HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us (Dan Hartung)
Subject: Re: Jurassic Park
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 04:54:59 GMT

huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>sch@oasis.icl.co.uk (Simon Hamner) writes:
>>Basically the trailer starts in some mine in (I think) South Africa, and you
>>see some guy cut a chunk of rock from the mine wall. This rock goes through
>>various processes until its seen that its a piece of amber with a mosquito 
>>embedded in it. Meanwhile theres a voice over describing how this mosquito 
>>had been found which still contained the blood of some dinosaur, and how they
>>manage to extract the DNA.
>
>This sort of amber with trapped insects mostly comes from the Dominican
>Republic.  Just this year there have been papers published about analyses
>of the DNA from fossilized bees and (I think) termites.  There is also some
>amber with blood-sucking midges, not mosquitoes, entombed, and it's thought
>that some of them might have dinosaur blood.  The use of mosquitoes is
>probably artistic license, but the extraction of DNA from insects trapped
>in amber is science fact, not fiction.

True.  Although the scientist most famous for this technique says that
the book/movie take some great liberties with the practical end of 
turning this DNA into a zygote.

Interestingly, his work is featured prominently in the book (though
fictionalized) and the actual laboratory where the experiments with bees
took place was filmed for the _JP_ movie.

-- 
The Presidential Towers complex here   | Dan Hartung               |  Ask me
in Chicago is bounded by four streets: | dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us |  about
Jefferson, Adams, Monroe  .....        | Birch Grove Software      | Rotaract!
        and Clinton!
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: dmichl@iiic.ethz.ch (Mosh)
Subject: Goof in "Star wars - the empire strikes back"
Originator: dmichl@a13
Organization: Dept. Informatik, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH)
Distribution: europe
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:44:40 GMT

Did anybody notice that the german synchronised version has got an ugly
fault in the title? Although everybody except the german has his utter
difficulties with the Umlauts (ae,oe,ue), there's no need to spell "Das
Imperium schlaegt ZUERUCK" instead of "zurueck"...

-- 
                                   ,,,
             Mosh                 (o o)         Dennis "the menace" Michl
  ----------------------------oOO--(_)--OOo------------------------------
  #include <stddisclaimer.h>                        (dmichl@iiic.ethz.ch)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: spady@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robyn Spady)
Subject: Re: Rest-of-the-year hopefuls (was: A Few Good Men:a comedy?)
Organization: Boeing
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:14:13 GMT

In article Charles L Isbell writes:
>
>Well!  So what does that leave for Oscar hopefuls for the rest of the
>year?  _Hoffa_, _Chaplin_ and that thing with Michelle Pfeiffer?
>--

I think _Glengarry Glen Ross_ has some major Oscar contenders.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: firestar@leland.Stanford.EDU (Lipton Ann Meredith)
Subject: Dracula ...
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 07:36:37 GMT



Okay, I know this has been said before, but I just saw the movie and I didn't
read the previous posts in order to avoid spoilers, so here goes:



IT SUCKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Yes, this movie featured some of the worst acting, the worst screenwriting, and
above all the absolute worst English accents I have ever seen ...

I cannot believe how terrible it was ... in fact, I'd recommend people to
see it in order that they understand just how bad a movie can get ... and 
btw, what was the deal with the translucent Hawaiian-punch-like blood?



Firestar
-- 
I don't bite, you know.    | Find me and turn thy | It is better to have loved 
Unless it's called for.    | back on heaven.      | and lost than to have your
-- Audrey Hepburn, Charade | -- R. W. Emerson     | finger caught in a blender.
*******************************************************************************
From: Jay.Majer@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Most SHOCKING film i
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Nov 17 1992
Date: 14 Dec 92  12:14:00

To: whan@eagle.wesleyan.edu

U> The most shocking film of my childhood was a movie called "The Kingdom of
U> the
U> Spiders".  In it, a bunch of tarantulas take over a small town and wrap
U> in
U> webs.

I thought the movie was very well done. It was an excellent shocker. William
Shatner was... well... different. And I loved the ending!

 * Q-Blue v0.7 *
--- Maximus 2.00
From: csroc@dime.prime.com (Charles Sroczynski x4014 5-2)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: 9 1/2 Weeks
Date: 17 Dec 92 20:54:53 GMT
Reply-To: csroc@dime.UUCP (Charles Sroczynski x4014 5-2)
Organization: Prime Computervision, Bedford MA

In article <1992Dec17.014613.14202@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mdriscol@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mollie M Driscol) writes:
>
>>When a woman seeks sex it cannot be called rape.
>>Furthur when people are enjoying it , it is called
>>pleasure.  This was pleasureable sex for both people
>>(in both movies)
>
>First, let me say that it is when MEN enjoy sex that it
>is called pleasure.  Women's pleasure is usually not considered
>important in heterosexual intercourse.

First, let me respond by saying that real men
always consider a Women's pleasure in heterosexual intercourse
to be every bit as important(and probably more so) as their own.
I am sorry if your own experiences with men have been
unpleasureable. I suggest you try to find a REAL caring loving
SO for any romantic endeavor. It makes a big difference in the
way you perceive members of the opposite sex.  and they are
not too hard to find. nice guys are everywhere.

>
>Second, if a woman is raped, she is raped, whether she happened
>to have pleasure [including orgasm] or not.  If she is forced
>or coerced to engage in sexual activity, it is rape.  and it's
>not her fault.

I agree totally...read what I wrote
">>When a woman seeks sex it cannot be called rape.
 >>when people are enjoying it , it is called pleasure"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: dtschett@saims.skidmore.edu (donna tschetter)
Subject: Blues Brothers Poster...
Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:03:30 GMT


I am holding an unclaimed "Blues Brothers" poster for someone.
If unclaimed, it will be sold to any one who requests it.

email to me if interested.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: dododge@wam.umd.edu (David O. Dodge)
Subject: Re: Best foreign films, by country
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:50:13 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.175510.23647@cs.ucla.edu> reiher@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Peter Reiher) writes:
>In article <1992Dec9.210316.14365@vlsi.polymtl.ca> d40937@aiken (Jean Yves Desbiens) writes:
>>Those selections are of course my personal opinions.
>>I had to select in those I had seen, so there are certainly a lot
>>of omissions. Adds on are of course welcomed.
>>
>>Sweeden :
>>1. The serpents egg ( produced by Ingmar bergman )
>
>The only Swedish thing about this film is Bergman's presence.  (And Liv
>Ullman's, if memory serves.)  It was filmed in Germany while Bergman
>was a tax exile from Sweden, and also stars Keith Carradine.

Should be David Carradine.

>I haven't seen it,

Unfortunately I have :-P

>but it's not commonly regarded as one of Bergman's best.  In 
>fact, it's often regarded as one of Bergman's worst.

It's a real stinker IMO.

>Some other well regarded Swedish films include

 [ deleted ]

Might want to consider "My Life as a Dog". It doesn't hold up to multiple
viewings that well (again, IMO), but it's still a good movie.

                                       -Dave Dodge/dododge@wam.umd.edu
From: otto@jybox.jyu.fi (Otto J. Makela)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Light saber SFX (Was Re: Freeze-Frame Scenes)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 02:19:30 EET
Organization: Jyvaskyla Electronic Mailbox

<U28698@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:

> The scene in Empire Strikes Back when Darth Vader chops off Luke's hand
> is pretty cool, cause you can see Luke's (severed) hand still holding
> the light saber.

Talking of said scene -- does anyone know how the SFX of the sabers
chopping thru thick metal pipes etc. were done?  I thought these
effects made the sabers very much more believable.

   /* * * Otto J. Makela <otto@jybox.jyu.fi> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */
  /* Phone: +358 41 613 847, BBS: +358 41 211 562 (V.32bis/USR-HST,24h/d) */
 /* Mail: Kauppakatu 1B18/SF-40100 Jyvaskyla/Finland, ICBM: 62.14N25.44E */
/* * * Computers Rule 01001111 01001011 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: clsable@screen.Princeton.EDU (Carl Lewis Sable)
Subject: Re: Top 10 Films?
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 22:10:56 GMT

In article <92352.151817TAB129@psuvm.psu.edu> Todd Bobenrieth <TAB129@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>Could someone post a list of the top five moneymakers of all time...
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>I know the three Star Wars and two of three Indiana Jones are in there,
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>plus E.T. and Home Alone. But where do they all fit? Thanks in advance.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Funny how seven films could be includied in a list of just five!
Instead of "where do they all fit?" you should have asked 
"how do they all fit?".

Actually, I'm sure you meant to say top ten, but I couldn't resist the
silly joke.

-Carl
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: jmartin@ntmtv.UUCP (Jeff Martin)
Subject: Hunt For Red October (wasRe: Jurassic Park)
Originator: jmartin@cleomed
Organization: Northern Telecom Incorporated
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:58:29 GMT

From article <1992Dec11.115856.8707@sco.com>, by davidv@sco.COM (Uncle David):
> 
> if i'm not mistaken, The Hunt For Red October had it's screen
> rights purchased before the book was published. the movie
> version was very eagerly anticipated. Jurassic Park seems
> to be generating the same amount of anticipation (and for
> good reason, it's a very good book).
> -- 

I find this hard to believe because:
	1. At the time of publication Tom Clancy was an unknown
	   author using a small publisher. In fact I think HFRO
	   was his first book.
	2. There was a 5 or 6 year time lag between publication
	   and the film.
From: jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JOSEPH ALOYSIUS MCVEIGH)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Where is Tippi Hedren?
Date: 21 Dec 92 02:51:06 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

whan@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
>I am interested to know if anyone knows whatever happened to Tippi Hedren who
>appeared in Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds and Marnie.
[...]
>I haven't seen anything that she's been in recently although every
>where I look I see her daughter, Melanie Griffith, but I can't stand her.

Her daughter brought her back to public view by seeing to it that Tippi got a
minor role in a recent Griffith vehicle -I think it was "Pacific Heights."
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Aloysius McVeigh | "No one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd
   jm0i@.Lehigh.edu     |  only had good intentions. He has money as well."
       "N.I.N.A."       |                               - Margaret Thatcher
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: phd85@seq1.keele.ac.uk (D.H. Holden)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: most underated actress/actor
Date: 19 Dec 92 16:50:34 GMT
Organization: Keele University, England

From article <1992Dec16.235003.18981@cs.ucla.edu>, by reiher@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Peter Reiher):


    overated:   Tom Cruise, Madonna ( I realise most people thinks she a
    crap actress, but thats overating her in my opinion.)

    underated: Jennifer Jason Leigh.


--
                                                                     

phd85@uk.ac.keele.seq1
keele university. 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: sterbenc@ivhs.mot.com (Joe Sterbenc)
Subject: Re: Watchmen
Organization: MOTOROLA 
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 12:18:53 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.movies

In article <1992Dec14.135334.6226@fwi.uva.nl>, schaper@fwi.uva.nl (Lancelot
Schaper) wrote:
> 
> Can anybody tell me what's true about the rumours of the making of Watchmen,
> the movie?

Me too me too me too. Any and all info.

My casting thoughts:

Comedian - Nicholson is almost too obvious
Doctor Manhattan - could he be animated?
Ozymandais - William Hurt with fake muscles
Laura Juspecyk (sp?) - not sure
Night Owl - probably not realistic, but John Goodman would LOOK perfect
Rorschach - no idea - Daniel Day-Lewis? he's done everything else...

Is it true that Terry Gilliam is directing?
=====
Joe Sterbenc - Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems - Motorola
All opinions are my own, but can be rented for reasonable rates
sterbenc@ivhs.mot.com
=====
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: reiher@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Peter Reiher)
Subject: Re: who is dwight frye?
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Distribution: rec
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 21:39:15 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.1489.34982@channel1> "eliot gelwan" <eliot.gelwan@channel1.com> writes:
>FGAgreed.  Lugosi was born to play Dracula, and Frye was born to
>FGbe Renfield.
>
>Not exactly. As Halliwell notes, Lugosi only got the role because
>Karloff, who the studio *really* wanted, refused!

That makes him third choice, since Universal originally planned it for
Lon Chaney, who died before it could be made.  None the less, Lugosi
was well known for the part from the Broadway production of "Dracula",
and so completely defined the role in the public's imagination that I think 
it's fair to say that if anyone was born to play any part, Lugosi was born
for "Dracula".

-- 
		Peter Reiher
		reiher@wells.cs.ucla.edu
From: bole@hmivax.humgen.upenn.edu (Greg Bole)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Jurassic Park
Date: 15 Dec 92 16:19:46 GMT
Organization: HHMI/Human Genetics, Univ of Pa.

In article <1992Dec14.234518.42050@datamark.co.nz>, thomas@datamark.co.nz 
(Thomas Beagle) writes:

> Anyone else think the book was hardly worth wasting the time it took
> to read it?

While I was glad I read it (curiosity, and being able to discuss it) yes, 
it was a pretty poor novel.
 
> On the other hand, that sort of weak plot and wooden characterisation
> might work quite well in a film.

Agreed, the whole time I was thinking: "Wow what a badly written book, but
it could sure make a hell of an enjoyable movie!"

Greg Bole                            "Don't shrug you moron, I'm blind!
bole@hmivax.humgen.upenn.edu          Save the body languare for the bimbae."
                                        Al Pacino in _Scent of a Woman_
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: What makes us pick a film ? was -Re: Top Five Movies of All Time
Date: 15 Dec 1992 22:47:24 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com

In article <1992Dec9.164043.22180@spider.co.uk> colint@spider.co.uk (Colin Tinto) writes:
>Anyone else had similar childhood experiences that have influenced their
>choice of films ?

When I was ten years old, my aunt dropped my cousins and me off at what she
thought was a kiddie matinee.  However, the film was _Vertigo_ on its initial
release.  This made a lasting impression upon me although it was another 15
years before I was able to see it again (special network TV showing).  In
1978, when I drew up my top ten list, I placed _Vertigo_ in Position 3, but
I did not get to see it again until the early 1980s.

-- Herb Huston
-- huston@access.digex.com
From: Harv@cup.portal.com (Harv R Laser)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Problems with DieHard 2
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 16:00:17 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: usa
  <1992Dec15.165632.2198@Virginia.EDU>


>> I watched DieHard 2(again) over the weekend and there are a couple of things
>> that I have to mention.
>> [problems with DH 2 deleted]
>
>	I haven't actually seen DH 2, but I just had to get my
>$0.02 in by mentioning the fact that in the original Die Hard,
>Bruce Willis' tank top is sometimes white and sometimes black.
>Which is not to say that this ruined the movie, I loved it, and
>let me apologize now if this is an old topic but I'm new here...

It's an "undershirt" not a "tank top" :-) and watch the film
again. It doesn't really flip from white to black, as in a film
with bad continuity.. it starts out white and as he gets hot
and sweaty and shot at and crawls around/under/thru the
building it gets dirtier and darker and darker and dirtier so
it LOOKS like it's black but really it's just damn filthy.

Of all the things one might find to complain about (bad plot
logic, bad continuity) in the DH films, Willis' shirt in DH-1
wouldn't be one that I'd choose. 

Regards, Harv
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: barrus@cod.nosc.mil
Subject: Re: Movie Question - LORENZO'S OIL
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego, CA
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 23:25:54 GMT


In article <2302@hsdndev.UUCP> usenet@hsdndev.UUCP writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.221946.15547@cpqhou.compaq.com> dpruitt@cpqhou.UUCP (Daniel Pruitt) writes:
>>
>>I was surprised to find out that the movie is non-fiction.
>
>How could it be fiction if it's based on a true story? By the way,the
>trailers for Lorenzo's Oil look pretty powerful.
> 
I believe there is a book by the same name.  Reader's Digest had
an article (or abbr. version of the book, I can't remember) about a
couple of months ago.  I remember reading it and really being moved
and awed.  If the movie is as inspiring, it is going to be a really
good one.

JDB
From: hhtra@usho72.hou281.chevron.com (T.M.Haddock)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: APOCALYPSE NOW  (Was Re: Movies you loved, but couldn't see more than once.)
Date: 15 Dec 92 22:45:30 GMT
Organization: Chevron

In article <168BEDF0D.ARL00SJB@UNCCVM.UNCC.EDU>, ARL00SJB@UNCCVM.UNCC.EDU writes:
|> Definitely _Apocalypse Now_.  One of the most powerful movies I ever saw,
|> but the whole thing was like a descent into a nightmare, with madness at
|> the bottom.  My boyfriend and I argued about that one for weeks, especially
|> when they sacrificed the cow - I said that scene was real.  They filmed in
|> the Phillipines, with no SPCA to forbid actually chopping up an animal
|> that way, so I was (and still am) convinced that the sacrifice was real.
|> I remember someone asked me if I "liked" that movie, and I couldn't give
|> her an answer she could relate to.
|>  
|> --Jean

 Yep, the waterbuffalo was really slaughtered.  As I remember it...

 According to the Oscar winning THE MAKING OF APOCALYPSE NOW, the
 crew were taking a break from filming and the villagers were off 
 celebrating some kinda of holiday or something.  Some of the crew
 went but soon came running back to get FFC and took him to see the
 _sacrifice_ for real.  So impressed he was with the whole ceremony,
 he put it in the film to symbolize the _slaughtering_ of Kurtz/Brando.

 After arguing for several days over WHY Kurtz/Brando should say a
 simple line, someone said they could've save a animal by just sticking 
 some horns on Brando.  ;)


 TRAVIS
From: bgonzal@math.rutgers.edu (Bil Gonzalez)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Watchmen
Date: 14 Dec 92 21:41:29 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

schaper@fwi.uva.nl (Lancelot Schaper) writes:

>Can anybody tell me what's true about the rumours of the making of Watchmen,
>the movie?

>I'd like to hear everything that's known about this, so what would be the cast?
>(I especialy like to know who would play the part of Jon!)

A script for a movie version was completed several years ago ('89?), but I
understand that it was since ditched.  It was a bit different than the
original story, I guess to make it more realistic (yeah, right).  I
think it was by Sam Hamm, but this is from the top of my head.  The
script was available at SciFi conventions for a while.  I think
that they were going to give someone else a try at it...

Bil Gonzalez
bgonzal@math.rutgers.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
From: sjs28257@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Stelter)
Subject: Re: Most Underrated Actor/Actress
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:00:59 GMT

gjh2j@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Im a Joker Im a Smoker Im a Midnight Toker) writes:


>I am intersted in seeing who people think are the most underrated actor and
>actress currently working today...

Brion James ("Tango & Cash," "Crimewave," etc.), although Christopher
Walken is on my list as well.



                                --Steve Stelter
                                  sjs28257@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Spielberg Bashing
Date: 16 Dec 1992 19:26:58 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <1gnrelINNgfh@uwm.edu> alanchem@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Alan  
Scott Olson) writes:
> Personally, I'm tired of the Spielberg bashing.  SS is one of the  
most
> prolific, and successful directors/producers of the modern age.   
So, his
> films have been primarily targeted at families and children...so  
what!
> I was one of the children growing up and looked forward to his  
movies, and
> loved them all.
> 
> Who can argue that ET wasn't a terrific film.

I can. It was an OK film, but the level of manipulation got to
me after a while.  It was typical of mid-to-late Spielberg: a 
good film that should have been a great film had Spielberg
been able to edit himself, tighten things a bit around the
edges, and make a few minor changes.

  Jaws scared the *#@! out of
> me, but I still loved it.  The Raiders trilogy was great.  IMHO, he  
should
> have won Best Director for The Color Purple.  I could ramble on  
about how
> I enjoy every movie I've seen by him, but why.

I liked the ones you mentioned above, though I think the 1st and
3rd Indy Jones movies were better than the second one.  But
I think Jaws and Raiders of the Lost Ark are perhaps the
two best Spielberg films (though Close Encounters of the Third
Kind, The Color Purple, and Empire of the Sun also belong on the
list of his best work).

But you neglect to mention the films that didn't entirely
work.  Hook was a disapointment: a good film that should have
been a great one. 1941 was very overdone (though funny in 
spots).   And Indy Jones and the Temple of Tomb is not up to
the other two because in several key points Spielberg changes the
feel of the film by his inability to control himself (the dinner
sequence, with snakes, bugs, and monkey brains is the prime
example of this).

> 
> After reading Jurassic Park, I said to myself, "This would be a  
great movie,
> and, God I wish Spielberg would direct it".  Now, I cannot wait for  
it to
> come out.  
> 

I agree here. I think Spielberg will do a fine job on it.

> The guy is a genius, plain and simple.
> 

No, the guy shows signs of genius from time to time, but usually
lacks sufficient self-control and the ability to edit himself
to really be great instead of only very good.  (Sort of like
the cinematic version of Stephen King, who also shows flashes
of brilliance in novels that are padded by 20%.)

I have almost never come out of a Spielberg film feeling that
I'd wasted my money or feeling that it wasn't somehow a good
film. But I've often left them also feeling "If only he'd ... "

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com