HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gummitch@techbook.com (Jeff Frane)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Darkman - Crap (NO!)?
Date: 7 Apr 92 17:47:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: techbook.1992Apr7.174741.18977
Organization: TECHbooks of Beaverton Oregon - Public Access Unix

jxxl@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil (John Locke) writes:

>bole@hmivax.humgen.upenn.edu (Greg Bole) writes:

>> It was just a movie.

>I think we all agree that "Darkman" was just a movie. No one has said
>it was something other than a movie. What most of us are complaining about
>is that it was just a bad movie. Bad, recall, is the opposite of good and
>usually attracts more complaints than compliments.


Whoever it was that suggested Darkman was a comic book had the right of
it.  IMO it was a perfect translation of the comic medium to the screen,
or rather the comic medium as it has been influenced by the screen.
Darkman looked like Jim Steranko drew it frame by frame.  If you went to
the theatre to see anything but a comic book on the screen, you probably
wouldn't like it but if you are an old comics fan -- it was excellent.

--Jeff

>John
-- 
gummitch@techbook.COM  Public Access UNIX at (503) 644-8135 (1200/2400) 
"Where the press is free and every man able to read, all is safe."
                                    --Thomas Jefferson
From: rod@cats.ucsc.edu (Rodrick Su)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: The Remains of the Day
Date: 10 Apr 92 02:28:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: darkstar.32494
Organization: Tigana Restoration Inc.



	Read it this morning that Columbia is casting 
	Anthony Hopkins and Anjelica Huston in the film
	version of `The Remains of the Day' on a script
	adopted from the novel by Harol Pinter and produced
	by Mike Nichols.  It didn't say who is going to
	be the director.
-- 
[ Rodrick Su           ]<----------------------------------------------------] 
[--------------------->[ `Belief is a concept that Ring does not believe in.']
[ rod@cats.ucsc.edu    ]----------------------->[ ``Emerald Eyes''           ] 
[ rod@ucscb.ucsc.edu   ]----------------------->[   Danield Keys Moran       ]
Xref: sparky rec.arts.movies:13376 alt.cult-movies:3906
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies
Subject: Re: Darkman - Crap (YES!)? Not hardly!(If you say so)
From: tfarmer@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Farmer)
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 1992 20:46:10 GMT
Organization: Datamark International Ltd.

In article <grantham.702693915@milton> grantham@milton.u.washington.edu (Henry Grantham) writes:
>
>	"Darkman" was clearly a comic book on screen.  It was marketed that way
>and it was filmed that way.  Ofcourse it doesn't work as a "serious" action
>flick and anyone viewing it with that expectation will be disappointed.
>What does "Darkman" sound like?  Batman, Superman, Spiderman, etc.  Look at
>the video box, the poster and the previews.  Everything about it says
>comic book in big letters.
>
>	Expectations effect movies.  It's just the way life is.  As you
>stated above, you're expectations were:
>
>1. Good acting - These type of films almost never have good acting in 
>                 the traditional sense and tend to focus more on camp.
>2. Excitement  - I would say that the movie was a success on this count.
>3. Action      - The movie was almost nonstop action.        

I have no problem with seeing comic-book style movies. However, I do
have a problem with seeing poorly done comic-book style movies.

I thought the film was lacking in excitment and the action sequences
were fundamentally boring. I blame the director.

It was the first Sam Raimi film I've seen - but I'd heard that he was
good. (I have some friends who like horro movies and they though 'Evil
Dead' was pretty damn good.)

>	BTW, in an interview, Raimi said that he had to tone down his style
>for this movie because of restrictions put on him by having a big budget.  
>If he did not have these restrictions, who knows how wild the film would
>have turned out?  

I wish he hadn't toned his style down. Perhaps if he'd been allowed to
do whatever he wanted the film might have turned out better...
-- 
Thomas Farmer      | tfarmer@cavebbs.gen.nz | I need an apartment!
Datamark Intl Ltd  | tfarmer@datamark.co.nz | +64-4-233-8186 (work)
Technical Writer & Dos M/Wrangler           | Love is a warm beagle.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: gibson@crisium.geop.ubc.ca (Brad Gibson)
Subject: Re: Who's Spider-Man? and Highlander wanted
Organization: Dept. of Astronomy / Univ. of British Columbia
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 17:55:54 GMT

In article <1992Apr11.223519.17357@random.ccs.northeastern.edu> gfm@ccs.northeastern.edu (george f mcbay) writes:
>In article <ddrumm.21yn@amiganet.chi.il.us> ddrumm@amiganet.chi.il.us (Daniel Drumm) writes:
>>Here's my list of Peter Parker candidates:
>
>>7. Keanu Reeves: My 2nd choice, my girlfriend's 1st choice (for anything).
>
>	I think he'd make a pretty good Spiderman...

   Only if one overlooks the lack of acting skill.  If you relax that
   criterion, I guess I'd agree. :)

>
>>10. Luke Perry (90210): The best box office draw, probably.
>
   I'll reserve comment on this as I can only assume this was included as some
   sort of joke.

   Seriously though ... the only person I can imagine in the role of Peter
   Parker is John Cusack.  He may be a bit tall, but I don't think anyone is
   going to lose any sleep over that.  An extremely talented actor, with the
   necessary ability to carry off the humour elements.  His kick-boxing in Say
   Anything may have been a bit rusty, but it at least shows he has the
   potential to get involved in the physical aspects as well.

   Brad

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Brad K. Gibson                           INTERNET: gibson@geop.ubc.ca
  Dept. of Geophysics & Astronomy         
  #129-2219 Main Mall                      PHONE: (604)822-6722
  University of British Columbia           FAX:   (604)822-6047
  Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  V6T 1Z4
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: conrad@brahms.udel.edu (Jon Conrad)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Censorship of nudity (was Re: Photo of minor: is it illegal to possess?
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:59:32 GMT
Organization: University of Delaware

In article <ddrumm.21vz@amiganet.chi.il.us> ddrumm@amiganet.chi.il.us (Daniel Drumm) writes:

>If you liked Natassha in Cat People, how about that wacky Malcom McDowell. the
>man lives to do full frontal nudity. Witness Caligula, Clockwork Orange, Cat
>People 

Also Britannia Hospital.  And I've been told there's an original X-rated
cut of "If..." which got Malcolm off started on his career of FFN.
Admittedly some of those are X, but not all.

His closest rival would seem to be Gerard Depardieu, with four frontal
appearances that I know of: Going Places, The Wonderful Crook, 1900, and
The Last Woman.  Plus in the last of those he's said to sport the
occasional erection (in the final scene he cuts it off with a carving
knife...onscreen -- I guess that's why he's stopped doing this sort of
scene!  :-)  ).

Jon Alan Conrad
From: bwf@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (bernard.w.fecht)
Subject: Nicol Williamson (Was Re: _Robin and Marian_)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 13:17:06 GMT

>
>Nichol Williamson - one of a great generation of British stage actors -
>was in "The Human Factor", based on Graham Greene's novel.
>

He played Holmes in _The Seven Percent Solution_.
He played Merlin in _Excalibur_.
He played "a pretty strange dude" (the guy who claimed to have
found the 5th gospel) in _The Word_ (made for TV).

and yeah, he was wasted with the tooth paste in _Black Widow_.
From: fajack@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Eroticism without nudity
Date: 8 Apr 92 11:33:05 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <32372@darkstar.ucsc.edu>, rod@cats.ucsc.edu (Rodrick Su) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Apr8.145712.10073@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> dsc@gemini.tmc.edu (Doug S. Caprette Bldg. 28 W191 x3892) writes:
>>In article <702653666@macbeth.cs.duke.edu> kirk@cs.duke.edu (Scooter Corleone) writes:
>>>In article <4755@umriscc.isc.umr.edu> wdechent@usenet.umr.edu (William L.
>>>Dechen
>>>t) writes:
>>>>       I'd like to see some discussion of how this issue reflects on
>>>>our culture.  ...
>>>see her completely naked and panting, and I think movies that allude to sex
>>>are much more exciting than today's more explicit and clinical displays.
>>>
>>Indeed, the most erotic scene I can recall from any film is the racetrack
>>discussion between Bogart and Bacall in "The Big Sleep".
> 
> 
> 
> 	My vote goes to `The Big Easy' in the scene where Ellen Barkin's
> 	character was apprehensive about making out with Denis Quade's 
> 	character, McSwayne, who proceed on giving her a nice rub down...

	My vote goes to "Sea of Love' in the scene where Ellen Barkin
was seducing Al Pacino.  I don't recall she being naked, but man, 
what a turn on !!!!!

Jack Teh

> -- 
> [ Rodrick Su           ]<----------------------------------------------------] 
> [--------------------->[ `Belief is a concept that Ring does not believe in.']
> [ rod@cats.ucsc.edu    ]----------------------->[ ``Emerald Eyes''           ] 
> [ rod@ucscb.ucsc.edu   ]----------------------->[   Danield Keys Moran       ]
From: mem@mv.mv.com (Mark E. Mallett)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Will the Real Alan Hale stand up (was: The Sea Hawk questions)
Date: 7 Apr 92 07:16:55 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: MV Communications, Inc.

In article <1992Apr7.004000.21036@athena.mit.edu> kamorgan@athena.mit.edu (Keith Morgan) writes:
> Is this what modern movies are missing,
>those actors who were happy to spend time  in the background? Sigh...

I don't know.  I think maybe we just don't notice them until long
after after the body of work has been amassed.  And there do seem
to be those "background actors" -- although perhaps not as prevalent
as those you mentioned.  Remember the thread about Ratzenburger?  :-)

Dunno.  How about M. Emmet Walsh; Tracey Walter; Joan Cusack; William
Sanderson; Danny Aiello; Wilford Brimley?  I'm sure there are lots of
others that are not missing.  :-)

-mm-
-- 
Mark E. Mallett  MV Communications, Inc./ PO Box 4963/ Manchester NH/ 03108
Bus. Phone: 603 429 2223    Home: 603 424 8129     BIX: mmallett
Internet: mem@mv.MV.COM  ( uucp: ...{decvax|harvard}!mv!mem )
Looking for news and mail in southern NH / northern MA?  Try MV!
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: jordan@cs.tulane.edu (Misti Jordan)
Subject: Re: Dead Again: Plot conflicts
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Tulane Univ., New Orleans, LA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 18:55:00 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-18702]: babylon


In article <204949@unix.cis.pitt.edu>, jmgst26@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Joseph M Goodwin) writes:
> Well, spoilers will follow
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ok, let me know if I've got this straight.  The theme of the movie is
> getting revenge in another life.  All along, the hypnotist has his
> opportunity to kill Amanda, once he saw the picture in the paper.
> Why didn't he?  Then he'd be free until the next lifetime :-)
> Another theme is fate, and fate brought the two main characters
> (played by Brannagh and his wife) back together, but why did she have
> memories that she was killed by her husband?  Are we to believe that
> the hypnotist could also employ mind control?  Lastly, why didn't
> Brannagh's character profess his innocence of the murder.  He seemed
> to accept that fact that he had been convicted and he was going to his death.
> I jus thought of another contradiction.  Amanda had memories of being stabbed by her husband before this hypnotist character entered the picture.
>
> Confused?!
>
> Mike Goodwin

First of all, Mike, I think you are confused by the plot. It has been a
while since I saw the movie, so I don't remember character names, but I'll
accept your name of "Amanda" for the female lead and I'll call the other
characters Brannagh and the Hypnotist...

In a Former Life, a musician was convicted of murdering his wife. He did
not actually perform the murder, though, it was done by the child of the
housekeeper who was holding a grudge against the wife. In the later life,
Amanda was having dreams and visions of the killing. She was taken to the
hypnotist, who was trying to find out how much she knew. Everyone assumed
that she was the reincarnation of the wife, since she was having these
dreams... however, as it ended up, she was the musician reincarnated, and
Brannagh was the wife-- they reversed roles.
Amanda was having dreams not of being killed by her husband, but of watching
her wife be killed by the housekeeper's kid-- but she never actually saw
the killer. All of the dreams were as an observer (Possible forshadowing to
show that she was on observer, and not actually the murderee...) who never
actually saw the person doing the killer.
When you speak of "Brannagh's character not confessing his innocence", I
suppose you are talking about the original musician, and although I don't
know for sure, I assumed it was because he wanted to die so that he could
be with Amanda... It didn't matter if they killed him.

Just my opinions, but I thought this was an awesome movie!!!!!

Misti
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: sabotkap@woods.ulowell.edu (Pete Sabotka)
Subject: T-800 or CSM-101 ?
Organization: University of Lowell
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 08:49:17 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.024704.11340@unlinfo.unl.edu>, gberigan@cse.unl.edu (Life...) writes:
> nmehl@rm105serve.sas.upenn.edu (Nathan J. Mehl) writes:
> 
>>BTW, Arnold's Terminator clearly identifies himself in the beginning
>>of the film as a Cyberdyne Systems Model T-101 - the same as the robot
>>in the first film.
> 
> Read the book.  There it clearly indentifies him as a T-800.  The full
> designation is CSM-101-T-800.  ALSO, on the cover of the first movie
> cassette (and likely the movie poster) the characters "T-800" was
> displayed over one of the lenses of the Gargoyle shades he wore then!

What was displayed over Arnold's Gargoyle's was clearly CSM-101, not T-800.

pete
<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>
This is a .sig:                        This is a .sig in binary:
----                                   ----
Pete Sabotka, UMass-Lowell             @ma.L0^  _1f\|P"
  DECnet: WOODS::SABOTKAP              Ta#%HTQ*[  2S'pUq
Internet: sabotkap@aspen.ulowell.edu   1&#*  %^2E)A<!2I\\SNMs6YvdN~  

                             Any Questions ?
<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>
From: djones@megatest.UUCP (Dave Jones)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Silence of the Lambs
Date: 14 Apr 92 22:31:31 GMT
Organization: Megatest Corporation, San Jose, Ca

From article <1992Apr2.033210.32396@eecs.nwu.edu>, by kaufman@eecs.nwu.edu (Michael L. Kaufman):

>


Why do all of the postings reveling in my little mistake
come from sites with names ending in ".edu"?


> In article <22113@prometheus.megatest.UUCP> djones@megatest.UUCP (Dave Jones) writes:
>>For those who missed my definitive review when the movie came out,
>>feast your neurons on this...
> 
> I was going to post a long reply to this lame review, ...


Cheap shot number one. If you have something substantive to say, say it.
Don't just claim, "My long reply can beat up your lame review." Besides,
it's not nice to brag about how long your reply is.


> .. but I decided that the following line really summed the whole
> wretched thing up.


"Wretched?" (C.S. number two.) 	"adj. Deeply afflicted, dejected or
distressed in body or mind." Not my idea of effective name-calling,
but tastes vary.

In the line cited, I got the actor's name wrong. I had just been having
a conversation about Trevor Howard, and I made a mistake. Of course
I meant to say Rory Hopkins.
From: jxxl@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil (John Locke)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: NEWSIES (was promoted very poorly)
Date: 16 Apr 92 19:51:40 GMT
Reply-To: jxxl@cs.nps.navy.mil (John Locke)
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA

reiher@onyx.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Peter Reiher) writes:

> The [focus] group (made up of people in their mid twenties to mid
> thirties) didn't like the title, either, and generally didn't seem to
> feel this was a movie they badly wanted to see.

The title reminded me of a line in "The Maltese Falcon": after
confiscating Wilmer's pistols, Spade tells The Fatman they were taken off
him by a "crippled newsie."

I always associated "newsie" with the guy running those well-stocked
newspaper and magazine stands. Not a bad association if you're into
thumbing through the latest karate mag, car mag, true-crime mag, or
some other form of bulldada. The Walter Mitty-esque possibilities would
probably end up better than the Disney product.

> At any rate, it looks like Disney is giving up on "Newsies".  They have
> apparently been talking about releasing theaters from contracts that
> require a certain number of showings of the film each day.  "Newsies"
> had the poorest opening day of the year for a major studio release, I
> have heard.

"Ruby" may be sharing the cellar.

John
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: a0s5108@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Neal and Mara Priestly)
Subject: Re: Jacob's Ladder
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 20:50:58 GMT

In article <92101.185221IO20456@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> <IO20456@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:
>Is there anyone out there who can tell me when Jacob's Ladder was released,
>and during what season? 


2 November 1990.  Late Fall.  Made buckets of money.

-Neal



Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: on an unrelated subject...
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 06:17:21 GMT

> 	You have submitted a follow-up article by using the "f"
> command from within rn or trn. ... I suspect that you wanted to do 
> a *NEW* post and not a follow-up.  To post something, you 
> should exit rn or trn and get back to your system prompt. 
> There you should try "postnews" ...

Or "Pnews", the program that rn's "f" command invokes.

But you don't need to exit from rn or trn.  Instead just use "$" to get
away from any article in the group, and *then* do "f".
-- 
Mark Brader			"Bad news disturbs his game; so does good;
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto		 so also does the absence of news."
utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com				-- Stephen Leacock

This article is in the public domain.
From: kettyle@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (john.jr.kettyle)
Subject:  Jabberwoky (?)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 15:02:20 GMT

I seem to have just had a thought pop into my mind. ( Very rare occurence)

I remember seeing a movie on HBO years ago ( early 80s) called Jabberwoky.

Does anyone remember it?
Could you give me more info on it?

Is it available on video?


Thanks in advance,

John Kettyle, Jr.
From: barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Who starred in 'Rabid'?
Date: 14 Apr 1992 05:53:46 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: gandalf.think.com


"Rabid" starred Marilyn Chambers.  It was pretty bad, and didn't even have
enough sex to redeem it.
-- 
Barry Margolin
System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com          {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: jon@lindy.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis)
Subject: Instant movies
Organization: DSG, Stanford University
Date:  7 Apr 92 20:27:47 GMT


   If you've watched a lot of old movies, especially bad ones, you
become familiar with certain lines of dialogue which have become such
standard cliches that they sum up the whole film:  that is, one such
line will let you know what type of movie it comes from, who is speaking
it, who it is addressed to, what the situation is, and often even the
whole plot.  You might almost call these lines "instant movies."  Here
are some examples:


     *  Curse?  Poppycock!  Superstitious nonsense!

     *  So you're the Cheyenne Kid, huh?  I hear you're fast.

     *  Scared, kid?  Well let me tell you a little secret:  I'm
        scared too.  Yeah, me!  Does that surprise you?

     *  Professor, listen!  If the creature is sensitive to cold,
        doesn't that mean that we could trap it using dry ice?

     *  Oh John, never say that, not even as a joke!

     *  The boss ain't gonna like this.

     *  Now, give me that gun!

     *  I'll be all right, Sarge!  Just leave me a little water and 
        a cigarette!

     *  O'Brian, you and Antonetti try to circle around behind them,
        while Goldberg and Winningthorpe cover you.

     *  It shore is quiet out there.  Yeah -- too quiet!
--


Jon Corelis               jon@lindy.stanford.edu
Stanford University       BITNET:  BA.JYC@RLG.STANFORD.EDU 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: adam@eastern.COM (Adam Salter)
Subject: Re: THUNDERHEART
Organization: Eastern's Public Access BBS, Toronto CAN
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 05:35:14 GMT

gmcmanus@reepicheep.gcn.uoknor.edu (Gary McManus) writes:

> In article <1992Apr10.180629.8055@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> leeper@cbnewsj.cb.att.c
> >     Rating: -1 (-4 to +4).
> >
> >
> >     Oh, heck, I know director Michael Apted's heart was in the right place,
> >but John Fusco's script was just awful.  Twenty-five years ago this would
> >have been a good script but it has been used, with variations, just too
> >often.  And the Indians who have been handed so many injustices deserve a
> 
> First off, I loved the movie.  I thought it did a great job of fusing 
> humor with the rage these people must have been feeling.  I also believe
> the screenplay was based on a true story.  As for being done before, how
> many movies are TRULY original?  Just because it's been done doesn't 
> degrade it's value.
> 
> >been used too many times.  And for one more cheap shot, the film leaves
> >ambiguous if Indian magic might be working.  I thought that went out with
> >BILLY JACK.  Native Americans don't have any magic any more than anyone else
> >does.  I wish they did.  Maybe if they did, they could use it to get some
> >justice.  But Apted uses trick photography and staged scenes to imply you
> >really can see ghost dancers who disappear in a flash or to imply that a man
> >might have turned himself into a deer.  Indians are not great magical people
> >who live half in a spirit world.  They are just a group of ethnic peoples
> >who have been cheated and exploited and who desperately need a little bit of
> >justice.  Throwing them a bone by implying that their magic really breaks
> >the laws of physics is just not what they need.  If enough people confuse
> 
> But a lot of their culture (or what is left of it) is based on this 
> "magic", as you call it.  What you don't realize is this was (and still
> is, for a lot of indians) their religion.  Don't you think when they 
> watch something like the baptism scene in the Godfather that this
> appears like magic?  And as for defying the laws of physics, is that
> sort of like the parting of the Red Sea?  How about walking on 
> water?
> 
> >plot is so thoroughly worn out, they give it to the Indians.  I give
> >THUNDERHEART a -1 on the -4 to +4 scale.
> >
> 
> I'd give it a 2.
> 
> Gary McManus


  BRAVO! 

  Of course the movie IS BASED ON A TRUE STORY, it's based on Leonard 
Peltier, buy the book In The Spirit of Crazy Horse. 

   LEONARD PELTIER who was portrayed in the movie is STILL ALIVE and IN 
JAIL! Help get him out!!! Buy the book "In the Spirit of Crazy Horse" for 
more info!!!

                                                            -adam