Dan, for me the question of "liking: exists on two entirely independent levels. I watch all kinds of crap for entertainment or to kill time and presumably enjoy them on that level in the same way as everyone else, perhaps less so as I'm not a connoisseur of special effects, action films, etc. My problem has always been that "pure" entertainment is rare; that is, there is almost always a questionable ideology built into it that I can't help but notice, constructed as I am to see these things. It's not that the people who produce these things are trying to fool anybody: they are not smart enough for that; they are for the most part "innocent", clueless vehicles of the ideological structures of their work.

My issue is the problem of awareness, the ability to understand what you see and get to the bottom of what makes its ideational structure work. On the level of pure form I can enjoy these various films like anyone else unless I get really pissed off. Ultimately, though, I get far more enjoyable out of teasing out all the bad ideas embodied in them. Fo em the turning point was STAR WARS: I got a bad vibe the first time I saw it, and it was something brand new at that time. Of course I had no concrete conception of the shambles that was to become of the American political system, but this film was a bolt out of the blue that for me signalled this nation's imminent turn to the far right.

That does it.
This is crazy.
Ralph ... are you the perfect product of our time, or what? I take it Sarte's 'No Exit' must be on your to 're-read list'.
Far right, Star Wars? What next? Leigh Brackett was not a clueless vehicle.

I'm a bit more simple-minded in my entertainment. If I pay $7.00 to go see a movie, I default to enjoying the experience. I've spent my money, I'm going to just relax and enjoy it. For me, the idea is to go into this dark world and just relax and take a break.

Nevertheless, as Ralph indicates, there is a time to analyze things and it's important to accept that different people enjoy things in different ways. I've always been able to disassociate the scholarly from times designated as entertainment. But, like Ralph, at some point (if it's really bad that point comes very quickly!) I will want to do the analysis. Sometimes, like with the Matrix, I'll just go see it and relax and enjoy it as pure entertainment. Then, a couple weeks later, I'll go back and really get into the ideas underlying it. This makes Ralph the better scholar, but maybe I'm the better date?

:-)

Of course, I've never seen Ralph, so; if he's really good looking, maybe he's the better date anyway!

Parting thought:

"To everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven.
A time to be born, and a time to die;
A time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted.
A time to kill, and a time to heal . . ."

. . . A time to relax and hold hands and take the ride, and a time to analyze and dissect.



[This message has been edited by Mr. Dark (edited 05-20-2003).]

In defense of the realm:

Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try. Anger, fear and agression lead to the dark side. In seeking your destiny, patience is your ally. When judging people, size matters not.
Traveling through hyperspace insn't like dusting crops.
There's no such thing as luck.
You must follow your own path; no one can choose it for you.
Wars do not make one great.
Faith in your friends is a strength, not a weakness.
If it smells bad on the outside, it's worse on the inside.
The possibility of successfully navigating an asteroid field is approx. 3,720 to 1.
In your pursuit of peace and justice, remember, the Force will be with you...always!

As long as we support the rule of law, honor the Constitution and Bill of Rights, respect each other as people, and make sure the separation of goernmental powers are able to balance each other out; I don't worry too much about the far right or the far left. History is filled with the pendulum swing of politics in this country. One of our strengths as a nation has been that we take these other elements and we keep working back and forth to the middle. Because of this we have remained both free and stable -- with the occasional glitch.

This one scene, from Starman, struck a cord. When Starman, (Jeff Bridges) is with Jenny (Karen Allen) and the guy from SETE sitting in the diner toward the end. (paraphrased)

Starman: Do you want to know why we find humans so interesting?

Sete Guy: Why?

Starman: Because when things are at their worst, mankind is at his best.

I always felt Bridges portrayed Starman as more Christlike than an alien.

Haven't seen Mattrix II, so can't comment.

Celestial:

That is one of my favorite parts of that movie. Sometimes when I watch it, I get chills when he says that.

I loved both Jeff Bridges and Karen Allen in that movie. Thought they were both very good.


[This message has been edited by Mr. Dark (edited 05-20-2003).]

Mr. Dark:
No matter if it is matinee or evening ticket, if the movie is terrible (to my personal experience) I ""CANNOT"" sit thru it.
Some of the more recent movies I couldn't take was, for instance, Gosford Park, which became the most terrible movie experience in memory. It was putrid, horrible, absolutely immersed in the lost life of people who are so haughty about themselves, that I just couldn't take it. (It has to do with how it is portrayed, not the subject matter). Because I was with my wife, I sat thru nearly 1/2 hr. of the movie. Then... was propelled from my seat as if sprung-loaded.

Others: Hannibal, with Jodie Foster. I couldn't even stand the opening graphics
I thought a high-schooler did it. With 'Pulp Fiction' I tried, really tried, but couldn't do it. Went to see it 3 times, because everybodys saying it's... so fantastic. First time, about 10 minutes. Second time maybe 15...third time...forgot how long, but that did it.
Favorite recent movies...Fargo, O Brother Where Are Thou. Specifically, Barton Fink is amazing. Amazing actors, amazng music. I guess I am partial to the Coen Brothers, directors.

The movie that caught my attention 30 seconds into the film, where I said, this is great, was Chariots of Fire. Still near favorite film... and Trip To Bountiful. That's it for mainstream films.
Yes, I am also partial to the Indiana Jones Films, and hope the 4th one is as good as the last one. (click on, or type into finder www.theraider.net/films/indy4/index.php




[This message has been edited by Nard Kordell (edited 05-20-2003).]

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Dark:
I always prefered the Marvel Comic line to the DC line. Marvel's heroes were always more flawed and conflicted: Dr. Strange, Daredevil, Thing, Silver Surfer, Spiderman, etc . . . all of them had conflicts in their lives, weaknesses, etc. that made their stories and struggles far more interesting. The DC characters seemed "flatter" to me. The Marvel characters seemed much more complex, and as a result, more interesting.[/B]

Mr. Dark,

It's amazing that you brought this up. This is a subject that I discussed recently with the proprieter of a vintage comic collector/seller shop in Minneapolis recently. I have slowly been rebuilding my comic collection from childhood (1960's/1970's) after it was decimated by a request (demand) by my parents that I give some of my collection (probably in excess of 300 comics) to my cousins. In checking on E-bay, I was amazed to find that Marvel comics (Hulk, Fantastic Four, Spiderman) we're going in excess of $300 each. In talking with the store proprietor, he informed me that part was due to the interest sparked by the recent movies and the other reason was that Marvel was more popular for the reasons you listed. He himself preferred Marvel growing up. I was very surprised to say the least. I was a DC comics fan growing up (Superman, Legion of Super Heroes, Supergirl, Superboy, Lois Lane, Batman) and always thought the stories and artwork were great. I did make a brief foray into Marvel comics for a while and would have to agree that at the time, the artwork was better and the stories a "little cooler". However, I got so frustrated by the fact you would get two pages of story followed by two to four pages of advertisements repeated throughout the comic. This sent me back to DC comics for good. As Superman and family progressed into the late 60's and early 70's, the characters/stories became less wooden and more vulnerable. However, from the mid to late 70's on through today, they have gotten so far removed from what drew me to them in the first place, that I lost interest a long time ago.

In the discussion of favorite sci-fi movies:

How about "Contact"? Although based on Sagan's story and with his science vs God approach, I still love this movie. As someone who was interested in science at an early age and a "somewhat" Christian at the time, over the years the scales have tipped much further towards Christianity, but I still retain my great interest in science. I think the movie brought up many of the great talking points still evident today in the debates of science vs God in relation to where did everything start and is there life elsewhere in the universe. To me, nothing as great and awesome as life and the universe could come into being by happenstance. I think that God's fingerprints are in science.

One of my most profound "Kodak moments" of growing up? My mother taking me to see Kubrick's "2001" at the local theater when I was about 10 years old. Thanks Mom.

Okay...
... So I must relate my sad story of comics, too...

Think I am over it. Then, it's something I don't think I ever have come to... fully grasp. Perhaps someday I'll suddenly 'scream' for no seemingly 'apparent' reason!!

I have had, stored away on shelves in a pantry in the basement of my parent's home, some of the following comics:

��The first 50-60 first-printing issues of Classics Illustrated

� The first several issues of Captain Marvel Comics

� Comics called Action Comics, going back to the 40's.

Plus hundreds of vintage Donald Ducks, Mickey Mouse, and lots of Unusual Tales, Tales of the Unexpected, etc. Along with original art by Steve Ditko.
And what has become of all these pieces of paper treasures?
Ah, LOST...LOST to basement floodings.
That's right. Back in the mid '50's, soaked to piles of soggy pulp, and taken out to the alley for pick up by the, then called, garbage men. (Today it would be ...picked up by the Sanitation Engineers).

It didn't seem like that big a deal, mostly, in my case, because I was a goofy little kid who didn't really know what he had. Couldn't do much about it, anyway. And then there were always new comics out there to attract interest.

Unfortunately, also with this pile of comics went....some of my Father's collection as well:

A couple hundred pulp science fiction magazines, Fantastic, Amazing, with The Green Man cover story, and The Return of The Green Man, by Harold Sherman, Startling Stories, Thrilling Wonder Stories, Astounding, etc etc. In wooden crate boxes...now set side by side with the comics, to be hurried to destinies known mostly by God alone.
There, story told.

They say the price of comics is so high, and the comics so rare, because mothers got their darlings throw them out, or got rid of them when the brats were looking the other way. I say...those dang basement floodings surely come in a close second...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nard Kordell:
[B]Okay...
... So I must relate my sad story of comics, too...

A sad tale indeed! Surely ranking up with the loss of the Library at Alexandria!

As our previous President was fond of saying, "I feel your pain". I do, I really do!

I laughed when I saw the question posed in this opening of this post - who would have thought it would have generated such an interesting thread.

Guess I was wrong this time..... imagine that.

I have some conflicted feelings about "Contact". I loved the relationship between the father and his daughter at the beginning of the film. I thought the special effects where she's going through space were very cool (although updated Space Odyssey stuff). I liked that the first "Transporter"s destroyed by religous terrorism (we've seen some of that lately, huh?).

I liked the dialog where the ex-priest novitiate argues for faith by comparing it to love. When the scientist argues against faith because it can't be proven, he counters by asking if she loved her father. She says yes. He says "prove it". While it oversimplifies the argument at some level, it is just not the case that empirical verification is the only source of epistemology.

I didn't like that this smarmy, horny ex-priest novitiate (or whatever) is catapulted to such a high level of importance that he is suddenly indispensible to a US Cabinet meeting; and that he is one of the determinants of selecting who goes through the transporter. What in the world justifies the importance this guy has? He's published one book.

The other thing I didn't like was the "investigation" at the end. The James Wood character was a jerk, and they didn't acknowledge in the "hearings" the presence of an 18 minute (or whatever) gap. Surely, this would have been a part of the hearings. It was not a secret.

To me, pretty mixed. Overall, I liked it, but some of the story gaps were a bit much for me.

Matthew McConnahy portrayed a Theologian in "Contact", thus his affection toward Jodie Foster could be advanced. Although his importance was significantly upgraded to encompass their emotional relationship, I did find the cast slightly compressed to accomodate plot advancement.

It's been suggested that Jodie Foster's enormous salary puts a cap on the number of co-stars she appears with in any given film. In Panic Room, it became even more obvious. Still love everthing she's ever done. McConnahy in "Reign of Fire" was unbelievable!

It did bother me that the lapse of time in the gyrosphere was never publicly admitted, but perhaps that's how it would have played in real life anyway.

In Contact, her father's image took on saint-like attributes, which added a nice touch. Is Ray Bradbury perhaps the pioneer of this particular inclination to blend fantasy/sci fi/spirituality together?