Slashdot Mirror

Steve Urkel a character from a lame TV show. The classic nerd.

Well, I think there's going to be a Pixar vs. DreamWorks debate raging for a long time. I've seen all of Pixar's movies and most of the DreamWorks flicks that were computer animated, including Shrek I and II. I tend to try to stay out of these types of debates but I do have some opinions on this one.

First off, I've felt that DreamWorks has been unfairly riding Pixar's coattails for a long time now.

They find out about Bug's Life, they release Antz.
They find out about Monsters Inc., they release Shrek.
They find out about Finding Nemo, they start work on Shark Tale.
(I would expect the announcement of a super hero flick really soon now.)

It always came across to me as being a dirty practice meant to intentionally cause confusion in the marketplace and get people to see their movies thinking there was a connection to the Pixar films.

Secondly, I feel DreamWorks' stories are lacking - particularly when it comes to Shrek I and II. To me, watching Shrek was like watching the best of Saturday Night Live. There were lots of short parody bits, many targetting Disney movies or traditional fairy tales - most targetting current pop culture. I think that between these bits and the modern pop music, these movies are not going to stand the test of time well. In my mind, they were well worth the ticket price at the theatre but I wouldn't dream of purchasing them on DVD.

As for the quality of the animation, I think anybody would be hard pressed to say that Shrek I and II weren't extremely well done. They were certainly cinema quality productions. I still think Pixar does it better though. There's something about the movement of the characters in Pixar movies that is more emotionally expressive and natural looking. It's just a tad more polished and artistic than the DreamWorks stuff.

Does it turn into a cannoli?

Especially considering he's now dead... Charles Bronson

Hmmm.. so what happens if I watch Spy Kids:3D on this? Will it upconvert me to 4D?

The fifth ad campaign by Quentin Tarantino.

Starring David Carradine as Bill Gates
Michael Madsen as Steve Ballmer
Uma Thurman as The Bride (Tove Torvalds, avenging her dead husband Linus, her reign of bloody revenge sponsored by IBM)

and Chiaki Kuriyama as Gogo NT, the prototype Microsoft Killing App. (because really, when you're dealing with this stuff, you need a killer android, preferably Japanese in a schoolgirl outfit, for the sheer surrealism factor.)

The fifth ad campaign by Quentin Tarantino.

Starring David Carradine as Bill Gates
Michael Madsen as Steve Ballmer
Uma Thurman as The Bride (Tove Torvalds, avenging her dead husband Linus, her reign of bloody revenge sponsored by IBM)

and Chiaki Kuriyama as Gogo NT, the prototype Microsoft Killing App. (because really, when you're dealing with this stuff, you need a killer android, preferably Japanese in a schoolgirl outfit, for the sheer surrealism factor.)

The fifth ad campaign by Quentin Tarantino.

Starring David Carradine as Bill Gates
Michael Madsen as Steve Ballmer
Uma Thurman as The Bride (Tove Torvalds, avenging her dead husband Linus, her reign of bloody revenge sponsored by IBM)

and Chiaki Kuriyama as Gogo NT, the prototype Microsoft Killing App. (because really, when you're dealing with this stuff, you need a killer android, preferably Japanese in a schoolgirl outfit, for the sheer surrealism factor.)

The fifth ad campaign by Quentin Tarantino.

Starring David Carradine as Bill Gates
Michael Madsen as Steve Ballmer
Uma Thurman as The Bride (Tove Torvalds, avenging her dead husband Linus, her reign of bloody revenge sponsored by IBM)

and Chiaki Kuriyama as Gogo NT, the prototype Microsoft Killing App. (because really, when you're dealing with this stuff, you need a killer android, preferably Japanese in a schoolgirl outfit, for the sheer surrealism factor.)

Then again - they may be like "Oddworld" and eat other intelligent species on their planet - they may identify with movies like "Silence Of The Lambs" and ask us for our BBQ recipe.

Will you volunteer to be one of the 5 billions 'erased' from the planet, or will make a run for it like Logan did?

Seriously folks, has there *ever* in the history of Hollywood been a movie-from-a-scifi-novel which didn't actually rape-and-pillage the story in some way or other?

Man I wish I'd seen that. There were several radio adaptions of Bradbury's stories back in the 1940s and 1950s, most of which were quite excellent. More recently there was the low budget Ray Bradbury Theatre. It used to appear in reruns on USA (the cable network). And I just barely remember seeing The Electric Grandmother when I was a kid.

Man I wish I'd seen that. There were several radio adaptions of Bradbury's stories back in the 1940s and 1950s, most of which were quite excellent. More recently there was the low budget Ray Bradbury Theatre. It used to appear in reruns on USA (the cable network). And I just barely remember seeing The Electric Grandmother when I was a kid.

Don't imagine that because a character isn't listed on IMDb 4.5 months before release, the character isn't in the film. IMDb rarely has complete credits this far before release. I'm surprised the Slashdot editors let such a silly claim through.

It doesn't? Damn, and here I had my hopes up for a Charlie and the Chocolate Factory with only Charlie and Willy Wonka.

I'm not a huge Moore fan, btw. I've only seen Bowling for Columbine, but found it entertaining and thought-provoking (in spite of the creative editing).

I liked Kurt Wimmer's version.

" I'm not sure that the guy who directed "Timecop" and "Sudden Death" was the right choice for a replacement"

Yeah... and by applying that logic you could say that the guy that directed Bad Taste and Meet the Feelbes probably wasn't the best pick to direct LOTR...

I'd give the guy a chance... some people just make the pictures they can get signed on for, for all you know this guy's just been waiting for a decent screenplay with the right producers to make his "masterpiece".

" I'm not sure that the guy who directed "Timecop" and "Sudden Death" was the right choice for a replacement"

Yeah... and by applying that logic you could say that the guy that directed Bad Taste and Meet the Feelbes probably wasn't the best pick to direct LOTR...

I'd give the guy a chance... some people just make the pictures they can get signed on for, for all you know this guy's just been waiting for a decent screenplay with the right producers to make his "masterpiece".

Time travel has been a popular theme in movies nowadays. However many have failed to address the paradoxical effects of time travel, which is how your actions in one time affect the consistency of another.

Some movies choose to ditch this issue completely, Twelve Monkeys immediately comes to mind, which resorted to the use of a Time Loop to hide the real issue. The movie adaptation of H.G. Well's The Time Machine was a tad better IMHO but not without its flaws.

Donnie Darko was a much better film in the aspect of consistency, so much that it has managed to spawn a rip-off, the cheesy and overrated The Butterfly Effect

Time travel has been a popular theme in movies nowadays. However many have failed to address the paradoxical effects of time travel, which is how your actions in one time affect the consistency of another.

Some movies choose to ditch this issue completely, Twelve Monkeys immediately comes to mind, which resorted to the use of a Time Loop to hide the real issue. The movie adaptation of H.G. Well's The Time Machine was a tad better IMHO but not without its flaws.

Donnie Darko was a much better film in the aspect of consistency, so much that it has managed to spawn a rip-off, the cheesy and overrated The Butterfly Effect

Time travel has been a popular theme in movies nowadays. However many have failed to address the paradoxical effects of time travel, which is how your actions in one time affect the consistency of another.

Some movies choose to ditch this issue completely, Twelve Monkeys immediately comes to mind, which resorted to the use of a Time Loop to hide the real issue. The movie adaptation of H.G. Well's The Time Machine was a tad better IMHO but not without its flaws.

Donnie Darko was a much better film in the aspect of consistency, so much that it has managed to spawn a rip-off, the cheesy and overrated The Butterfly Effect

It's a short story. Adapting a short story into a full-length feature film that remains faithful to the original story takes more talent, artistry and loyalty to the source material than anyone in Hollywood is willing, or able, to provide. This could still turn out to be a good film, of course; they don't always screw up. Although chances are they will.

It's a short story. Adapting a short story into a full-length feature film that remains faithful to the original story takes more talent, artistry and loyalty to the source material than anyone in Hollywood is willing, or able, to provide. This could still turn out to be a good film, of course; they don't always screw up. Although chances are they will.

It's a short story. Adapting a short story into a full-length feature film that remains faithful to the original story takes more talent, artistry and loyalty to the source material than anyone in Hollywood is willing, or able, to provide. This could still turn out to be a good film, of course; they don't always screw up. Although chances are they will.

It's a short story. Adapting a short story into a full-length feature film that remains faithful to the original story takes more talent, artistry and loyalty to the source material than anyone in Hollywood is willing, or able, to provide. This could still turn out to be a good film, of course; they don't always screw up. Although chances are they will.

It's a short story. Adapting a short story into a full-length feature film that remains faithful to the original story takes more talent, artistry and loyalty to the source material than anyone in Hollywood is willing, or able, to provide. This could still turn out to be a good film, of course; they don't always screw up. Although chances are they will.

It's a short story. Adapting a short story into a full-length feature film that remains faithful to the original story takes more talent, artistry and loyalty to the source material than anyone in Hollywood is willing, or able, to provide. This could still turn out to be a good film, of course; they don't always screw up. Although chances are they will.

It's a short story. Adapting a short story into a full-length feature film that remains faithful to the original story takes more talent, artistry and loyalty to the source material than anyone in Hollywood is willing, or able, to provide. This could still turn out to be a good film, of course; they don't always screw up. Although chances are they will.

It's a short story. Adapting a short story into a full-length feature film that remains faithful to the original story takes more talent, artistry and loyalty to the source material than anyone in Hollywood is willing, or able, to provide. This could still turn out to be a good film, of course; they don't always screw up. Although chances are they will.

It's a short story. Adapting a short story into a full-length feature film that remains faithful to the original story takes more talent, artistry and loyalty to the source material than anyone in Hollywood is willing, or able, to provide. This could still turn out to be a good film, of course; they don't always screw up. Although chances are they will.

Ray Bradbury has shed light on the situation that resulted in Renny Harlin departing from the A SOUND OF THUNDER movie project.

"The original story is about a man who travels back in time to look upon dinosaurs, only to be ran off the safe designated path by one of them. There, he steps upon a butterfly, altering the entire timeline to come. [Harlin said,] 'Why don't we take the butterfly out of SOUND OF THUNDER?' Can you believe that? When I heard it, I whooped with laughter. I said, 'Oh my God,... if you wanted to be accurate about being stupid, this was it.' So they fired him, and we've got a new director now."

Smart move, but I'm not sure that the guy who directed "Timecop" and "Sudden Death" was the right choice for a replacement...

My money is on the upcoming "Fahrenheit 451" directed by Frank Darabont.

Ray Bradbury has shed light on the situation that resulted in Renny Harlin departing from the A SOUND OF THUNDER movie project.

"The original story is about a man who travels back in time to look upon dinosaurs, only to be ran off the safe designated path by one of them. There, he steps upon a butterfly, altering the entire timeline to come. [Harlin said,] 'Why don't we take the butterfly out of SOUND OF THUNDER?' Can you believe that? When I heard it, I whooped with laughter. I said, 'Oh my God,... if you wanted to be accurate about being stupid, this was it.' So they fired him, and we've got a new director now."

Smart move, but I'm not sure that the guy who directed "Timecop" and "Sudden Death" was the right choice for a replacement...

My money is on the upcoming "Fahrenheit 451" directed by Frank Darabont.

I think you're talking about Enemy Mine .

It's not a great movie, but it's a good example of what you're talking about.

... before 2004 was 1956, it was Cousteau's "Silent world."

Moore and his slavish followers claim that disagreeing with him is the same as trying to silence him

Actually, no, Moore and his slavish followers claim that prohibiting an owned subsidiary of yours which you normally treat as autonomous from distributing one of Moore's films is the same as trying to "silence him".

Perhaps there's someone somewhere who *does* think that it's censorship to, say, give a Michael Moore movie a bad review, but since I've never actually met this person, it seems like you're pushing something of a straw man here.

> The liberals in this country want open and free discussion.

As long as you ignore all the campaigns against Fox News and talk radio hosts plus speech codes on college campuses, I would agree.

Wait. What "campaigns" I've seen against Fox News and Rush Limbaugh aren't to get them, say, pushed out of their airwave and cable distribution channels and attempt to limit their medium for reaching their customers, but rather campaigns to encourage individual viewers not to support or watch those on the grounds that they display poor journalistic integrity. Didn't you just imply that disagreeing with someone shouldn't be considered the same thing as "silencing" them?

Also: What on earth are "speech codes on college campuses" and, if (as I assume?) this refers to something performed by the administrators of certain colleges, why do you consider college administrators to be representative of whoever or whatever "liberals" are?

"Fame" You call Baby Geniuses a claim to *FAME*?

I can't believe that the cite you use for Kathleen Turner is Baby Geniuses. There was a time when she made really good movies.

Romancing the Stone

Peggy Sue Got Married

The Accidental Tourist

"Fame" You call Baby Geniuses a claim to *FAME*?

I can't believe that the cite you use for Kathleen Turner is Baby Geniuses. There was a time when she made really good movies.

Romancing the Stone

Peggy Sue Got Married

The Accidental Tourist

"Fame" You call Baby Geniuses a claim to *FAME*?

I can't believe that the cite you use for Kathleen Turner is Baby Geniuses. There was a time when she made really good movies.

Romancing the Stone

Peggy Sue Got Married

The Accidental Tourist

release the movie online, for free

No, this would be a mistake. If MM released his movie on the internet first, it would damage its credibility and hurt its message.

There are plenty of 'exposé' documentaries available online (including the infamous banned Panorama documentary on the US election in 2000); just take a look on any of the major P2P networks. None of these have made a dent on the public at large because the image of online video is of something shady and illicit rather than respectable and credible.

This is a PR war just as much as a real one. If MM gets fat on the profits of his movie, who cares? It's the message that's important. Put it in the mainstream cinemas, just like Black Hawk Down and JFK (two movies that attempt to 'rewrite history' with obvious bias) so the public can get a balanced view and decide for themselves.

release the movie online, for free

No, this would be a mistake. If MM released his movie on the internet first, it would damage its credibility and hurt its message.

There are plenty of 'exposé' documentaries available online (including the infamous banned Panorama documentary on the US election in 2000); just take a look on any of the major P2P networks. None of these have made a dent on the public at large because the image of online video is of something shady and illicit rather than respectable and credible.

This is a PR war just as much as a real one. If MM gets fat on the profits of his movie, who cares? It's the message that's important. Put it in the mainstream cinemas, just like Black Hawk Down and JFK (two movies that attempt to 'rewrite history' with obvious bias) so the public can get a balanced view and decide for themselves.

Real Dolls and QRIO for me to have any vested interest :-)


Kinda like AI.. only replace Jude Law and give me Rebecca

*sigh*... how great the world would be.

Real Dolls and QRIO for me to have any vested interest :-)


Kinda like AI.. only replace Jude Law and give me Rebecca

*sigh*... how great the world would be.

Mockmentaries refers to those scripted comedy films that take documentary style (handheld, talking-head interviews, bad lighting/framing). Many of Christopher Guest's films are good examples:

Spinal Tap
Waiting for Guffman
" A Mighty Wind"

See the difference. These are all staged and scripted(act/performance). Moore's films are anything but mockumentaries. They are neither staged nor scripted!!! (except for narrations, which is necessary)

The parent post is rated completely wrong and/or overrated. I can't belive that people are swallowing this horse sh*t without a doubt...

Mockmentaries refers to those scripted comedy films that take documentary style (handheld, talking-head interviews, bad lighting/framing). Many of Christopher Guest's films are good examples:

Spinal Tap
Waiting for Guffman
" A Mighty Wind"

See the difference. These are all staged and scripted(act/performance). Moore's films are anything but mockumentaries. They are neither staged nor scripted!!! (except for narrations, which is necessary)

The parent post is rated completely wrong and/or overrated. I can't belive that people are swallowing this horse sh*t without a doubt...

Mockmentaries refers to those scripted comedy films that take documentary style (handheld, talking-head interviews, bad lighting/framing). Many of Christopher Guest's films are good examples:

Spinal Tap
Waiting for Guffman
" A Mighty Wind"

See the difference. These are all staged and scripted(act/performance). Moore's films are anything but mockumentaries. They are neither staged nor scripted!!! (except for narrations, which is necessary)

The parent post is rated completely wrong and/or overrated. I can't belive that people are swallowing this horse sh*t without a doubt...

Mockmentaries refers to those scripted comedy films that take documentary style (handheld, talking-head interviews, bad lighting/framing). Many of Christopher Guest's films are good examples:

Spinal Tap
Waiting for Guffman
" A Mighty Wind"

See the difference. These are all staged and scripted(act/performance). Moore's films are anything but mockumentaries. They are neither staged nor scripted!!! (except for narrations, which is necessary)

The parent post is rated completely wrong and/or overrated. I can't belive that people are swallowing this horse sh*t without a doubt...

What a coincidence. Louis Malle was definitely no less radical and left-leaning than Michael Moore. His movies were full of political or social satire, given in a lighthearted and pleasant manner, yet they were also insightful and generally true to the historical fact. How unlike Michael Moore, who is unable to do anything but cashing his alleged ideals. Sorry, I consider myself a leftwinger, I am all against Bush and the whole Iraq invasion, but I think I'm too old school for Michael Moore. When Karl Marx wanted to launch a revolutionary movement, he went to a library to study the facts. FACTS. Ef - ah - cee - tee - es. Something you won't find in a flashy mockumentary by Michael Moore.

Yeah, I know. Here goes my karma bonus. Well, I won't post it as an AC.

The linked article was a little slim on details, but I found the AP article that says that Tarantino was the president of the jury for Palme d'Or, and actress Kathleen Tuner (of Baby Geniuses fame) sits on the panel as well. Plus in other cool news, the AP article says that an edited-together 4-hour complete version of Kill Bill was shown. Can't wait for the special edition DVD on that one.

The linked article was a little slim on details, but I found the AP article that says that Tarantino was the president of the jury for Palme d'Or, and actress Kathleen Tuner (of Baby Geniuses fame) sits on the panel as well. Plus in other cool news, the AP article says that an edited-together 4-hour complete version of Kill Bill was shown. Can't wait for the special edition DVD on that one.