HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: THUNDERHEART
Date: 13 Apr 92 14:43:50 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <28812@brahms.udel.edu>, bew@brahms.udel.edu (Ben Williams) writes:
> In article <1992Apr10.180629.8055@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> leeper@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (mark.r.leeper) writes:
> ; 
> ; 				 THUNDERHEART
> ; 		       A film review by Mark R. Leeper
> ; 
> ; 	  Capsule review:  Awful cliche-ridden script about a
> ;      murder case on the Ogalala Sioux Indian Reservation.  Well-
> ;      intentioned film has a good performance by Graham Greene (of
> ;      DANCES WITH WOLVES), but don't trust the film's portrayal of
> ;      Native American culture and don't expect to see a new plot.
> ;      Rating: -1 (-4 to +4).
> 
>   That's 'Oglala', I believe...
> 
>   [one hell of a cynical movie review]
> 
> ; 
> ;      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.  
> 
>   Huh?  I can count movies that have portrayed Native Americans fairly on the
>   the fingers of one hand.  That's too often?
> 
[... stuff relating to cynical movie review deleted ...]
> 
> I'm sorry that a film about what is currently happening to the indigenous
> peoples of this country is not entertaining enough for you.  Oh well...

Yeah, me too.  I'd like to see movies that describe events and are 
entertaining to me at the same time.  That may be idealistic since a lot
of informative movies fail to be entertaining.

Ben, you seem to be saying in your response to the review that the viewer
is obligated to like a movie that portrays a view you agree with.  I
hope you didn't intend that.

Secondly, you seem to say that the reviewer cannot know that Native Americans
do not have magic powers.  I agree that he cannot know this, but I have to
list myself among the skeptical on that point as well.

Thirdly, as with the person responsible for the movie, I'd say your heart
is in the right place, but that's not sufficient for a logical argument any
more than it is for making a movie.  The fact that any movie can have a worn-out
or "cliche'-ridden" plot has little or nothing to do with the message it is
trying to convey.  The message of the movie may make the audience more
receptive to the entertainment aspects of it, but that may do one of two things:
Those willing tolerate some flaws may enjoy it despite them, and those not
willing to tolerate them may be even more disappointed.


GMS
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: serdar@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (Serdar Uckun)
Subject: Premiere magazine collection for sale
Originator: serdar@taacman
Organization: Vanderbilt University School of Engineering, Nashville, TN, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 18:42:04 GMT

I'd like to get rid of my collection of the Premiere magazine (American
version).  The collection is complete from issue 1 (August 87) till
December 91.  Drop me a note if you're interested -- shipping costs +
best offer gets it.

-- 
the golden rod disappeared        the green trouser-suit was left on a hanger,
with a dry-cleaning ticket pinned to the left arm.  On the ticket was written:
		NAME:    ........................................ Serdar Uckun
		ADDRESS: ...........................serdar@vuse.vanderbilt.edu
From: jonke@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov (Stephen Jonke)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Censorship of nudity (was Re: Photo of minor)
Date: 8 Apr 92 14:32:46 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

In article <12013.29e1d40a@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu>, farrell@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu writes:
> 
> I thought this thread was originally about the claim that in movies there 
> are many more frontal nudity scenes of females than of males? 
> And not about making a list of every movie that contained a scene of Full-
> Frontal Nudity (FFN).  That would be a very long list!  ;-)
> --
> Margie 
> 
> 

Any film that has a full frontal nude of a male in it generally gets an
X (or NC-17 these days) rating, presumably because they figure that with
females you can have full frontal nudity that doesn't show "all the details"
where as with male full frontal nudity you've got no choice!

Personally, if I were a film star, I would NOT perform in a film which did
NOT have full frontal nudity. (insert smiley face here)

Steve
From: synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: DUNE...A minor classic?
Date: 15 Apr 92 06:25:15 GMT
Organization: SynthMuzik Productions Ltd.:  The Danes Call It Quality

napalm@next07wor.wam.umd.edu (Warren L. Mohn) writes:

>A CLASSIC?, Dune?, you must be on drugs.  Or were when you saw it.  This  
>piece of garbage passed off as science fiction is an insult to everyone  
>who saw it.  Audiences should bring a class-action suit against the studio  
>for releasing this film.  Just because David Lynch, a very fine director,  
>directed it and it had some nice visuals does not make it a classic.  The  
>[...]
>    When I saw this in the theater the studio had the audacity to hand out  
>little 2-3 page glossaries about the terms used in the movie, just in case  
>you hadn't read the book.  This gave the impression that the movie was  
>going to be an insightful, accurate, believable, intellectual journey into  
>the world of DUNE.  Yeah, whatever.  It was trash.

Jeez!  Tighten the reins on that rampant emotionalism for just a moment!
"Audacity"?  For your information, those little booklets were made *in
response to* initial audience complaints that the terms were confusing and
hard-to-follow.  Hardly the commercialistic self-glorification that you
seem to suggest.

On its own merits, DUNE was a flawed but noble attempt.  I thought the casting
and acting were marvelous, and the occasional Lynchian touch made some moments
really stand out.  The cinematography and set design were also very good, and
the whole film has a real operatic, somber atmosphere that *works* ... for
me, at least.

Just remember that anytime you compare a movie adaptation of a book to the
book itself, the movie will almost always crash and burn violently.

(Apologies for the .sig quote below, which came up completely at random
before I even saw Warren's post ... :-)


===============================================================================
    :: :: :: :: ::     Synth           synth@dreamtime.unm.edu   All Bound For
 :: :: :: :: :: :: ::  (F. Oberheim)   synth@yenta.alb.nm.us      Mu-Mu Land!
===============================================================================
"COOP! WE CAN'T LEAVE ALL THIS SPICE BEHIND, COOP!"
Xref: sparky rec.arts.movies:14096 alt.cult-movies:4223
From: gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies,alt.cult-movies
Subject: Re: Buckaroo Banzai (was Darkman - Crap)
Date: 17 Apr 92 15:41:36 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <aoucJB2w164w@bluemoon.rn.com>, orson@bluemoon.rn.com (Craig Smith) writes:
> > I read all the way through the book, and pretty much agree. It is all too
> > self-important and takes itself much too seriously. However, it is essential
> > reading for understanding much of what is going on, and the 'in' jokes,
> > in the film. 
> > 
> Again, telling inside jokes without an inside.  If one sees the movie
> cold (i.e. w/o preview, book, comic, etc.) too much of the movie goes

I'm kind of surprised at this.  I saw the movie without a clue as to what it
was about and enjoyed it immensely.  I didn't catch any "inside jokes" that
I found confusing or thought I needed more information to appreciate.
Maybe I missed "both levels" of the humor at those points.  Some of the
stuff (like the giant watermelon) made me laugh because of the non-sequitur
quality.  Maybe there was more to "get" that I didn't feel a need to "get"?

GMS
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: tmkk@uiuc.edu (K. Khan)
Subject: Re: Lets clear this T 101/800 thing up.
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 14:27:35 GMT


In article <Mdss7NG00Vp8QmXVkZ@andrew.cmu.edu> lb2e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Louis Blair) writes:
>Mark Julian Turner writes:
>>In "The Terminator" Kyle Reese calls the terminator a 800
>>series "...bad breath"
>
>I don't think so.  Here are the lines from the movie:

[lines omitted.]

>Why do people make such a big deal about this?  I think that
>terminology arguments are boring.

It's not terminology arguments per se - it's the fact that some of us
like to nitpick. That's why continuity errors like crawling blood stains
and pickup trucks parked on Roman chariot racetracks get us so excited.
;-)

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Pince of Tides: 0 for 7 (yes!)
Organization: Amherst College, Amherst, MA
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 19:15:53 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.184626.18648@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> sws8n@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Stefan William Sittig) writes:

>directing...Barbra is eons better than Demme, and I'd rather hear her voice
>than that boring ol' Demme and his "hums" and "uhs" and so forth.  What a mentalidiot!  I know 6th graders that have better public speaking skills than that
>troglodyte.

Intelligence is not directly related to speaking or writing skills, as
should be obvious in your case.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / "Someone here suggested blue square badges for
\  / twpierce@amherst.edu      /  straights.  Maybe we should try mauve
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /  heptagons?" - Damian Cugley, on soc.bi
From: George.Harris@bbs.oit.unc.edu (George Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: A small problem with Silence of the Lambs
Date: 4 Apr 92 19:43:08 GMT
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service

In article <1992Apr2.032745.9772@eecs.nwu.edu> kaufman@eecs.nwu.edu (Michael L. Kaufman) writes:
>
>Now, the problem. Who shaved Lector? I am fairly sure that he didn't shave
>himself, as I don't see anyone giving him a razor or an electric shaver. I
>am equally sure that noone shaved him. Considering his track record, who would
>get close to his mouth? Any ideas?

	I don't think it was mentioned in the movie, but in the book I believe
they say he used a depilatory powder.  I know such things exist, anyway.

>
>Michael Kaufman | I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on
> kaufman        | fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in
>  @eecs.nwu.edu | the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be
--
"If you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce, they taste more like 
prunes than rhubarb does."		-Groucho Marx

George.Harris@bbs.oit.unc.edu	or, preferably	gharris@jade.tufts.edu
--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: birch@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (Steve Birch CSD)
Subject: Predator II Question
Organization: University of New Brunswick
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 14:51:35 GMT

 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??
 Question: what did the evil dude say??

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

 Thanks
-- 
Steven Birch
University of New Brunswick
Fredericton N.B. Canada
Internet: BIRCH@UNB.CA
From: ab4n+@andrew.cmu.edu (Anish Bharat Bhimani)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Opinions on Oscar
Date: 10 Apr 92 04:53:43 GMT
	<1992Apr9.234139.12477@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
Organization: Masters student, Information Networking Institute, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Excerpts from netnews.rec.arts.movies: 9-Apr-92 Re: Opinions on Oscar
Gerald Olchowy@alchemy.c (737)


In article <22251@prometheus.megatest.UUCP> djones@megatest.UUCP (Dave
Jones) writes:
>From article <1992Mar31.181053.23779@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, by
jsw21124@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Joseph S. Walker):
>> 
>> ... I think the sweep was due more to the lack of strong competition than to
>> Lamb's own power as a film.
>
>There was plenty of good competition. The only problem was that none of those
>films got nominated. The Acadamy has much in common with our political
>parties in that respect.
>
>    -- See "Silence Of The Lambs" at a theater near you. It's the Clinton
>       of motion pictures.


Agreed totally....Naked Lunch should have been nominated in most of
the major categories, but it wasn't a Hollywood film, so it wasn't.

Gerald


I'm pretty sure that "Naked Lunch" was released _after_ the deadline for
consideration - thus making it eligible for 1992. However, I could be
wrong.

- Anish
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: kamorgan@athena.mit.edu (Keith Morgan)
Subject: Point Break - Coherent?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 18:09:08 GMT


Spoilers - 




^L



I saw the Keanu Reeves and Patrick Swayze movie _Point Break_ this
weekend and I'm puzzled about both the timing and what I saw as a
suddenly introduced character inconsistency. Has anyone else noticed
this? 
First, the cassette says the timing is 117 minutes and my Leonard
Maltin guide says that it's 122 minutes. (I know, Maltin can be wrong
but bear with me)

Second, the inconsistency is in Bodhi, the character played by Swayze.
According to the FBI analysis of their robbery m.o. they are so
successful at robbing banks because they're in and out and they never
touch the vault. Well, in the last robbery they do rob the vault and
chaos ensues. As well, their motivation for robbing banks is
attributed by the FBI agent played by Gary Busey to their desire to
have enough dough to go away for the winter to surf, and attributed by
Bodhi to their desire to screw the system. So, why did Bodhi decide to
go into the vault? This was over the objections of Presidents Nixon
and Johnson as I recall. Finally, why didn't he tell Rosie to let the
woman go when he was in the plane? All of sudden he turns into a real
hard case and this is somewhat at odds with the supposedly spiritual
thrill seeker of the first part of the movie. So it seems to me that
the missing 5 minutes might have had a scene that accounts for Bodhi's
change of attitude. I really like Kathryn Bigelow as a director and
think that problem resides with the screenplay.

'Nuff said. Any comments?

Keith
Newsgroups: alt.sex.movies,rec.arts.movies
From: merlyn@iWarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Subject: The Bare Facts Video Guide: ISBN, author, publisher
Followup-To: poster
Reply-To: merlyn@iWarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Organization: Stonehenge; netaccess via Intel, Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 22:15:33 GMT

[watch your followups... the only thing in common between these two
groups is "movies" :-]

A gazillion people emailed me wanting facts about "The Bare Facts
Guide" that I referenced in this newsgroup.  Well, on my lunch errand
run, I dropped by the house and got the info you'll need to ask for it
or order it.

The Bare Facts Video Guide (2nd Edition; blue cover)
by Craig Hosada
published by The Bare Facts (heh!), Santa Clara, California
ISBN 0-9625474-2-5
  (hmm. second book from this publisher.  wonder what the first one is? :-)

Just another videographer,
-- 
/=Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 ==========\
| on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III      |
| merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn |
\=Cute Quote: "Intel: putting the 'backward' in 'backward compatible'..."====/
From: joneil@heretix.East.Sun.COM (John O'Neil - SunExpress IR)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: buckaroo banzai--good?? bad??
Date: 14 Apr 92 04:48:11 GMT
Reply-To: joneil@heretix.East.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: heretix.east.sun.com


is this movie any good?? is it worth renting???
From: nicos@csa.bu.edu (Nicos Kontopoulos)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: `Hannibal' movies
Date: 8 Apr 92 17:57:00 GMT
Reply-To: nicos@cs.bu.edu (Nicos Kontopoulos)
Organization: Computer Science Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA


 I have heard that there have been movies about the character "Hannibal Hector"
(Anthony Hopkins in "The Silence of the Lambs").

 If you know anything about such a movie (title, availability, etc)
please e-mail me - rec.arts.movies has too much traffic for me :-)


Thanks,


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Nicos Kontopoulos                             Voice: (617) 787-1780
   INTERnet: nicos@cs.bu.edu                    BITnet: ecolpqc@buacca
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jrs@netcom.com (John Switzer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: New Predator II Question
Date: 15 Apr 92 21:21:50 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <54698@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz) writes:
>In article <1992Apr15.165709.9609@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> dyrda@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (The Conservative) writes:
>
>>I think they
>>were here for the sport of it. Also the predators maybe getting pissed
>>at earth seeing as though two have already bit the dust, maybe another
>>sequal will show this by Predators going nuts and attacking everywhere
>>and everyone. :-)
>
>If they're really only here for the sport of it, then there is no reason
>why they would get pissed at earth.
>
>Would you expect every human in the world to suddenly start killing
>all the deer just because some people have been killed while hunting?
>
Besides, if the Predators are really warriors/hunters, then the hunt 
would not matter at all if they faced no risk of death themselves. This 
is one reason they don't attack anyone who isn't armed themselves. 

Now, who the heck was the father of whats-her-name's baby!?!
-- 
John Switzer-Hoek          | "You hear it, you see it, 
(note yuppy hyphenation)   | you want to turn away, but 
74076.1250@Compuserve.com  | you CAN'T! It's Ren and Stimpy!"
jrs@netcom.com             | Happy, Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy, Joy!
Xref: sparky rec.arts.movies:13281 alt.sex:13713
From: kirk@cs.duke.edu (Scooter Corleone)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies,alt.sex
Subject: Re; Censorship of Nudity
Date: 7 Apr 92 13:34:27 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies
Organization: The Zymurgy Institute

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.  The male penis is referred to so many times and yet it is
>considered something to hide.  As a culture we consider ourselves an
>improvement over our Puritan ancestors yet on this issue they still seem
>to exercise a control of sorts.

(I restored rec.arts.movies to the Newsgroup line, because I'm discussing
nudity in movies.)

I'd like to see more *nonsexual* nudity, both male and female, including
male frontal nudity. The way nudity is portrayed now is really warped.
It is almost always sexual, and there is an overwhelming prevalence to show
women's bodies over mens. I'd like to see more natural, nonsexual nudity.
One of the more beautiful scenes I've seen in films is when Greta Scacchi
and her young daughter are taking a shower together in THE COCA COLA KID.
It's a natural and beautiful image. I think scenes like this are much
healthier than the way nudity is usually portrayed. Sexual nudity is
overemphasized, and in nonsexual situations, nudity is almost always shown
as being humiliating for the naked person or extemely embarassing for the
onlooker. The implication that nudity is shameful except in situations where
it always equals sex creates a distorted perception of the beauty of the
human body. Also, the bias towards showing increasingly explicit parts of
the female body while remaining very coy about the male body (we've now got
wall-to-wall boobs, and female pubic hair is increasingly common, while it's
still unusual to show men's butts) is an unhealthy imbalance and contributes
to the objectification of women's bodies.

PET PEEVE: It always bugs me when women have "magic sheets" attached to
their breasts after a "love" scene. They conform and conceal with their
every move. Since we've usually seen the whole show in the sex scene, it
breaks the illusion for me to see the obviously unnatural adherence of
sheets to breasts. Are women really more comfortable being naked during sex
than they are afterwards? This hasn't been my experience. (I realize this
can sometimes be due to the use of a body double for the sex scenes, and
coyness on the part of the actress, but it is a lack of continuity and
is incongruous.)

P.S. I'd also like to see less sexual nudity. We've seen it all already, and
I enjoy having sex much more than I enjoy watching other people do it. I
also think it's much more exciting, for example, to see a woman in bed with
the sheet up to her chin and know she's completely naked underneath than to
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.

No worries,

Scooter Corleone
From: csroc@dime.prime.com (Charles Sroczynski x4014 5-2)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Eroticism without nudity
Date: 9 Apr 92 14:05:47 GMT
Reply-To: csroc@dime.UUCP (Charles Sroczynski x4014 5-2)
Organization: Prime Computervision, Bedford MA

>> 	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 !!!!!

Gentleman,
  pls remember,
the subject is Eroticism without nudity

My recollection is that these movies
had mucho nudity(I love you , Ellen Barkin)
A scene or two with eroticism without nudity
violates the spirit of the subject.

I do agree that both films, and the performances
by Ellen are extremely good, sexy, and enjoyable.
From: bole@hmivax.humgen.upenn.edu (Greg Bole)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: SOTL questions...
Date: 13 Apr 92 15:24:41 GMT
Organization: HHMI/Human Genetics, Univ of Pa.

In article <1992Apr13.040304.27501@ucc.su.OZ.AU>, joe@archsci.arch.su.oz.au 
(Joe Nappa) writes:

> 1. Now Gumb's first murder is in the town of Belvedere,
> Ohio; if I remember rightly it's where Gumb hides out. Lecter
> tells Starling that he has drawn the view from memory -- how
> much more of a clue do you want?

Great point, I missed it entirely!

> 2. in the novel Lecter tells Starling that he once ate a census
> taker's liver "with fava beans and a big Amarone". Now in the
> film, the Amarone is swapped for the more well known Chianti. 

Don't you think that it's better for the audience to just realize that it's 
the name of wine, and not be confused.  I mean 99.9% wouldn't know the 
difference between the two anyway.  I support the filmakers decision.

>BTW, an aspect of Lecter that's left out of the film is his great reputation 
>as a gourmet writer -- pity, because the irony of this is, dare I say it, 
>delicious.

Ahhhh, but he did have a "Gourmet" magazine on his table in the cell that he
was moved too.  I saw it and got a good chuckle out of it.  Granted they
could have included this fact in the film to a greater extent, but I think 
much of Lecter's past was shrouded in mystery on purpose.

Thanks for the interesting comments Joe!

Greg Bole                           Indiana Jones - "Professor of Archeology,
bole@hmivax.humgen.upenn.edu        expert on the occult, and how does one 
                                    say it?  Obtainer of rare antiquities."
                                         _Raiders of the Lost Ark_