Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Moriarty's Rumblings from the Lab #20

Well, the sinister professor of all things twisted and evil has taken time off from his depraved ramblings around the sin dens of old Hollywood with the HEAD GEEK long enough to file this typically complex report with Father Geek back here at AICN Headquarters in Austin. Very interesting... Very interesting indeed...


Hey, all. "Moriarty" here. I know, I know... I said I was taking November off. It's not my fault. Just when I think I'm out, they PULL ME BACK IN! HOO-HA! Pardon me... I just saw the ANY GIVEN SUNDAY trailer again and I had the strangest compulsion to begin chewing scenery. Since I'm still up to my ears in the experiments that are taking up so much of the time here at the Labs these days, let's get down to brass tacks: how much for the ape?

Well, one of the bigger leaks of the week can be credited to the guys over at, who seem to be doing a bang-up job for being such a new site. Den Shewman scored a copy of David Mamet's rejected screenplay for HANNIBAL and has run the first major review of the piece. Sounds like they've kept all the problems of the book without retaining any of its strengths. No wonder Foster's making noises about bailing out. She's got to be nervous about coming back and destroying a character that still stands as one of the most popular of the decade. I hope that she and Hopkins stand their ground until someone delivers something useable to them. When I come back from my hiatus for real -- this column's just a hiccup, one I'm sneaking in -- I'll take a look at the script myself. I'm a big fan of some of Mamet's screen writing -- THE VERDICT, THE UNTOUCHABLES, and his own HOMICIDE leap to mind -- but I don't think he's infallible. I don't necessarily think Steve Zallian's the answer for that kind of film, though. It reminds me of Frank Darabont in the six months after the nominations for SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION. Everyone in town offered him everything, and he commented on one particular time, sitting in a meeting in which some producers were offering him a bloody serial killer piece with brutal, graphic murder sequences, when he finally laughed out loud and asked them what in SHAWSHANK made them think there was any reason he'd be interested in that type of film. Just because someone's great at one thing -- and Zallian is indeed that -- there's no reason to think they're right for every assignment. I hope Zallian can find the human heart of HANNIBAL. It's obvious from the amount of attention already focused on the still early development process for the project, people want to see Lechter and Starling again, as long as it's done right.

I also have to give props for making me insanely happy with one of their stories, in which they outline the development and specs for a new Playstation game called EVIL DEAD: ASHES TO ASHES. Yes, folks, that's right... you're finally going to be able to pick up the chainsaw in one hand, the shotgun in the other, and get groovy on some wicked cabin zombies. Bruce Campbell is providing the voice for the game, recording all sorts of new material. Since there's nothing but the vaguest of rumor about future EVIL DEAD movies at this point, geeks like me will probably rejoice at this announcement that promises some respite for us hardcore addicts to the series. THQ and Heavy Iron Studios have just become my favorite new friends thanks to the promise of new Ash, folks... as if the announcement of the McFarlane Toys Ash figure wasn't already enough to make me cry from joy.

Now let me follow up one last story that IGN ran yesterday, since they only had part of it. Eric Roth has been making sounds lately about writing a FORREST GUMP sequel, making sounds about how Tom Hanks is part of the development, and he's been making really coy sounds lately about the subject of the sequel. All that is true. Wanna know what it's going to be about? Remember... you heard it here first. It's a spoiler, too, so if you don't want to know... RUN, FORREST, RUN!! Gump's little boy is going to pull a Jenny, and Gump is going to be rocked to his very core and have to turn to religion to help him figure out what's happened. This will send him on a trip through all the religions of the world, giving Hanks and (presumably) Zemeckis a chance to make comment as they jump from Catholicism to Judaism to Buddhism, along with every other faith of the world. Can't wait to see Gump in the sure to be hysterical snake handling sequence.

Actually, all kidding aside, Roth and Hanks and everyone else involved should be careful, since they're evidently not allowed to discuss religion to any serious degree. If they say the wrong thing about Jesus, William Donahue and the Catholic League may come down on them. If they say the wrong thing about L. Ron Hubbard, they'll have Scientologists crawling all over them. And if they're really not careful, they could end up like Terrence McNally, who has now joined Salman Rushdie in the dubious honor of having a death fatwah issued against him by an Islamic extremists group over his play CORPUS CHRISTI, which just opened in London. I haven't seen McNally's play, so I'm not going to comment on what I think of his handling of a homosexual Jesus in the piece. I'm sure it's more sensitive and thoughtful than the infamous exploitation film HIM ("Why do you think he hung out with 12 guys?") from the '70s, but of course, there's no way McNally didn't know that the piece would cause controversy when he wrote it. That doesn't mean anyone has the right to kill him over the piece. I'm so saddened when any attempt to bring any alternative viewpoints into a discussion about religion, whether in real life or in art, results in people ending up further apart instead of closer together. It baffles me how the whole puruit of faith -- an attempt to understand one's relationship with mankind and the eternal -- can result in hatred or violence. It does, though. I couldn't even write a review for Luc Besson's magnificent THE MESSENGER (a view I'll stand behind even as other critics jump into a monkey pile on it as the release date approaches) without being bombarded by some truly twisted mail questioning my background and my motives in discussing Joan and her relationship with the Church.

I contend that it is literally impossible in this day and age to write anything of any serious intent regarding religion without causing outrage from someone. When CORPUS CHRISTI opened in London, members of Al-Muhajiroun -- a.k.a. The Defenders of The Messenger Jesus -- handed out copies of the fatwah, signed by Sheik Omar Bakri Muhammad, judge of the Shari'ah Court of the U.K. Why take it to that extreme? You don't like the play, you should be free to stand outside and explain to people why. That's the power of art, man. It challenges you, it dares you to react. But the minute that protest becomes the threat of violence, the threat of death... I can't fully describe to you how sad that makes me. Somewhere, some artist read that story about McNally, and they reflected on something, some piece of theirs, something that they may have already created or that they might just be considering... and they had second thoughts. They had doubts. They thought, "Is it worth it?" I don't fault them. Who wants to invite that into their life? It doesn't matter if the fatwah against McNally ever comes to fruition; the one against Rushdie didn't. In the end, the damage is done. If even one artist doubts himself or muffles himself or censors himself out of fear... then we're all poorer for it.

Speaking of censorship, I'd like to address something else quickly. Recently, ACCESS HOLLYWOOD signed a deal with Hollywood Stock Exchange to produce a Friday segment that predicts the weekend's box-office. It's just more meaningless numbers being spouted by more talking heads, exactly what television doesn't need, but there's plenty of people who get their rocks off playing HSX, so it seemed like a decent idea for a regular segment. Instead, the studios freaked out at the idea of someone on TV playing the kind of "fantasy football" prediction games that are so popular online. There was a lot of threatening and posturing back and forth, and the fate of the segment's now up in the air.

I'm not going to pretend like this is a "freedom of the press" issue, since ACCESS HOLLYWOOD is not the press. It's puff piece publicity machine press release fluff, and that's exactly why people watch it. That kind of shows lives and dies based on its relationships with the studios. I mean, for chrissakes, the name of the show is ACCESS HOLLYWOOD. They are freakin' invited. Piss off the people you work for and get uninvited, and the show doesn't really work anymore. I think you'll see the show do exactly what the studios want. If that means losing the segment, it's gone. You'll hear a lot of noise about how television's not ready for the Internet yet, and how it's censorship. Nonsense. It's possible to tell the truth about this industry online and on television, but you have to do it without relying on the old lines of communication and information. I know there was a bit of hubbub here on the site and in the press when USA TODAY ran their recent story about Harry pitching the AICN TV show. Let me just weigh in with this one thought about the plans that AICN has for television: it's nothing anyone expects. It is going to be genuinely thrilling to play with a whole new medium and to try and create something that no one else has done in terms of bringing you a unique insight into the world of film. Harry's got some great ideas up his sleeve, everyone. When he's ready to share everything with you, I promise you'll get as excited as I am.

I don't mean any disrespect, but what's up with Lucasfilm right now? Are they feeling the pressure of EPISODE II? Are they just hurting from the fan backlash against EPISODE I? I hope that the various sniping comments we've heard from Lucasfilm over the last few weeks have been misquotations, but if they're not, I'd like to suggest that they be the last such public quotes made. First reported that some Icelandic paper (which never did get named by anyone) supposedly ran an interview with Lucas where he bagged on Peter Jackson's upcoming LORD OF THE RINGS project, subtly (and not so subtly) suggesting that no FX company besides ILM could pull off the pictures. I don't know... that just doesn't sound like Lucas to me. It seems like poor sportsmanship to start taking potshots at someone else's movie that just happens to be opening at the same time as one of yours -- RETURN OF THE KING versus EPISODE II, if all works out correctly. I hope Rick McCallum was more tactful than to actually call MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 2 a "disaster" when interviewed by AUSTRALIAN INDEPENDENT FILMMAKERS MAGAZINE. The interview is quoted by Mr. Showbiz in an piece about how many of the smaller roles in the next two films will be filled by Australians, introducing a whole new accent into the STAR WARS universe. That's cool, and I can get behind Lucas and McCallum in their decision to go to Australia. I'll be honest... I want to eventually relocate the Labs down under. I think it would be amazing. There's a great film community there, just ready to be worked. For years, independent Australian films and New Zealand films have been among the most interesting and consistent in world cinema. I think it's very, very cool that somewhere, right now, the first day of filming on Baz Luhrmann's MOULIN ROUGE is underway. This could be a glorious experiment, a full-blown musical that works and reinvents the form, or it could be Luhrmann's ONE FROM THE HEART. Either way, what a great and crazy risk. I love that EPISODE II and III and MATRIX II and III and LORD OF THE RINGS and so much more is going to be all shot in this one corner of the world, all at roughly the same time. There's going to be such a fertile cross-polinization of talent and energy that we're bound to get some wonderful things from it. I'm personally praying that M:I2 is going to Woo at his biggest and best. I'm not going to read the script before the film comes out, and I'm not going to be reading spoilers. If you feel like writing me about the movie, don't. I'm waiting for that one. I think it's poor form for Lucas to take shots at the film. He was hammered with enough criticism for his movie that he should be focused on the two films still ahead of him. That's enough for anyone to concern themselves with.

I had the distinct pleasure of reading an advance copy of Bill Zehme's LOST IN THE FUNHOUSE: THE LIFE AND MIND OF ANDY KAUFMAN this week. It's slow going at first, but once it picks up and gets into Andy's actual work, there is a wealth of material here that I'd never heard or read anywhere. The book is filled with personal memories of Andy from everyone who ever met him, worked with him, or even saw him perform it seems. It's meticulously researched, and it offers a portrait of Andy that I had never seen. Between this, Zmuda's book, and MAN ON THE MOON, it's just a preposterously wonderful time to be a Kaufman fan. Now if I could just track down a copy of THE TONY CLIFTON STORY by Andy Kaufman and Bob Zmuda to read, I'd die of bliss.

I assume all of you heard the enormously cool news that Brad Bird has been signed to develop the feature film version of CURIOUS GEORGE for Universal and Imagine. I was never a giant fan of the idea of bringing Curious George to life; big fan as a kid, and there's a delicate nature to the stories that just doesn't seem like it could survive the translation to the screen. Well, with Brad aboard, I'm sold. I'm there opening weekend. I have absolute faith now that it will be a film that honors the spirit of the original books. He's also the only person I'd ever consider apt as a director for a CALVIN & HOBBES film (another project I'm dead set against for reasons that would take too long to explain here). I'm sure Imagine was thrilled when THE IRON GIANT swept the 27th Annie Awards Saturday night. I was. I know the film never broke $30 million at the box office, but the animation community recognized the film with fifteen major awards, including excellence in character animation, effects animation, directing, music, storyboarding, writing, theatrics, individual voiceover and production design. Awesome. Absolutely right on the money. Bird and his team have made a film for the ages, one that will be remembered far beyond this year's various brutal box office skirmishes. Bird is the one who first suggested to me this spring that we could set our expectations higher with our filmmakers, and I've had my expectations met time and time again this year with films that have taken my breath away for one reason or another.

I'm absolutely stone cold sure that you'll agree with me when it comes to Tim Burton's triumphant return to form SLEEPY HOLLOW. This is not a film; it is a spell that Burton casts on the viewer, a child's remembered version of a Hammer film. It is the SLEEPY HOLLOW we all saw after the Irving book had been put away, when we were trying to get to sleep. There are moments of haunted beauty in the film, image after unforgettable image, and the nighttime Horseman rides are truly stunning. The sounds, the sight of the Horseman in full gallop, sword or axe swinging -- god, Tim's created a thing of beauty here. I'm wrestling with whether or not I feel this is Burton's best work. ED WOOD is amazing in a totally different way, and comparing the films may be futile. This is the Burton that I always hoped he would become. In his original BATMAN, I thought one of the film's biggest weaknesses was the mishandling of the action scenes. Burton never really seemed to have the heart for it. Now, though, he's found the heart, and he delivers some astonishing kinetic sequences that really end up being jarring, exhilarating. He's also finally found the perfect balance between horror and humor, knowing just when to tweak the audience this way or that.

Sitting in the Paramount theater tonight, Harry and Robie and Segue all vanished. I had no sense of them. I was transported by the film. It's magic from the moment it begins. Even under the Paramount logo and the Mandalay logo, there's that first hint of Elfman, those first few creeping notes, and then the credits begin, smoke against the darkness, leading us into the first scene, the first ride, the beheading of Van Garrett (Martin Landau). It's shocking, bloody, genuinely scary. When we meet Ichabod Crane, it's quick, his character etched in as we get a quick glimpse at the world he lives in. It's just before the millennium, at the dawn of the 19th Century. He's a man of science, a man ahead of his time. He's almost immediately dispatched to Sleepy Hollow by Christopher Lee in a memorable, wicked little role, and then the credits continue. It's beautiful, propulsive, and it wastes no time in setting the mood, in painting the picture. Burton and Emmanuel Lubezki are a magnificent team, and if the film were ravishing only as a visual confection, that would be more than enough. It's that hypnotic.

That's not it, though; there's more... a lot more. Tim's jammed this film so full of wonders that if I try to list them all, I'll end up spoiling the whole film for you. Jeffrey Jones, Miranda Richardson, Michael Gough, Ian McDiarmid, Lisa Marie -- ESPECIALLY Lisa Marie -- Michael Gambon, and even Casper Van Dien all contribute memorable moments to the film. They've all got great faces, and the film is spilling over with character. In particular, though, let me praise Christopher Walken for his feral work as the Hessian Horseman, Christina Ricci for striking just the right tone as Katrina, and Johnny Depp, who continues to prove himself one of the most consistently fascinating actors working. He is funny, dashing, goofy, daring, and charismatic as Ichabod, but he never once lets you catch him working at it. There's an effortless grace to the performance, and Depp and Burton deliver another classic character to the pantheon. Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, and now Ichabod Crane -- I'd say they just became my official favorite actor/director team on the planet. I'm not sure what it is that defines their chemistry, but it's impossible to deny.

I'm genuinely baffled how anyone could walk out of this film disappointed. It is such a fast-paced, confident film, never misstepping, never erring in the choices it makes. Tom Stoppard's uncredited rewrite took the Headless Horseman of Andy Kevin Walker's script and made him a little less Terminator, a little more avenging ghost. It also managed to elevate the film from an action-horror piece to a classic dark fable. I think this film has a magnificent texture that only Burton could have pulled off. He seems more in touch with his gifts as an artist here than he ever has been. Maybe it was the heartbreak of SUPERMAN, but something seems to have changed him in some way, and I'd say it's for the better. I've been a fan since PEE WEE'S BIG ADVENTURE, but I've never been blind to Tim's weaknesses. His films have always seemed to be pleasing him than pleasing the audience. That's not the case here at all. This film never once takes the easy way out in any scene. If there's a way to take it one step further, make it one bit better, Tim does. He adds visual flourish to every moment without once losing focus of a scene. There's nothing here for the sake of style; it's all in service of the witty script that balances its ghost story and its mystery with aplomb. Stoppard's sure hand -- the same hand that brought so much to both BRAZIL and SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE -- haunts the film as surely as the Horseman does.

I hope this movie does phenomenal business. It deserves to. I hope it stands up to TWINE and TOY STORY 2 and END OF DAYS and all the giant December releases. I hope someone gets me a set of the McFarlane toys for Christmas, since they are literally the greatest movie toys of the year, and I will die if I do not own them soon. I hope Tim Burton contines to dazzle us now that he has reclaimed his place as one of the finest fantasy filmmakers, now or ever. Mainly, though, I just hope I get a chance to see the film again about five more times opening weekend.

Tonight, Tuesday, Harry and I will be checking out another major holiday release, and I'm genuinely dying to know how it's going to be. This one's riskier than the last few I've seen. I go into it with no preconceptions. As always, I hope for the best. I'll check in tomorrow to tell you what film it is and how it was. Until then...


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Nov. 9, 1999, 8:31 a.m. CST

    flying pumpkins

    by mr_noodle

    There are just too many movies coming out that I want to see. After Being John Malcovich and The Insider, this week we have Dogma, then Sleep Hollow. The film I'm still looking forward to the most is Magnolia, but after hearing everything I have about Sleepy Hollow, I think Burton may be back to form. 1999 will go down as a great year in film.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9 a.m. CST

    Sleepy Hollow & Fight Club

    by Smack

    Sleepy Hollow is the film I've been looking the most forward to since the summer ended. There's something about the story that has always intrigued me and stayed with me. I recently bought the Disney version because I enjoy it so much. If it's as good as Moriarty says it is then I'm sure I won't be disappointed. Contrary to what Moriarty thinks, I don't think Fight Club will be remembered in years to come. I thought it was OK with good performances by Pitt and Norton, and good direction by Fincher, but I walked out unimpressed. I think fans of the movie will remember it, obviously, but in terms of the American movie-going public I think it will be a blip on the movie radar. I could be wrong, but do you honestly think that people will remember this, or it will have the same cultural impact as Taxi Driver did? I don't think so, but that's just my opinion.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:03 a.m. CST

    runaway production

    by fonebone

    Everyone's going to Australia -- what's the hurry? I wonder if any of you find SAG's campaign against runaway production to be meaningful, or futile, or misguided. Is fear about the loss of American jobs realistic or xenophobic? I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on the subject.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:05 a.m. CST

    Thanks Moriarty....

    by Splinter

    Thanks again for a wonderful article - I'm sure there are a few Europeans hidden behind their talk-back handles, but the majority of you Americans don't realise how lucky you are - We (in Ireland) don't get to see the films you guys are raving about for fucking MONTHS, and its a killer. Blair Witch opened last week - by the time I actually saw it, it seemed like I'd been avoiding articles/potential spoilers forever. The Sixth Sense opens this Friday, and man - I can't wait. There's another film I have been PRAYING some asshole doesn't ruin for me with an absent-minded, throw-away comment in an abent-minded, throw-away article. Anyways, nothing specific to say - Hey Kurt, long-time no hear - I've been avoiding the standard 'Fuck Off Rufus' talk-backs because the guy actually makes me feel murderous. And that new guy St. Clair - man, if that guy isn't Rufus under a different name, I'm not a potato chewing Paddy. See ya later, Splinter out.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:08 a.m. CST

    Moriarty: Your END OF DAYS review

    by ABking

    Have you seen it and when will you post your review? I can't wait to hear what you thought of it!!!

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:09 a.m. CST

    Jodie Foster and Hannibal

    by jdegraf

    Very upset that Jodie Foster will not be in the Hannibal movie. Did not Silence of the Lambs give her a big career boost? She was nominated and won oscars right? This is perhaps the best 'suspense' film of the 90's. Now she has problems to play her charachter a tad on the dark side. It's not that big of a thing to eat a brain on screen is it?? What the hell is her problem? And all these complaints about the book being too gross, especially by the director of lambs, come on man, this is a psycho madman serial killer, what does you expect. I guess like with Man Hunter then Silence then Hannibal the spacing of the movies could allow for new actors. But the love relationship between Jodie and Hopkins would have been well worth it. SPOILER ALERT #### there is more than enough room at the end of hannibal that would allow Jodie to change her ways in the next book if there is one. Well this was one of many films I was looking forward to, too bad it won't happen.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:26 a.m. CST

    the millennium

    by crying wolf

    i was reading through the beautiful illustrated screenplay the other night at barnes and noble, and i noticed that line about the millennium. sorry guys, but unless the movie took place in 999, it wasn't the turn of the millennium, only the turn of the century. a great piece by moriarty yet again. my hopes are extremely high for this film after reading about half the script. it's going to be the perfect burton movie.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:32 a.m. CST

    Lucas can say what he wants...

    by :-o

    ...because he's the man behind Star Wars. And to be honest he's probably right--from the point of view of effects. I've also heard that MI2 is a disaster. Look, these guys are going to spout off occasionally. Sometimes I think they're too polite. They're responsible for the most visually exceptional CG work I've ever seen. They've proved that quality work can be done efficiently. There's NO EXCUSE for bad effects anymore. The Phantom Menace was wonderful and fun for it's pure, innocent unironic storytelling. People ragged on the film because they forgot that stuff in the decade of Pulp Fiction and the Matrix. No, it wasn't as good as Empire because it lacked Kirshner's character interplay and Kasdan's script. It also had too many Jedi's and royals and no everyman foils da da da. But it's mythology, man--and it was better than Return of the Jedi so...enough of this whining! Lucas is on to something only the kids seem to get. More of a Lewis Caroll plain, you know? Give them a break. Wait for the other two and don't get pissy when they let a remark or two slip out about the crappy industry they have to wade through. I saw Phantom Menace three times and the Matrix once. Why? I don't know. Just preferred to. More of a nerd's paradise I guess. But that IS the test at the end of the day isn't it. Can John Woo do this? Can Peter Jackson do this? Can Tim Burton do this? Maybe. But not yet for me.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:51 a.m. CST

    Of McNally, Runaway Productions, and HANNIBAL

    by mrbeaks

    It's horrifying to hear of a death threat made against McNally, and it's sad that it had to be provoked by such a lesser work. I don't know when McNally shifted gears from being a first-class playwright to a lazy, sensationalistic rabble rouser, but it's certainly a sad state of affairs. BTW, the play was not well-received in New York, and failed to incite any kind of violence or meaningful protest, which is why I'm shocked by this extreme reaction abroad. On runaway productions..... SAG has long been a tough bargaining party within the industry, and now they're seeing the fallout. With the recent election skewing as it did towards the more extreme, less-educated faction (who are mostly comprised of non-working actors,) I believe things will only get worse. Onto HANNIBAL..... if David Mamet and Steve Zaillian are unable to produce a workable draft of Harris' unwieldy tome, I think we should consider the project dead. That is, unless Tom Stoppard feels like taking a crack at it.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:53 a.m. CST

    And regarding Clarice...

    by :-o

    I LOVE the fact that Thomas Harris threw this curve ball in there. I swear, if I had to read another article about the great proto-feminist Clarice/Jodie in the various alterna-zines after Silence came out--I would puke! I started to feel like the role was more about Jodie Foster and Jonathan Demme than Clarice Starling!! And what a better way to call them on this by having the writer (i.e. the man who made it up!) fix it in his next book. I always thought that if Clarice was supposed to be such a diesel lady, as they editorialized, then why the hell did she let Lecter into her head in 'Silence'. Why did she sympathize with him? Why did she lobby for special treatment? Because she was enamored by the monster--and that is EXACTLY what Harris expounded on in 'Hannibal'. I liked the twist because it shut down the myth. Jodie should get off her high horse and tackle this ambiguous role! She's been playing the same uber- lesbian in too many movies anyway.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 10:18 a.m. CST

    Moriarty and "faith"

    by Mean Ween

    Why are you so baffled, Professor? To many, religion is not something that is done on Sunday mornings and twice a year with presents and bunnies. There a people out there who will gladly die, who consider it an honor to die, for their God. You seem to think that art should transcend all of that and bring us together in some coca-cola-esque feel good dialogue. We should appreciate eachother's differences and learn from them. Make no mistakes, these "zealots" are not unenlightened lunatics. They are very capable of understanding your argument. But their "faith" superscedes that. I know I will probably never approach their level of belief (though I'd like to). Their entire being, existence, life, and world are all viewed through the lens of their religion and your views concerning "art" and "expression" are meaningless and transient to them when you take into account the fact that they view their lives as preparation for eternity. These "extremists", "fundamentalists", "sects", whatever you call them should be taken very seriously. Anyone, any artist, out to challenge their views knows that there is a risk. I agree that views should be challenged and questions asked... I just realize that protests don't always involve innocuous pickets. This playwright knew exactly what he was getting himself into. And, anyway, what is art without risk? I'm sure if he isn't killed, he be a better, wiser man for it.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 10:55 a.m. CST

    Harry, this is fucking ridiculous. . .

    by MadBoy

    Not only are the posts screwed up in order on almost ALL of the articles, but my post on this talkback is GONE! It was the first one, and I'm assuming it's because of a fuckup on the AICN end, because a)it was completely innoffensive, and 2) after I posted it, I tried to go back to the article and got a blank page. I know there are some things you need to iron out, but this is getting infuriating. Fuck it, I don't evn remember what I said anymore.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 11:26 a.m. CST

    Damn....and I thought EVID DEAD: Ashes to Ashes was the title of

    by mckracken

    well its cool that EVIL DEAD is getting a playstation game... but dammit we need part 4 (and 5 and 6 and 7) EVIL DEAD 4 NOW! speaking of horror, whats Clive Barker doing these days? I know I'll never get it, but I'm still wishing for Nightbreed II. --McK

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 12:13 p.m. CST

    Kiss my Ash. . .

    by MadBoy

    Hey, I found my post, on the Cider House Rules article, who knows how that happened. Anyway. . . An Evil Dead video game?? What the hell? I suppose it could be fun, but I'm gonna have to convuince my roommate to buy it now, since he's the guy with the system. I hope they do it well. And I think that another Evil Dead movie is actually a pretty good idea, I've loved all of them, including Army of Darkness, you naysaying bastards that I'm sure are going to disagree. . . .Access Hollywood is probably one of the worst entertainment shows o all time, I could care less what they do. . . . Curious George is a very important, very special little guy for many of us, I don't see it translating well onto the screen, but who knows, I suppoose it's for the kiddies anyway. . . . And finally, G. Lucas - what's with the trashtalk, eh? I think he's feeling threatened, like he's the only one that can make a great epic fantasy saga. Kind of lame, but. . . And good call by McKracken - I want Nightbreed II NOW NOW NOW NOW!!! I've been thinking about ideas for it since '90, dammit. It's the most wanted byut never seen sequel since the disappearance of Buckaroo Banzai Against the World Crime Sydicate, or the sequel to Doctor Detroit (maybe not that last one).

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 12:31 p.m. CST

    Am I the only one on the planet who felt let down by the filmed

    by Fred4sure

    Jodie Foster never scratched the surface of Clarice and Hopkins played it like a cartoon. Manhunter had a lot of problems, but it was closer to tone of Harris' work. IMHO. --Fred4Sure

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 12:34 p.m. CST

    No need

    by Pomona88

    "Silence of the Lambs" had perfect closure. There is absolutely no need for a sequel. Give it a rest.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 12:34 p.m. CST

    Jodie is RIGHT to pass on Hannibal

    by AlanBenson

    As much as I wanted to see Foster & Hopkins battle it out again in these roles, Jodie's right to reject ANY movie closely based on the Hannibal novel. Harris totally PISSED on Clarice Starling and betrayed the character. There is NO CONTINUITY between her and the original Starling. He simply DIDN'T CARE about her and used her as a plot gimmick. After winning an Oscar for the part, how could Jodie possibly dump on the character herself? Bravo for taking the only artistic way out.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 12:43 p.m. CST

    sleepy hollow and fight club

    by blacksilence

    In all honesty, although I am a HUGE Burton fan, I didn't really think Sleepy Hollow would be all that great. I figured it would be a chance for Tim to show off his wonderful visuals, but that against such a backdrop the performances would fall flat, regardless of how skillful they may be. After seeing the trailers, I am convinced that this movie will be incredible. As for Fight Club, I have to part ways on it. Everyone seems to be looking at the questions the movie raises. I couldn't care any less. We've seen these "messages" done before in different films, and done a lot better. This film had all the existential angst we'd remember from puberty, but I don't think it was very remarkable. The movie itself, though? I think this was one of the best of the year. The ease with which Fincher uses the tools of filmmaking is astonishing. There was such a sense of experimentation there, and in the hands of a lesser talent (or at least a less-assured director), the film would have been a complete mess. I think Fincher's mastered the medium, and more so, I think this film will be one for the cinematography textbooks in another twenty years. Again, the story wasn't that great, but the fun he had with it was brilliant.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Jodie did not make Clarice

    by jdegraf

    Foster did not make Clarice, Harris made Clarice. Jodie wants to continue her heroic role, but she does not make Clarice what she is. She is simply an actor. Nothing like actors stepping in and wanting to change roles around and re-write scripts. That's not thier job. Harris did nothing to ruin the Starling persona in his new book. In fact Starling is really hardly in it, it is the story of Hannibal, that's what we want to know more about and got in the book. I really hope Jodie Foster never gets another decent role in her life. Foster says that Clarice is not Clarice? It's like foster thinks she is clarice. Artistic way to get out of a film?? hogwash

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 1:12 p.m. CST

    hmmm.. somethings not quite right.

    by Devils Halo

    1) Moriarty forgot to include The Vertical Limit to the list films shooting in Kiwi locations. 2) You really liked Sleepy Hollow that much? I thought it was generic Burton story-telling... that happened to be visually great. And that was too bad that I didn't get to see you and the fat man at Paramount. I just love that theater!

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 1:34 p.m. CST

    Ashes 2 Ashes...

    by Powerslave old news. This announcement was made over a month ago. There will be a series of 'Evil Dead' games for console and PC. Too bad the first game won't have multiplayer. It'll be nice to have a real 'Evil Dead' game, even though 'Duke Nukem 3d' referenced it constantly, as did 'Blood' to a certain extent. 'Duke Nukem Forever' will have the old chainsaw-for-a-hand weapon in it. Woo Hoo!

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 1:38 p.m. CST

    My thoughts...

    by gilmour

    I actually (and i'm going to get heck for this) thought that Silence Of The Lambs was a terribly overrated film. It's the only film to win all 5 major oscars WTF? What about it made it so good. I actually thought "Seven" was a much better and suspenseful film. I don't blame Foster, Harris may have created the character of Clarice, but it is Foster who people will remember as making the character a success.*slight spoiler* I mean, in the book's sequel, Harris makes Clarice practically a cannibal. The book is way too violent and is too far from the original. And for the poster who said the film made Foster, thats just not true. Foster was already an oscar winner before Silence Of The lambs. While it helped here career and was her biggest hit, she was already a successful actress.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 1:44 p.m. CST

    LUCAS is right

    by Darth Siskel

    Let's face it. Nobody has even come close to the realism & quality of ILM's character animation except, Phil Tippett(formerly of ILM), & PIXAR(formerly of LucasFilm)... The Frighteners had great effects, w/ some ILM people working on it. I think ILM WILL do some work on LOTR. It's just too big a project.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 2:08 p.m. CST


    by JON1969

    I didn't know what to call my subject so I figured ..anyway, Lucas can say what he wants, when he wants, but ... who the fuck cares! I have a idea .. Hey Lucas why don't you give a STORY next time and stop worry about another guy's project ... the preproduction work I have seen for LOTR looks good, but the story and characters are more important, but maybe I am wrong. Lucas would know, right? WRONG! work on your project and produce a better project of your own next time and than I'll listen. I agree with one of the posters about Silence of the Lambs it was a BIT overrated ... it was so like a comic book ... remember the scene of Jodi going to meet Lecter ... it was like a scene right out of a Batman comic. Where was Killer Croc and the Joker? The story was compelling enough ... the screaming of hte lambs!!! Manhunter was better and Seven was excellent except for that fricking ENDING .. and hearing Pitt, "What's in the box ...ohhhh" Man I could see that ending right when Brad's wife step on the screen ... I thought "SHE'S DEAD!" Anyway, otherwise a very moving and compelling film! The End of Days ..YES!! I hope that Arnold is good .. he needs a hit!!!

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 2:09 p.m. CST


    by JON1969

    I didn't know what to call my subject so I figured ..anyway, Lucas can say what he wants, when he wants, but ... who the fuck cares! I have a idea .. Hey Lucas why don't you give a STORY next time and stop worry about another guy's project ... the preproduction work I have seen for LOTR looks good, but the story and characters are more important, but maybe I am wrong. Lucas would know, right? WRONG! work on your project and produce a better project of your own next time and than I'll listen. I agree with one of the posters about Silence of the Lambs it was a BIT overrated ... it was so like a comic book ... remember the scene of Jodi going to meet Lecter ... it was like a scene right out of a Batman comic. Where was Killer Croc and the Joker? The story was compelling enough ... the screaming of hte lambs!!! Manhunter was better and Seven was excellent except for that fricking ENDING .. and hearing Pitt, "What's in the box ...ohhhh" Man I could see that ending right when Brad's wife step on the screen ... I thought "SHE'S DEAD!" Anyway, otherwise a very moving and compelling film! The End of Days ..YES!! I hope that Arnold is good .. he needs a hit!!!

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 2:13 p.m. CST

    Lucas Is Threatened

    by mrbeaks

    That is, if the statements attributed to him are genuine. Perhaps he's seen some test reels, or maybe he's just being paranoid, but if he's completely secure in the fact that LOTR poses no threat to his serial, then there's no reason to make such inflammatory comments. That is, unless he's friendly with PJ, but I've never heard that to be the case.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 2:25 p.m. CST

    Lucas' comments

    by SithPenguin

    I think we have to take into consideration the way Lucas said it. I have not heard the statement but was he smiling when he said it, was his tongue firmly in cheek, was he serious? Unitl we actually hear the quote we should not judge him on it taken out of context!

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 2:30 p.m. CST


    by jdegraf

    I thought for sure that PJ asked ILM to help out but ILM had to turn down the work due to too many other projects. So what gives? Lucas sees this as a knock against his movies I would guess. 1) 3 movies. Another knock against Lucas is that, were not the most recent additions of the triliogy supposed to be done in a relatively short time, not one every 2 years but one every 6 months like PJ is doing?? So perhaps Lucas is feeling some pressure to produce a decent tale. Personally he can't do much worse then TPM, or can he? Oh yeah the love angle in coming from Lucas, that should be funny. Lucas's ego is taking a hit I would think, f-him is what I say.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 2:44 p.m. CST

    good point, 2.35:1

    by MadBoy

    I think we should take heed of everyone's favorite ratio - who knows what the context was. I mean, if he's serious, then he's obvously threatened, but on the flip side, I can easily see him making the joke,. It will be easy to draw parallels between these two series', I hope for the best for both. And ABKing - I'm with ya this time, fella. We need to hear more about End of Days - the previews look great, and I just hope it's not another shitfest like Eraser. Ugh.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 2:48 p.m. CST

    Silencing LAMBS Criticism

    by mrbeaks

    Terribly stupid heading, I know. SOTL's 1991 Oscar sweep wasn't that improbable. It won out for Best Picture amid a weak field that included BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (probably the best of the rest,) BUGSY (solid, but unspectacular,) JFK (the movie that proved, finally, that SALVADOR was a fluke,) and, ugh, THE PRINCE OF TIDES (Nick Nolte being this film's sole saving grace.) There was some carping over whether or not Hopkins' performance was actually a supporting role, but that he deserved an award was, generally, not disputed. IMO, LAMBS is a worthy of its reputation. Demme, working from Ted Tally's script, which distilled the essence of Harris' novel perfectly (and jettisoned the right baggage,) sets a tone of dread that relents only at the close of the film. I love that first visit with Lechter. We're placed in the same nervous position as Starling as she descends into some kind of figurative hell, all the while that low rumbling on the soundtrack keeps building. Then, after running the gauntlet of psychopaths, she comes to the end of the hall, looks through the protective glass, and sees..... the most benign looking gentleman you've ever laid eyes on. There's many wonderful touches like this, along with some superb cross-cutting in both Lechter's escape, and the FBI's/Clarice's discovery of Jaime Gumb. I'm not sure if it'll make my list of the decade's ten best, but it's definitely in the running.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 3:20 p.m. CST

    Millenium changes every 1000 years

    by Rolande

    Not at the end of or dawning of the 19th century. Dude, a millenium changes every 1000 years. Ok, nuff about that. Evil Dead, let it go nerdlingers, the game will just be a lame cross between Res Evil and Quake. Oh wowee, a shotgun and a chainsaw, damn, never saw that (no pun intended) before...OOOH, zombies, gosh, how will I kill those?? Hey folks, let think of how many movies ate balls this year that were superhyped: Panty Menace, Blair Witch, Haunting, Fight Club, Dogma (you'll see) and um, now, maybe Sleepy Hollow. Damn, I hope not.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 4:06 p.m. CST


    by gilmour

    JFK WAS the best film of 91', it deserved it on the editing off the film alone. I still contend SOTL was overrated, Manhunter was the better film maybe because mann is a better filmmaker than Demme.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 4:19 p.m. CST

    All sorts of stuff

    by Omega Red

    On Lucas.....No one should say negative things like that, but we dont know what context it is in. He could have been kidding, or he could have said it without really thinking. Besides, its George Lucas, without him all our space epics would be models on string. When asked/told to give his opinion on the TPM critism, he was still extremely polite. He is too polite. He needs to vent his anguish. People might counter me by saying how he's still happy due to the money TPM made, but if theres anything Lucas doesnt need its money. He stopped doing this for the money a long time ago. Now he has a story to tell. Besides, although I have never read LOTR, from what I know about it it will be hard to put on screen. ILM may be the only one to do it, but they're busy. The competition can't be worrying him. Compare the worldwide amount of Star Wars fans, and then the LOTR fans. Se which is bigger........................On Sleepy Hollow: I've been following this for about 5 months, and I have avoided reading the scripts, but if its half as good as I've heard I'll be satisfied enough..................On Hannibal: I just finished reading the book. First let me say that I never saw Manhunter nor have I wver read any Harris novel. I loved Silence of the Lambs though. I also loved Hannibal. The biggest problem I'm hearing is with the books ending, how it betrays everything. Here is my interpretation (SPOILERS***THERE ARE SPOILERS FROM HERE TO THE END OF MY POST SO SKIP TO THE NEXT IF YOU DONT WANNA KNOW***SPOILERS): Harris shows that Hannibal is insane. He wanted to ressurect his sister (which we all know aint gonna happen). Clarice saves Hannibal because she doesnt want him to suffer at Verger's hands, but remember she is shot by (I think 2) tranquilizer darts. Someone (I forget who) in the book said she may not survive the darts, cause its too much for her system. Basically Clarice as we know her dies. By the time she awakes she has been pumped full with so many drugs that she barely remembers who she is. Lecter (who is a psychologist) has brainwashed her basically. He has know created for himself a recreation of his sister. Clarice didnt betray herself, if she knew half of what was going on she wouldnt have gone through with any of it. She is transformed, not willingly, into a completely different person by the end of the book. Harris did it well. I for one hope that Ridley Scott trys to get an NC-17, so we can have all the violence and still get into the subjects like Mason's "habits". Only time will tell...

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 4:31 p.m. CST

    JFK Was An Embarrassment

    by mrbeaks

    Aside from the fact that Stone's allegations had absolutely no basis in fact (historians had a field day with this flick,) you're left with his usual sledgehammer method of pounding home the ol' message, which reached new, ludicrous heights with the wretched NIXON (again, an historical travesty.) Stone does have an ace in the hole, however, and his name is Robert Richardson. One of the best DP's in the business (go see BRINGING OUT THE DEAD for his cinematography alone,) he continues to make Stone look good. In fact, I never miss a Stone film in the theaters because of his amazing work. And that's basically Stone's secret..... he surrounds himself with, mostly, talented individuals, and turns out great looking stuff. And, actually, I'd forgive him his kooky ideas if he would just allow the audience the opportunity to think for themselves, instead of cramming his lunacy down our throats. Instead, he leaves nothing to the imagination, and tends to repeat the same information over and over again until you're ready to strangle the drugged-out goofball.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 5:11 p.m. CST

    A quick review

    by Radd

    I sense a lot of hate. A lot of hate against George Lucas and The Phantom Menace. Most of wich is unfounded, but it does seem to be in bad form for Lucas to be panning on other people's movies. I'd like to see the original quotes before judging him on it though. Anyways, back to the hatred towards Phantom Menace. I'm getting more than a little sick and tired of all the little fanboys and thier groupies panning on this movie without any good reason. I'm serious. Everyone who has ever said the movie sucked has never given a good, solid reason as to why. Believe me, I've got my problems with the film, but I give reasons and see how it could be fixed. Most people just jumped on the 'Heh, heh, heh, this movie sucks Beavis' bandwagon and can't even say why they didn't like it. Like I said, I've got my problems with the film but it's not nearly as bad as most people say, ESPECIALLY when compared to the original trilogy. The story wasn't horrible, it was actually pretty good. You have to remember, this is 'Chapter 1'. This is not an entire story in itself. If you're going to say it sucks because of the story then you might as well say Empire and Jedi sucked because without the other movies in the trilogy to give the story for them, they do. A New Hope was the only one meant to stand alone since it was the first, and that wasn't exactly the most epic and awe inspiring story by itself. It was cool, but actually the overall plot of PM is a little deeper. Expect every single thing set up in PM to come around in Episodes II and III. Even a lot of stuff most people didn't even seem to notice. The acting wasn't the greatest, but there where a couple shining stars. Liam Neeson did a wonderful job portraying Qui Gon. I wish Anakin had been a little less of a punk, since he's supposed to be this young, innocent little boy who becomes one of the most evil men around. Oh well, we'll see how it developes. Compared to the original Star Wars, I'd say the acting is about the same, a lot of mediocre to not bad performances with a couple really good ones. Okay, now for directing. I had a lot of issues with the directing of this film. Lucas had all of these wonderful landscapes, beautiful effects, wonderful creatures, but you never really did see them. Courscant from space was only on screen for less than a second both times it was shown, and the city was panned by much to fast to give the audience a good look at this city of cities. We never really saw Mos Espa, there where no good panning shots like the canteena scene in A New Hope wich let you see the aliens in the background, no slow pans that let you see the cities and battlefields like in Hope and Jedi. The dogfight at the end was way to short and didn't really show much at all. All of the awe-inspiring special effects where left way in the background. And while I'm glad Lucas didn't make the effects the main focus of the story (except for Jar Jar, and even he got better towards the end of the film), I'm upset that he just didn't show enough. Other than the effets, the cuts in general where just to quick. It looks as if he tried to put too much into one movie. I'd say this movie could have been a lot better with only 10 more minutes at the end to give it more time to pan out. I loved the very end of the movie, with Chancellor Palpatine and the parade. Everything seemed so happy that everyone seemed to miss those words 'Congratulations on your election chancellor.' Hmm, everything was bright and cherry, but with those words the bad guys had won. Now its a slow, dark road leading up to Episode IV. Now if you don't think that's a good lead in, I suggest you go back to MTV, I think they might show a music video this week.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 5:28 p.m. CST

    Off the subject...

    by BenthicEx

    I just read that they changed the title of "Reindeer Games" to lame-o "Deception." What the hell is wrong with Miramax? That was such a cool title. Morons....

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 5:35 p.m. CST

    Here, here

    by :-o

    Phantom Menace rocked. Only movie I saw all year more than once. So much juicy good stuff in there. Let the backlash die along with tattoos, sketchers, and Pokemons.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 5:35 p.m. CST

    Bravo, Radd

    by SithPenguin

    *stands up and applauds* A lucid descriptions of the problems you had with TPM without once resorting to childish insults or attacking the makers of the film personally! This, I think, is what Harry had in mind when he created the Talkbacks! BTW, I also agree with almost all you said but I would like to add that the stories and the characters have arcs over three movies versus the arc over one in Episode 4, which Lucas ammended (well, I might add) to cover three movies. Call it wrong if you will but I think that's what he was doing!

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 5:54 p.m. CST


    by TRIGGER95

    As for Magnolia-- I caught a press screening of this the other night and was very disappointed. P.T. Anderson has bought into his own hype, making one of the most self-indulgent, bloated films in years. Don't get me wrong, there are some fine moments in the film (Cruise is a revelation; the frogs falling from the sky scene is a riot), but for the most part the movie is a pretentious bore. Look for P.T. to get crucified come release time. As foe TPM, I hated it, thought it was as bad as any movie I saw this year-- Lucas needs to let someone else write the next two. As for JFK, I loved it, but I love almost all Stone films, warts and all. The shooting script for Any Given Sunday, by the way, is pretty amazing. As for Hannibal, well it looks like Universal could have their work cut out for them. I didn't care for the book too much, but would love to see them shoot a faithful adaption just to freak out people (I know, I know, it will never happen). As for Fight Club, I thought the first hour was gangbusters then it kind of lost its way. Fincher is incredibly talented, and if he turns his attention to the right project he could do something amazing-- the Black Dahlia, for instance, could be a fantastic film. The script is one of the best unproduced scripts in Hollywood and the lead role of Bucky Bleichert is a great part that actors are going to be stepping over each other for. Hopefully the studio will forget box office concerns and let Fincher make the three hour film he wants to make. But we all know that will probably never happen.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 6:28 p.m. CST

    Sarin Rudepuss here

    by disappointed

    The following is a copy of a letter I have sent to AICN "I feel that for you to ban me without an explanation is unfair, for I have done nothing but post in fun. It is neither malicious, nor vindictive, nor vulgar. It is just in fun. I have seen some poor decisions in the past at AICN of this nature, but this one is quite uncalled for. I know you have no obligation to allow postings or a talk back at all, but when you open yourself up to such a forum it is an injustice to handle it in such an arbitrary manner." Yes I have been banned. I even tried to create an ID sarin rudepuss2 (ironic, don't ya think?) but I never recieved a password in the mail, which would lead me to believe that it was intercepted by Harry or Father Geek (who seems to be the more likely candidate). I expect this post to be deleted soon, so if need be, I will create other IDs and repost it as necessary until I have at least been sent a response as to why I have been banned. I was under the impression that AICN readers found my postings to be entertaining, and I would hate to see Harry take such a stance on censorship of entertainment. Parody and satire are important elements of our modern society, and I would hope that Harry would not turn his back on these forms of humor. signed Sarin Rudepuss A.K.A. ?

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 6:29 p.m. CST


    by gilmour

    Sure, we all know JFK had little fact and was the paranoid thoughts of wingnut Stone. But as a film it rocked! Sort of like "The Insider" it may not be accurate but its very good. Oh and wasnt JFK's DP Tak Fujimoto and not robert richardson?

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 7:05 p.m. CST

    JFK Was Intoxicating Cinema

    by mrbeaks

    You'll get no argument from me there. I was a senior in high school when that came out, and I can still remember walking out of that film feeling like blinders had been removed from my eyes. The fact is, I'd been lied to again, and that's the danger with Stone's "Histories" (god forbid, I invoke Shakespeare.) I'm an avid reader, but I know most people aren't, and I'm afraid some might be misguided to take JFK as gospel. Then again, maybe *I'm* being paranoid. BTW, Stone has never made a film without Richardson as his DP. Some contend that he is more the director of Stone's films than Stone himself.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 7:51 p.m. CST

    Lucas and LOTR

    by Elwe Singollo

    He's jealous because if LOTR is done right, Star Wars is a thing of the past. Star Wars was a LOTR ripoff anyway ( Lucas knows this)and the special effects are mediocre for the most part. Except Yoda that is, but Vader and the Emperor were idiotic to say the least.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 8:42 p.m. CST

    Jon 1969

    by Lester Diamond

    What? SEVEN is a case of what I call a great ending. Come on, just to hear Spacey say, "Oh, he didn't know." Someone needs to put your head in a box. As for HANNIBAL, I can safely say now that it will never happen. Since Jodie isn't doing it, Tony won't. We're going to be stuck with a Steve Zaillian scripted, Ridley Scott in G.I. JANE mode, Tim Roth and Sarah Michelle Gellar starring piece of overhyped crap. The sad thing is that I'll be there on opening day.

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:01 p.m. CST

    It's probably too late, but...

    by Toby O. Notobe

    Hey, I was sick yesterday, so sue me. Anyway, I think everyone has to be a little more selective with what they believe. I wary of most things I read in the news, much less a website quoting an unnamed Icelandic paper. That

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:02 p.m. CST

    It's official, misquote!

    by Wonders

    I just heard Lucas was misquoted. He did say he was curious to see how LOTR was going to come out because it is almost unfilmable. The rest is bad translation. (You have to admit that Frighteners and Heavenly Creatures had decent FX, but not great. And let's not get started with Xena and Hercules, all coming from WETA...)

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:03 p.m. CST

    Seven did have a great ending!

    by gilmour

    I loved the ending because it had a very sad ending. Not the usual happy go lucky endings we usually see. It was a superb film, give me it over SOTL any day! I actually liked G.I jane alot. Demi moore was very good in it (how many films of her's can we say that?)

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:07 p.m. CST

    It's probably too late, but...

    by Toby O. Notobe

    Hey, I was sick yesterday, so sue me. Anyway, I think everyone has to be a little more selective with what they believe. I wary of most things I read in the news, much less a website quoting an unnamed Icelandic paper. That

  • Nov. 9, 1999, 9:38 p.m. CST

    Give a hoot. Read a book.

    by Powerslave

    Check out 'Case Closed' by Gerald Posner. Not only does it thoroughly debunk all the JFK conspiracy theories with logic and - gasp - fact, it also reserves a whole chapter for Oliver Stone and 'JFK.' Let's just say that Ollie and his movie don't fare too well. Another good book by the same author is 'Killing the Dream,' and it does for James Earl Ray and Martin Luther King what 'Case Closed' did for JFK. This message brought to you by your local public library.