004, at 5:39 PM, Rex Broome wrote: > Umm, this is French Krautrock we're talking about? French...? > Kraut...? Rock...? Well, having witnessed the big retro-renaissance in > Brazilian Psychedelia a few years back, I guess I'll just nod here and > pretend I understand. I only have a couple of Pinhas albums, but he's put out a ton, under his own name and with his band Heldon. He's sometimes called Fripp-like, but that probably shouldn't be taken any more seriously than the assertion that Amon Duul II is the "German Jefferson Airplane". Magma is the brainchild of Christian Vander, who developed his own language for the band's vocals. My old roomie was way into Magma back in the day. Hard to describe, weird high-concept fusion, maybe, highly structured and percussion heavy (as Vander is a drummer), and epic. You can find Magma and lots of other neat stuff at Wayside Music. And probably reviews of a lot of it here. - - Steve __________ "When we were getting ready to announce for the 1992 campaign, the Bush people said to us, 'Don't run this time -- wait four years and you'll have a free pass. If you do run, we'll destroy you.' And I said to Bill, 'What are they talking about -- how could they do that?' And now we're finding out." - Hillary Clinton to David Talbot, March 1998 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 21:45:20 -0500 From: "Michael Wells" Subject: Re: brand new human, potential feg > Please welcome into the world Julian Earl Huddell, 7 lbs 9 oz, non-smoker, > likes breasts. Congrats, Brian! May Julian bring you joy, happiness and colic-free nights. It's sometimes hard to remember when they're little and keeping you up all night that they eventually turn into nifty little people. Hang in there. To borrow an excellent phrase, your world just got much bigger and so much smaller than it ever used to be...eh, Rex? :) Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 00:21:43 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: Re: Too Faust For You (AKA Amon Duul II You What You Did II Me) On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 15:39:34 -0700, "Rex Broome" said: > Dr. John: > >>I'd also add to > >the list early Guru Guru (psychedelic guitar-bass-drum jamming) and > >Grobschnitt (similar, but then they went all prog). For the later era of > >classic Krautrock, Michael Rother's solo albums (he was the guitarist in > >Neu!) are often wonderful, as is the work of La Dusseldorf. Dr. John? The Night Tripper? You're on this list? And also into Robyn Hitchcock - and Krautrock - and that New Orleans gumbo stuff that scored you a few hits in the early '70s? Wow - diverse cat. Can you score me one of those ostrich feathers? - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: crumple zones:: :: harmful or fatal if swallowed :: :: small-craft warning :: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 00:28:19 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 18:48:35 -0700 (PDT), "Capuchin" said: [eb] > > Personally, I'm more likely to give cred to a Spielberg fan than to > > anyone who would have "high hopes" for an X-Men movie. > > Well, I LIKE action movies. But I think they need a decent storyline and > good character development. X-Men has a long history of character > development on which the filmmaker could draw and it's really just a > juvenile action series, so I had some high hopes. Otherwise the action is just sheer kinetics or adrenalin - if there are characters and story, we might actually care about the action, and the kinetics and adrenalin *add to* that emotional base, making them more powerful. Just the FX appeals to a 13-year-old (because they're new) but once you've seen them, they're a big so-what unless they're connected to something. I think the X-Men series on film has so far been pretty successful, first one a little more than the second. However, I once saw part of a TV version of the first X-men that unaccountably decided that the way to edit the story to fit the timeslot was completely vaporize the relationships among (uh-oh...gonna lose geek points by not knowing names) the guy with the laser eyes, his putative girlfriend type, and Wolverine. It was *very* weird - because they had to leave some of those scenes in, but it was as if suddenly W. and Laserguy were hostile towards one another, but for no reason at all. I sure hope that version was edited by some drunken third-shift local-channel intern - cuz if anyone at the studio authorized it, yeesh! In other words, the X-Men works when it does because of the characters & their interrelationships (i.e., what drives a story). Seems reasonable to me...even though I wasn't a fan of the comics beforehand (obviously) and haven't been inspired to check them out afterwards (likewise). - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: Miracles are like meatballs, because nobody can exactly agree :: what they are made of, where they come from, or how often :: they should appear. :: --Lemony Snicket ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 18:58:59 +1200 From: James Dignan Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #191 >From: "Brian Huddell" >Subject: brand new human, potential feg > >Please welcome into the world Julian Earl Huddell, 7 lbs 9 oz, non-smoker, >likes breasts. congrats! May you have joy and happiness and some sleep occasionally! 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, 2 Jul 2004 19:01:53 +1200 From: James Dignan Subject: ookpik! (or maybe morepork?) >Gene: > >Weird. I can swear there are owls in my backyard right now. > >Rex: > >You'd better double-check... the owls are not what they seem. > > Maybe the owls are looking for "A clean place, reasonably priced" whatever - as long as I can have some coffee and a slice of that damn fine cherry pie. 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, 02 Jul 2004 00:16:24 -0400 From: Barbara Soutar Subject: Re: Health care costs going up? Ok Stewart, now I feel like an idiot. How could I have thought health costs were so high in Ontario? That $600. a year is enough though, quite a sudden jump from zero! Are you serious that people are beating a path to your door for windfarm design? I wish it was true. But people in Burlington are not the most enlightened, I know that because I'm a product of that city. Sounds like you had a very Canadian day. Today is our 30th anniversary as a couple. Wow, our city had fireworks and everything - oh yeah, it was Canada Day too. My husband Ian had arrived back from New Zealand on July 1st of 1974, and we'd been corresponding by mail after knowing each other casually in high school. It was my day off from my summer job working at the circular saw factory. I believe it was this job that lead to my eventual brain tumour, removed in year 2000. I had to work with a vat of melted plastic, coating the sharp edges of the saws before shipping them out. I have my suspicions about breathing in the fumes of that chemical all summer. And back we come to the health care issue. Who could complain about free brain surgery? Barbara Soutar Victoria, BC ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 00:09:01 -0700 (PDT) From: "The Mammal Brain" Subject: Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? i'll nominate terry gilliam, jean-pierre jeunet, and the coen brothers. sam raimi and peter jackson can shove it up their collective arses, as far as i'm concerned. the first Spiderman is probably the worst big-budget movie i've ever seen - -- yes, even worse than Attack Of The Clones and Jurassic Park. (admittedly, i'm not an expert of the genre. like, i don't think i've ever seen a michael bay movie.) i know the second one has been getting great reviews, but, it seems highly improbably to me. A Simple Plan was unwatchable as well. haven't seen Return Of The King, but the shittiness of the first two in the series (especially the wretched Two Towers) leaves me in little doubt that the third is highly overrated. i wasn't smart enough. but the browser was... would you say, then, that the effects are a very big improvement over the first movie? because, the visual effects in the first one were fucking laughable. not that i know anything about the technical side of it -- i just know what my eyes tell me. . haven't been to Enchanted Forest since...'83? but back then, it kicked ass. are you saying that you think CGI is somehow superior to "classical" special effects? it's certainly not convincing to the eye. that makes it far less "magical", in my opinion. unless you mean by "magic" that it can be done more cheaply, and people will still eat it up, even though it's obviously fake-looking. KEN "Entering Controlled-Access Highway" THE KENSTER ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 00:20:54 -0700 From: Subject: Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? Jeme: > > >Also, I couldn't tell you the last time I saw a television commercial... > > >let alone a broadcast television show. > > > > Lordy. > > In all seriousness, what's that supposed to mean? Is it just surprise? > Is it disappointment? Is it empathetic regret? Pride? Glee? Anger? Just creeped out at how far up your own bunghole you live, I suppose. ;) If the shows for which you made exceptions weren't things like Futurama, Family Guy and Star Trek, this might pass for highbrow isolationism, but such as it is.... > On closer inspection of the picture, I see that he might be heavily > wrinkled with really flappy skin. > > Is it a digital animation? I guess it's a big trade secret but, personally, I can't imagine he can be anything but a young guy wearing old-guy makeup. Poor guy is a superstar, yet can't tell anyone. > I've been thinking about that "good annoying/bad annoying" thing since you > mentioned it. I can't remember: Has this list yet discussed those Pepto Bismol ads, where the office workers chant about their diarrhea while clutching their asses? Now there we have a case of BAD-annoying -- perhaps the single most tasteless commercial I've seen in my life. Simply astonishing. > Well, I LIKE action movies. But I think they need a decent storyline and > good character development. X-Men has a long history of character > development on which the filmmaker could draw and it's really just a > juvenile action series, so I had some high hopes. > > So are you writing that it's more reasonable to enjoy the pandering of LCD > pap than to simply want to enjoy an action movie with good character > development? You're not arguing fairly here, because you're broadening the issue to "action movies" in general, rather than "action movies FEATURING SUPERHEROS." I'm not a big Spielberg fan, but it's just sour grapes to dismiss him so roundly. "Jaws" is a flat-out masterpiece, even if it did ruin the movie industry forever. Also, the first half-hour of "Saving Private Ryan" is one of the most stunning feats of razzle-dazzle direction I've ever seen. I also admire how he has bucked expectations to follow his own path in recent years, more or less. He downplayed the sci-fi/fantasy mantle to make big message films -- and now, he's seemingly enjoying making solid, small-scale films like "Catch Me If You Can" and "The Terminal" which are purely story-driven. Good for him. It kinda reminds me of how U2 similarly managed to weather incredible superstardom and the subsequent backlash, and reinvent themselves to eventually come out ahead. Now, you want to hear two big-name, established directors who *really* can't direct? Oliver Stone and Alan Parker. Phew. Just my own opinion, of course. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 00:26:08 -0700 From: Subject: Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? Kenny Tews: > i'll nominate terry gilliam, jean-pierre jeunet, and the coen brothers. I'm not so sure about Gilliam -- I think he's actually an example of a guy who directs special effects much better than he directs characters. And when in the hell did the Coen brothers ever make a "special effects" film?? Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 01:40:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 elbroome@earthlink.net wrote: > > In all seriousness, what's that supposed to mean? Is it just > > surprise? Is it disappointment? Is it empathetic regret? Pride? > > Glee? Anger? > > Just creeped out at how far up your own bunghole you live, I suppose. ;) > If the shows for which you made exceptions weren't things like Futurama, > Family Guy and Star Trek, this might pass for highbrow isolationism, but > such as it is.... I think you have no idea what I've been watching or how much. I watched Futurama when it aired and downloaded the few episodes that I missed. I did download some Family Guy and watch that... mostly on eddie's recommendation from way back when. I downloaded the first three or so episodes of Star Trek: Enterprise, just to see what it was about. So, in that those things did happen, you're right. But they're the exceptions in the larger set. But in terms of actually following a series with interest, I mostly download the cable series that are so good these days. In particular, The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, and Dead Like Me. I have no interest in Buffy, Firefly or other such claptrap. In fact, except for the above few episodes, I don't think I've downloaded any broadcast series. It's pretty much all cable series and feature films. > > On closer inspection of the picture, I see that he might be heavily > > wrinkled with really flappy skin. > > > > Is it a digital animation? > > I guess it's a big trade secret but, personally, I can't imagine he can > be anything but a young guy wearing old-guy makeup. Poor guy is a > superstar, yet can't tell anyone. Does it look like makeup? > I can't remember: Has this list yet discussed those Pepto Bismol ads, > where the office workers chant about their diarrhea while clutching > their asses? The list certainly has not. This is the first I'm reading of it. > You're not arguing fairly here, because you're broadening the issue to > "action movies" in general, rather than "action movies FEATURING > SUPERHEROS." All action movies feature superheroes. Nobody, in real life, can or would do the things that are done in action movies. They're pretty much all magically enhanced with some combination of luck, grace, good looks, and lots of money and gadgets. > I'm not a big Spielberg fan, but it's just sour grapes to dismiss him so > roundly. "Jaws" is a flat-out masterpiece, even if it did ruin the movie > industry forever. There are some positive things in Jaws, but the actors all seem to be in different movies. I'd be surprised to learn that Spielberg talked to them at all. The editting and cinematography are the real shining points in that movie. > Also, the first half-hour of "Saving Private Ryan" is one of the most > stunning feats of razzle-dazzle direction I've ever seen. Not if you include the first four minutes! That's exactly the problem with Spielberg. He has no subtlty (now THAT is a strange looking word), no grace and, as a result, no charm. If he'd made a 75-90 minute film (and those DO play mainstream theaters these days) that was just an extension of the invasion at Normandy, he could have made all the same points about war and sacrifice without any of the other pukey sentimentality. When you're drawing on recent history, you don't need characters to invest the viewer in the story. We care because we know why the people are there and roughly who they are and what they want and their intentions and all that. It's powerful on its own. The man just can't leave well-enough alone. I think the same could be said for Titanic, by the way. If that movie just had the ending with the boat sinking and the people scrambling and tried to capture the tragedy and loss and scale of the devastation instead of following two dumb kids in their Nancy Drew Mystery, it would have been much more interesting. Really, these kinds of epic historical events on film suffer from too much personal storyline. You follow the few instead of the many. You lose the notion that every single person in the frame is going through the same kind of tragedy as the "star" (who usually has some inconsequential little added problem so that they're in a worse position than everybody else -- trivializing the suffering of the many). > I also admire how he has bucked expectations to follow his own path in > recent years, more or less. He downplayed the sci-fi/fantasy mantle to > make big message films -- and now, he's seemingly enjoying making solid, > small-scale films like "Catch Me If You Can" and "The Terminal" which > are purely story-driven. I think you call that "resting on your laurels". They're hardly gems. They're just shiny rocks. They are barely competent examples of the bare minimum. > Now, you want to hear two big-name, established directors who *really* > can't direct? Oliver Stone and Alan Parker. Phew. Just my own opinion, > of course. I'll happily give you both of those. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 01:49:23 -0700 From: "Eb" Subject: Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? Jeme: > But in terms of actually following a series with interest, I mostly > download the cable series that are so good these days. Why are you insistent on *downloading* everything you watch? Are you really so unable to tear yourself away from the computer monitor? > > I guess it's a big trade secret but, personally, I can't imagine he can > > be anything but a young guy wearing old-guy makeup. Poor guy is a > > superstar, yet can't tell anyone. > > Does it look like makeup? Does to me.... > > I can't remember: Has this list yet discussed those Pepto Bismol ads, > > where the office workers chant about their diarrhea while clutching > > their asses? > > The list certainly has not. This is the first I'm reading of it. Oh man. That ad really is a marvel. I can't remember the exact chant...something like "somethingsomething, achy head, indigestion, diarrhea".... > All action movies feature superheroes. Nobody, in real life, can or would > do the things that are done in action movies. They're pretty much all > magically enhanced with some combination of luck, grace, good looks, and > lots of money and gadgets. What garbage reasoning that was. Were you serious? > He has no subtlty (now THAT is a strange looking word), Not if you spell it right. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 02:03:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, The Mammal Brain wrote: > special effects. In all honesty, I'd say there's Peter Jackson and Sam > Raimi and that's about it.> > > i'll nominate terry gilliam, jean-pierre jeunet, and the coen brothers. I think Terry Gilliam makes really great movies. He's got a good eye and his sensibilities are just right. But his actors always come out more cartoonish than seems necessary. Mostly, I think we just both find the same things interesting and that's enough. Jeunet's special effects stand out as separate from the continuum of the storyline. I find them jarring. I'm particularly thinking of Amelie and Delicatessen. I like both of those movies. The Coens are in the same boat. > the first Spiderman is probably the worst big-budget movie i've ever > seen -- yes, even worse than Attack Of The Clones and Jurassic Park. > (admittedly, i'm not an expert of the genre. like, i don't think i've > ever seen a michael bay movie.) i know the second one has been getting > great reviews, but, it seems highly improbably to me. A Simple Plan was > unwatchable as well. I didn't LIKE A Simple Plan, but mostly that was because I don't like movies where you're just watching terrible things happen to people. You know the whole time that things are just going to go badly and you're stuck there watching it unfold. But I thought it was a good movie. I mean to say, it was paced just right for a movie of that sort. Oh, I also hate hate hate Billy Bob Thornton. > haven't seen Return Of The King, but the shittiness of the first two in > the series (especially the wretched Two Towers) leaves me in little > doubt that the third is highly overrated. Have you seen Heavenly Creatures? How about The Frighteners? I get the impression that Jackson himself doesn't care much for the latter, but I think he nailed it. It's another of that "new kind of movie". > safe to assume that (most) people are smart enough to figure out it's > two "t"s instead of three. At least one hopes so...> > > i wasn't smart enough. but the browser was... Well, my browser told me it was wrong, but didn't fix it. > would you say, then, that the effects are a very big improvement over > the first movie? because, the visual effects in the first one were > fucking laughable. not that i know anything about the technical side of > it -- i just know what my eyes tell me. I wouldn't say "laughable", but they didn't look REAL all the time. But hell, how much did you enjoy Clash of the Titans when you were a kid? It doesn't have to look real to be part of the story. > nothing you'd call a "theme park" in the Pacific Northwest.> > > . haven't been to Enchanted Forest > since...'83? but back then, it kicked ass. The Enchanged Forest was exactly what I was thinking about when I wrote about the "crappy mom & pop places". I think I went there some time in the early 90s. I was still afraid of the Rabbit Hole from a time when I entered and lost my pacifier as an infant. > had a more "classical" special effects style...but Spiderman has people > AND magic working together.> > > are you saying that you think CGI is somehow superior to "classical" > special effects? I didn't mean to imply that at all. When I used the term "classical", I meant that to describe a style of direction rather than a method of producing effects. The effects shots in what I was calling "classical" style are distinct from the non-effects shots in a way that I can't describe. It's almost like you can tell that an effect is about to happen even before it comes on screen because the way everything is framed and the way people move and act changes. It's kind of like in those old cartoons where you know which drawer Bugs is going to open because it's a slightly different color... or how you can tell that a television show is a daytime soap, even if it's on tape and nobody's had a chance to say or do anything stupid but because of the way it's lit and blocked, you know it's a soap. The kind of director I mean lets the effects shots and the non-effects shots blend in a way that allows the effect, no matter how realistic or phony it looks, to take its place as a legitimate part of the entire piece. I can't describe it any better than that right now. > it's certainly not convincing to the eye. that makes it far less > "magical", in my opinion. unless you mean by "magic" that it can be > done more cheaply, and people will still eat it up, even though it's > obviously fake-looking. Uh, no. I used the term "magic" to apply to effects generally. But I will write this: Viv and I were discussing the new Harry Potter movie and agreed that the cool and magical images we enjoyed in our youth pale in comparison to some of the things kids get to enjoy today and our children (should they ever be born) will probably see things that make modern magic look like Rankin-Bass chromakeyed into The Birth of a Nation. Specifically, Buckbeak the Hippogryph is a living creature where Falcor the Luck Dragon is a muppet. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 02:21:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Uncle Junior's summer gig? On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Eb wrote: > Jeme: > > But in terms of actually following a series with interest, I mostly > > download the cable series that are so good these days. > > Why are you insistent on *downloading* everything you watch? Are you > really so unable to tear yourself away from the computer monitor? It's exactly because I don't spend all my time at the monitor that I download it! I can watch it whenever I like and I don't have to pay for cable or tapes or tivo. I have the internet connection already for working from home, so there's essentially no cost. I did mention that I take videos away from the video store and library, didn't I? I don't download EVERYTHING I watch. > > Does it look like makeup? > > Does to me.... OK. > Oh man. That ad really is a marvel. I can't remember the exact > chant...something like "somethingsomething, achy head, indigestion, > diarrhea".... I don't really believe advertising is effective at making folks buy one product over another (merely that it makes people think they need to buy products), but some would say that it's done its job if you remember that much and that's all that matters. We had a discussion tonight at a monthly geek meeting I attend about the spam problem and what can and should be done about it. It was fascinating that while everyone could pretty much agree that it's a social problem and not a technological one (and so there is no technical solution), it was very difficult to get them to agree on why it exists or how to actually diminish the problem (rather than just fighting the symptoms). People actually stated out loud that you couldn't blame somebody for doing something foul if it meant making some money. You just couldn't. Yet, that's exactly the attitude that gives us these unpleasant things like spam. Amazing. > > All action movies feature superheroes. Nobody, in real life, can or > > would do the things that are done in action movies. They're pretty > > much all magically enhanced with some combination of luck, grace, good > > looks, and lots of money and gadgets. > > What garbage reasoning that was. Were you serious? I'm dead serious. Rambo is a superhero... so is Wil Smith's character in Bad Boys (or anything else, really), Bruce Willis in Die Hard, and Geena Davis in The Long Kiss Goodnight. They all do things that regular people could never do. Action movies are generally NOT based on reality and include the fantastical alongside the realistic. With few exceptions (where the exceptions are trying very hard to make a point by their exception), action movies depict the same black & white view of right and wrong/good and bad that characterizes a comic book story. Exactly how would you define "superhero movie" so that you weren't also talking about the examples I gave? > > He has no subtlty (now THAT is a strange looking word), > > Not if you spell it right. Heh... that's what I get for allowing google to check my spelling. Sometimes, when I have a web browser handier than a terminal window, I'll just punch a word into google to check the spelling (I have a google bar in my tool menu... I suppose I could just as well create a dictionary bar that submitted the word to an online dictionary, but I haven't, so it's not there). Most of the time, google will pop up a "did you mean correctspelling?" link at the top of the search results. Didn't happen this time, so I just let it stand. Had I had a terminal handy, I'd've just done this: jbrelin@shaft:~$ grep subtl.*y /usr/share/dict/words subtlety subtly And that would have been that. Funny, though, because leaving off an "e" in those cases is usually considered a normal variant in American english, but not here. Weird. I wonder why Google didn't do the right thing. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #192 ********************************