HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: boebert@sctc.com (Earl Boebert)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Acts of Butchery (good book --> really lame movie)
Keywords: wasgood,nowbad
Date: 17 Apr 92 17:08:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: sctc.1992Apr17.170803.23722
Organization: SCTC

murphy@npri6.npri.com (David P. Murphy) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>    what is the BEST novel which has been made into the WORST movie?

Well, I would nominate _The Great Gatsby_, with _Lord Jim_ coming a
close second, and _Daisy Miller_ third.

Earl
Xref: sparky rec.arts.movies:13194 rec.arts.sf.movies:3092
From: uslave@mcl.mcl.ucsb.edu (KJS @ucsb.mcl)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies,rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Jennifer Connelly
Keywords: Jennifer Connelly, Walt Disney, warlord-able sigs
Date: 7 Apr 92 05:45:55 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies

In <1992Apr6.234001.20018@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> fal20643@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Capt. Frank A. Lauro) writes:

>teg@uunet!tellab5!odgate (Todd Grinnell) writes:

>>Harv@cup.portal.com (Harv R Laser) also writes re JC:
>>>Ms. Connelly appear in a recent film called "The Hot Spot"
>>>with Don Johnson of Miami Vice fame... in this film she does
>>>some nude or topless scenes.

>>Alas, no. :-) The rollerskating scene in Career Opportunity comes close,
>>though. 

>Uh...the correct answer to Harv's question is, "Oh, joy, yes!"  Jennifer
>does a brief (but unmistakable) sunbathing scene that involves frontal 
>nudity above the waist.  (And they look pretty real to me, gang.)  =)


Good Lord, people!  Let's not start this thread up again, please?   :-)



--
*        *      *     *     *    *   *  *  * * ** ** *** **** ****** ********* 
   KJS @ucsb.mcl (Jesse Chang)               e-mail: uslave@mcl.mcl.ucsb.edu *
   "Traveling thru hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy!"    -- Han Solo * 
*         *       *      *     *    *   *  *  * ** ** *** **** ****** ********
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Subject: Re: Undubbed version of Mad Max
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 12:48:44 GMT

kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown) writes:

>WHERE can one get an UNDUBBED version of Mad Max?  You know, the version
>*without* the stupid Americanized voices?  The one with the *original*
>*unmodified* soundtrack.
>Can the undubbed version be gotten in Australia?  Is it possible to get
>one from there in a VHS format that a standard VHS type VCR in the U.S.
>would understand?  There might be video compatibility problems between
>machines here in the States and those in Australia...

We have VHS in Australia. The normal TV format is PAL-D. I don't think
I've ever seen Mad Max for sale.

Why don't you come to Australia and buy or copy Mad Max, and pick up
a duty-free PAL + NTSC video on the way back in Honkers? Why is your
company called taronga by the way?

-ricko
From: synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Dean R. Koontz
Date: 10 Apr 92 05:12:25 GMT
Organization: SynthMuzik Productions Ltd.:  The Danes Call It Quality

dododge@wam.umd.edu (David O. Dodge) writes:

>eabu202@orion.oac.uci.edu (Virany Margaret Kreng) writes:
>> With all this talk about Stephen King and his books that are being made
>> into movies, I was wondering if anybody knows of plans to make any of
>> Dean Koontz's bestsellers (particularly THE BAD PLACE, COLD FIRE, PHANTOMS,
>> and THE VOICE OF THE NIGHT) into movies. 
>
>"Whispers" was made into a film a year or two ago.
>
>There's another one that just came out on video, but I can't remember
>the title. It's about a little boy that a bunch of cultists believe is
>the Antichrist.

That would be HOME ALONE, right?


===============================================================================
    :: :: :: :: ::     Synth          synth@dreamtime.unm.edu  Ask Me About My
 :: :: :: :: :: :: ::  (F. Oberheim)  synth@yenta.alb.nm.us    Psychopathology
===============================================================================
"I walk into a club in 100 years time and Elvis is playing 3 chord rock'n'roll
 on unbelievable high-tech equipment ... That's what I want to sound like!"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: drew@rakoth.ic.cmc.ca (Andrew Scott)
Subject: Re: alien 3: aliens in disguise
Reply-To: scott@rakoth.ic.cmc.ca
Organization: CMC
Distribution: can
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1992 14:57:08 GMT

In article <-1mjky@lynx.unm.edu>, lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) writes:
|> sascxh@hornworm.unx.sas.com (Chuck Heatherly) writes:
|> 
|> >> in alien 3 ripley will give birth to one one the fanged creatures from
|> >> outer space. by the time she returns to earth the alien species has
|> >> interbred with the human race- creating offspring that look like humans
|> >> but act like aliens. sounds cool. 
|> >
|> > Hey, asshole, do you know what the word SPOILERS means? 
|> 
|> I certainly do.  Do you know what the phrase "reeled in like a hungry
|> largemouth bass" means?
|> 

Lazlo   1
Chuck   0

pds
Xref: sparky rec.arts.movies:13536 alt.conspiracy:6234
From: jreece@sousa.intel.com (John Reece)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: JFK - Stone getting flak...
Date: 10 Apr 92 16:28:36 GMT
Reply-To: jreece@sousa.intel.com
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Organization: Intel - Information Technologies

In article <schuck.702605426@sfu.ca>, schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck) writes:

> 20/20 also interviewed the former Chief of Staff who admitted to
> threatening to ruin the Doctors and Nurses careers if they told
> their stories for profit. 

Although this implies the Chief of Staff is part of a coverup, the key 
word here is telling their stories for *profit*.    
 
> Crenshaw is also one of many Parkland staff who saw cerebellum leaking
> out of JFK's head wound. The cerebellum is at the base of the brain,
> and would only be seen if JFK was shot from the front, blowing part of
> the back of the skull off. Cerebellum material is distinct in color
> and shape from the rest of the brain. So many trained medical staff
> could not be wrong. JFK was shot from the front.

Then how come in Zapruder there is a spray of blood and tissue going 
forward out of the supposed entrance wound in the front of the head, 
but not out of the supposed exit wound in the back of the head?
How come there wasn't a massive amount of blood and tissue all over
the trunk of the limo, or a bullet hole from the bullet that caused
the exit wound?

Don't answer.  I'm tired of arguing about what people claim to have
remembered seeing or hearing 30 years ago.  If the lower back of
JFK's skull was missing then, it still is now.  An exhumation and re-autopsy 
would settle the matter of the head wound once and for all.  After all, 
Zachary Taylor was exhumed on far weaker evidence of foul play.  Of course,
the results there pretty much ended the gravy train for the author who
was pushing a Zachary Taylor assassination conspiracy theory...

-- 

John Reece			
Intel spokesman?  Not!
From: steinarb@idt.unit.no (Steinar Bang)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Jennifer Connelly...NOT
Date: 15 Apr 92 11:54:06 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology, Trondheim, Norway

>>>>> On 13 Apr 92 21:12:36 GMT, margaret@cs.arizona.edu (Margaret Newman) said:

> The girl/woman in "The Man from Snowy River" was NOT Jennifer
> Connelly.  I believe her name is Sigrid Thompson or something very
> close to that.

Close, it's Sigrid Thornton

- Steinar
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: sjs28257@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Stelter)
Subject: Re: New Predator II Question
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 15:37:52 GMT

jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer) writes:

>Okay, now that the gun from the 18th century question has been solved, 
>can anyone explain to me who was the father of the female cop's baby? 
>Was she married? Was she just going out with one of the other cops?
>Which one? Did I miss something really obvious in this? (The last one
>I can answer - "probably")



Um, I don't think it matters.  I think the point here was to show that
although the Predator is an evil villain, 'cause he kills people, he's
at least an *honorable* villain, because he doesn't hunt pregnant 
women.  (We also learn around that time that he only kills people who
are armed.)

                                       --Steve Stelter
                                         sjs28257@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
From: rod@cats.ucsc.edu (Rodrick Su)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Eroticism without nudity
Date: 8 Apr 92 15:39:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: darkstar.32372
Organization: Tigana Restoration Inc.


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...
-- 
[ 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       ]
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies,rec.music.misc,rec.games.trivia,alt.music.alternative
From: cybe@leland.Stanford.EDU (Rajesh Krishnan)
Subject: Secret Samples (Shriekback & Pop Will Eat Itself) - the answers!
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 02:31:00 GMT


I am told that the Shriekback quote from Nemesis (Arch-Deviant Mix):
"...the pain of hell.  The burst from a lighted match increases a million
times..." comes from the movie Christine by John Carpenter.

The quote from X,Y, and Zee by PWEI:
"Let me tell you a little something about love.  It has a voracious
appetite.  It eats everything.... You feed it right and it can be 
a beautiful thing and that's what we have...." I am told is from
Mean Streets, the Martin Scorsese film.

I'm still working on verification, but these sound about right.

Thanks to all of you out there!
Enjoy life, it doesn't last long (fortunately).

   ----------------------------------------------------------------------
 / cybe@leland.stanford.edu   						  \
|  AOL: Cybe	  	      		Wherever you go...		   |
|  3-Space: Rajesh Krishnan   		  There you are.    - the B-52's   |
 \ OS/2 user & proud of it!   						  /
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: koerse@fwi.uva.nl (Niels Koerse (I88))
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Predator II Question
Date: 15 Apr 92 08:40:21 GMT
Organization: FWI, University of Amsterdam

birch@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (Steve Birch CSD) writes:


> Forgive me if this question has been asked before but....

> At the end of Predator II, the alien leader tosses a gun to our hero then
> says something to him.
> 
> Question: there was an inscription on the gun..what did it say??
As far is I remember it was an old gun from the 17 (18?)th century
bearing an inscription showing who owned the gun. I dont know 
who that was, I think it was some famous pirate captain from these days

> Question: what did the evil dude say??

> We must have rewound the tape 10 times trying to figure this out.

What he said I dont know. But it was meant to show that the Predators have 
been paying us visits for the last few centuries

> Thanks
>-- 
>Steven Birch
>University of New Brunswick
>Fredericton N.B. Canada
>Internet: BIRCH@UNB.CA



-- 
****************************** koerse@fwi.uva.nl ******************************
******************************** .sig ** naaah ********************************
From: fal20643@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Capt. Frank A. Lauro)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Plug Pulled on Spike Lee's "Malcolm X"
Date: 11 Apr 92 18:31:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: ux1.1992Apr11.183129.28230
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

tkelsey@panix.com (Tom Kelsey) writes:

>My feeling is that if he is 'going to the mat' for all this 'artistic'
>integrity he's nuts.  Its a film I feel no one wants to see any way..
>The 'whites' will stay away in DROVES...  

Not *this* one.  Speak for yourself (if, indeed, you are European-American).
There's a dangerous tone in your words:  'whites' will stay away from the
film, therefore 'no one' wants to see it.  Utilize the process of elimination
and you've got a statement that could be interpreted as downright racist.
--------
Captain Frank A. Lauro          Commanding Officer       University of Illinois
fal20643@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu       USS ALEXA NCC 1764-D     Urbana-Champaign
--------
"The artist deals with what cannot be said in words.  The artist whose 
 medium is fiction does this *in words*.  The novelist says in words 
 what cannot be said in words."  (Ursula K. Le Guin, 1976)
From: jpehko@cs.joensuu.fi (Juha Pehkonen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: A small problem with Silence of the Lambs
Date: 6 Apr 92 13:08:58 GMT
Organization: University of Joensuu

ddrumm@amiganet.chi.il.us (Daniel Drumm) writes:
>Michael Kaufman:
> 
>Good point about shaving Lecter.

yes it's a good point, but since the answer

>maybe they gave him a straight razor to shave himself and then made him give
>it back.

is and has all the time been this obvious I just wonder why this thread
got this long in the first place. 

No flames.

Juice

jpehko@cs.joensuu.fi 
Xref: sparky rec.arts.movies:13916 alt.cult-movies:4138
From: gmkoenig@acsu.buffalo.edu (Gerson V Koenig)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies
Subject: Re: Buckaroo Banzai (was Darkman - Crap)
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:29:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: acsu.1992Apr15.142942.2534
Organization: UB

orson@bluemoon.rn.com (Craig Smith) writes:
>     Frankly, I was very dissapointed at BB, because the humor in it was
>     told three levels deep.  That is to say, they were telling inside
>     jokes without having already established an inside!
>     I wanted BB to be a campy satire of SF movies, but the comic book
>     adaptation (which I read first) was campier than the movie. 

Did it ever occur to you that that is not what the people who made BB wanted?
The campy SF element was really only a small part of the movie. They were
trying to make something layered and complex with a world of its own that
you might have to watch carefully a few times before you really get it.

I mean, if you want campy sci-fi movie fine, just don't go saying that's what
BB should have been. 

>     For campy SF (ohh, I'm going to get blasted for this [cringe])
>     Howard the Duck (yes, the movie!) has it all over BB.  HtheD was
>     what BB should have been.

Yes, and Star Wars is what Close Encounters should have been.

>:: Craig E. Smith      "Life is a fulltime occupation" -- Gene Kallman ::
>:: Columbus, Ohio                                                      ::

"John" Koenig
gmkoenig@acsu.buffalo.edu
From: gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: defending your life (boring ?)
Date: 17 Apr 92 15:45:21 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Apr17.071420.54567@cc.usu.edu>, fajack@cc.usu.edu writes:
> 
> 	I enjoy Albert Brooks' movies such as "Modern Romance"  and "Lost
> in America".  I thinks he is a funny guy.  However, I find that "Defending
> your life" is one of the most boring movie I've ever seen.

I like all of his movies, but I thought DYL was the funniest (next to "Real Life").
> 	What went wrong here ?  Am I missing the jokes in the movie ?

Probably.

> Or are there too many 'symbolism' or 'message' in the film  ?

That might be the reason.  There was a bit of that.

GMS
From: tkelsey@panix.com (Tom Kelsey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: NOISES OFF
Date: 11 Apr 92 15:34:34 GMT
Organization: PANIX - Public Access Unix Systems of NY

In article <1992Apr03.164142.18000@microsoft.com> frankm@microsoft.com (Frank R.A.J. Maloney) writes:
>In article <kstsr7INNmer@early-bird.think.com> barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin) writes:
>>In article <1992Mar23.023604.26806@microsoft.com> frankm@microsoft.com (Frank R.A.J. Maloney) writes:
>>>Linn-Baker and Hagerty play the stage director and his
>>>assistant.
>>
>>I've seen the stage version twice and now the movie version, and I've
>>always thought that Poppy (Hagerty's character) was the stage manager and
>>Tim (Linn-Baker's character) was the assistant.  Notice the activity near
>>the beginning when Poppy gives instructions to other crew members, and when
>>Tim is called on to fix doors and such.
>>
>That may be. The situation in the movie is, shall we say,
>fluid?
>
>>Regarding the film in general, my one complaint is that it was *too*
>>faithful to the dialogue in the play.  They changed the characters of the
>>actors (but not the characters in the internal play) from British to
>>American, but the dialogue seems quite British to me.  This is most
>>noticeable in Vicki's "Sorry" lines; an American would say "What?", "Huh?",
>>or "Excuse me", but not "Sorry".  John Ritter's (I can't remember the
>>character's name) "You know" lines also seem stilted.
>>
>>However, there is one effect that is enhanced by this change.  When all
>>hell is breaking loose during the performances, the actors sometimes lose
>>their accents.  It's quite funny when they go in and out of character
>>rapidly like this.
>>
>When Carol Burnett makes her first entrance, she is moving
>rapidly in and out of accent, which a very broad
>stage-Cockney, I suppose. My first reaction was "Oh, dear,
>another movie where American actors prove they can't do
>accents." Then I caught on to the humor of those stilted
>stage-British accents. My partner, Lyndol, felt that having
>them speak in accents was a weakness; when I pointed out
>that it was a humorous device, he said: "Too subtle." Over
>all, we might have done without them since it opens the
>question of how good were these actors supposed to have
>been. Judging by their behavior in the middle part, I'd say
>not very professional, but the overall results say otherwise
>and Burnett's character is supposed be a major star in her
>last hurrah, investing her own money, trying to get a little
>retirement fund together from the success of the show.
>
>Incidentally, everyone I've personally recommended NOISES
>OFF to who has gone has loved it.
>
 Well evidently not enough, it was PULLED from release in
TWO weeks in New York City... thats really bad..

tk
Xref: sparky rec.arts.movies:13964 alt.cult-movies:4157
From: mack@acuson.com (David Mack)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies
Subject: Re: Buckaroo Banzai (was Darkman - Crap)
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:20:28 GMT
Organization: Acuson; Mountain View, California

orson@bluemoon.rn.com (Craig Smith) writes:

>> If you mean `is BB based on a comic book?', the answer's no -- the comic
>> books, the records, the Saturday morning radio show -- they're all
>> fabricated allusions.  Part of what makes this film such a gem is how
>> these subtle references feed the mystique of the characters' folk-hero
>> status, embedded in the mass public's consciousness ...
>> 
>     Frankly, I was very dissapointed at BB, because the humor in it was
>     told three levels deep.  That is to say, they were telling inside
>     jokes without having already established an inside!
>     I wanted BB to be a campy satire of SF movies, but the comic book
>     adaptation (which I read first) was campier than the movie. 
>     Example:
>       Th line was in the comic, not the movie:
>     "Youre going to the eighth dimension? Well, what about the fifth,
>     sixth, and seventh?"
>     "I guess they don't matter."

>     For campy SF (ohh, I'm going to get blasted for this [cringe])
>     Howard the Duck (yes, the movie!) has it all over BB.  HtheD was
>     what BB should have been.

YOU had better duck!  The feathers will fly after that comment.  I have to 
admit to not having seen all of HtD, but what I saw was just dumb.  And now,
to rescue BB, possibly my favorite movie of all time.  As for the comment
about the various dimensions, I think it is much cleverer to leave the
questions about the other dimensions unstated.  Obviously, the 8th dimension
is the only one that matters--it's the only one where you can go through
solid objects and the only one that let John Whorfin (self-proclaimed "Lord")
onto the Earth.  Anyway, I don't think BB is supposed to be satire.  It's
just weird and funny.  And the characters and their interactions are great--
especially Jeff Goldblum's New Jersey--"Where're yer spurs at?""What?  Is he
making fun of me?"  Too funny.  On another topic, I read about halfway through
the book and it wasn't funny at all.  It seems to take the whole thing too
seriously, which is a major mistake.  I guess I should admit that a fair amount
of lubrication increases the enjoyment of BB considerably.  You could probably
say that about most cult movies.

Dave Mack
-- 
"Believe it" - John Parker
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: csroc@dime.prime.com (Charles Sroczynski x4014 5-2)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Please help identify a quote
Keywords: Jane
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:53:10 GMT
Reply-To: csroc@dime.UUCP (Charles Sroczynski x4014 5-2)
Organization: Prime Computervision, Bedford MA

In article <92Apr5.212354edt.9047@rock.db.toronto.edu> fche@db.toronto.edu writes:
>Does anyone know where the line
>
>	"Jane, you ignorant slut!"
>
>comes from?
>

The early SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE programs
did a takeoff on the point-counterpoint
segment on the early 60 MINUTES show.

On SNL, Dan Akroyd would begin his 
counter with "JANE, you ignorant slut!"
In effect he was actually saying what
many people believed was in the mind
of the 60MInutes counter, but left unsaid.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: michaili@blondie.cs.wisc.edu (Afroditi Michailidi)
Subject: Re: I've got JUNGLE FEVER...She's got JUNGLE FEVER...
Keywords: We're in love...
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison -- Computer Sciences Dept.
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 04:32:44 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.212409.6717@ms.uky.edu> nyberg@ms.uky.edu (Jack Nyberg) writes:
...
>as in Spike Lee.  His JUNGLE FEVER was one of the more intelligent
>offerings this past year.  This comes as no surprise considering that all
>of his works are excellent (even School Daze which is underrated).
>
>   Why are they excellent?  Because they provoke thought and don't conclude
>with easy answers.  Also Mr. Lee is excellent with the camera and knows his
>stuff.

    The problem is, they often don't conclude at all. I'm a fan of Spike Lee's
ever since I saw _She's gotta have it_. Then follows _School Daze_ nice, a
change of style but ends ever so suddenly. Then _Do the Right Thing_ which
has no ending at all. Then _Jungle Fever_ which also ends with no answers. For
me, it's starting to sound like he doesn't _know_ how to end his films rather
than that he deliberately avoids ending them.

    Don't get me wrong, I like his stuff but (to me) it comes off as if he
doesn't know how to wrap up a story.

    And to be fair, I found the more conventional ending of _Mo' Better Blues_
more absurd than normal. Goes to show I don't know what endings should be
there either.


>                                                Jack
>


                                     Afroditi


*****************************************************
Warning: Graduate student -- overworked and underpaid
*****************************************************