And dude, while I hear what you are saying with the majority of the world in piss-poor conditions, but to think that no one is special, I feel sorry for you. If we all felt that, then there is no need to fight for anything at all. I have a one year old and I think she's pretty god damn special. While I do not consider myself special, I have known people who were special throughout my life. But perhaps we are saying the same thing, except I choose to use the adjective special instead of unique.

Do you by chance live next to a Jesus Camp or something oceanfrog? Not that I don't agree with you in terms of not taking responsibility for your actions, but just asking.

They are merely the best films so far. Goddamn, the talent each has shown in each of those three films is such a leap over their previously amazing work, I almost shudder in anticipation of their future work. If they continue to improve at all, we will be fortunate beyond words.

Great list, though.

Catch phrases are not funny, people. Stop using them.

No probs pillow. It's doubly funny because the music playing in the Rolls Royce on the drive to the powerstation is by King Crimson who music snobs have for years argued as being vastly superior to Floyd in everyway.

email is: infitior@gmail.com

btw manatee, netflix got cancelled in my house a year and a half ago. they're currently embroiled in a ton of bad press and negative customer reaction considering they insist on only giving the hot, new movies to the latest members to sign up, while restricting or limiting older or more frequent renters to the most sought-after movies.

Regarding Trolls: Garbageman33's description is pretty accurate. However, I would be willing to say that most Trolls actually DO believe what they say. In fact, some of them are just flat-out insane. Someone who "trolls" a messageboard is just looking to start fires/fights. For example: I could just start calling you a f*ckhead or a racist for no real reason other than to get a reaction out of you. Another classic Troll-sign is someone who constantly claims "ownage/pwnage" when they have actually done no such thing.

AICN has had some LEGENDARY Trolls in the past. However, there have only been a few second-rate poseurs in the past several months.

chrome my friend, there's more we have in common than that. for instance, if you like SJ you also like Anne Hathaway, Jessica Biel, Katetherine Heigl, etc etc. These women in hollywood LOOK like women (ie: they have hips, boobs, womanly features if you will)! PRAISE GOD FOR THAT! I know the boys on this site love the likes of Keira Knightly and such, and while that's common if you're 17, once a boy turns into a man you realize having a partner in bed who's got something to hold onto is alot more fun than trying to nail a 2x4 for 20 minutes. or 20 seconds, depending on your stress level at work.

further to that, evidence is found in the fact that people like Barbra Steisand, a 100% bonafide hollywood Jew hates and I mean absolutely HATES someone like George Bush, despite the fact that he's sacrificed his presidency to keep Israel safe from nuts like Hussein and Ahmadinejad who are SUPER JEW HATERS. And I bet if you asked her what she thought of those two crackpots she'd say something like "a dictator who provides free health care should have been left in power, even if he did have chemical or biological weapons to use on Israel" or "that guy who runs iran cracks me up! I love the way he's always making fun of george bush, who's a big idiot by the way."

that's one thing about hollywood jews that's always confused me, is why they're so liberal, and worship guys like clinton (ie: speilberg would french clinton if given the chance, either or both of them) who would have sold israel to the syrians or iranians if made a reasonable offer.

anyway, that's it for me. I have to pee, and my wife's current issue of us weekly with scarlet johanson's big fat face will be staring up at me from the counter wherest I left her earlier today...watching...

Something tells me he's that type.

if you want a less romantic view of the current state of islam, check out a few books by Robert Spencer. start with "the politically incorrect guide to islam and the crusades" and then read "the truth about muhammad." both are more critical but cite historical and religious sources.

all four are good reads and well-worth the money and time. they read quickly and are great for a general understanding of the historical and current conditions in the islamic world.

not sure if columbine has read these or knows about them, but I figured it was important to you so here are you good Sir.

What? Too much? I didn't get struck by lightning did I?

7 seas: samething that's happened to peace in our current world - it's always cast aside.

pillow out.

Yes, Children of Men is based on a very good book by Doris Lessing.

I have always sided with the "Brazil" has a happy ending crowd. The ONLY joy in Sam Lowry's life is his fantasy world. He escaped in the only way possible. And I how many parallels would you care to draw between Brazil and the present, with a government's wet dream of being able to blame everything, and scare the populace, with talk of terrorsits everywhere.

The Oscars have always been political. Columbine is only getting attacked (on this one issue) because he's focusing on black actors. Every Oscar season we hear the same things, he won't win because he won last year, she won't win because a Brit won last year, he doesn't deserve to win but the Academy will throw him a bone this year.

And to paraphrase "Larry Sanders"...."Do you know who runs Hollywood?" "The Jews?" "The GAY Jews!"

And yes, I'm Jewish.

Mori, I'm sure your math is better than mine.

2+2 still equals 5, right?

Right?

and I regret my false accusation. Please accept my sincere apologies. I also agree with your attitude that there should be more civility around this place. I have been visiting this site for quite a while yet only recently have I posted on a Talkback, as the level of discourse tends toward the imbecilic. But boys will be boys. Don't take the bait from the jackals.

I am watching "A Little Princess" and it has a quality I have noticed in other collaborations between Alfonso Cuarón and Emmanual Lubezki. The camera has a lurking quality that embues it with a character of its own, as if "it" is another character in the film, similar to a third-person narrator in fiction, but different than a typical audience perspective. As with "Children of Men," we are witness to events, directed as to what we are allowed access to, but quite often allowed to have our own experience while events unfold. I don't feel the heavy-handedness of Spielberg with regard to emotional manipulation, but they are both terrific technical directors.

I think Cuarón has a brilliant career ahead of him and "Children of Men" in his calling card. Guillermo del Toro has a remarkable imagination and is an intuitive and born storyteller, and I see his technical skill starting to catch up with his creativity.

It's important to remember that films are not made by one person, and often the collaboration between craftspeople is what filmgoers think of when they speak of a director's style. One only has to consider the shift Spielberg took once he started collaborating with Janusz Kaminski, Scorsese's work with Chapman and Balhaus, Allen and Willis, and recently Cuarón and Lubezki, and del Toro and Guillermo Navarro.

What? 'Widescreen' means any number of things, from (A.I.'s) 1.85:1, to 2.35:1, to (Minority Report's) 2.39:1. Why don't you learn a thing or two before trying to sound like an expert?

Speilberg is known for picking DPs to his vision of a script, not simply attack every film in the same way. One needs only watch (as I did this previous year) Bill Butler's Jaws and Vilmos Zsigmond's Close Encounters back-to-back to see this in action. I believe he is currently trusting too much in Janusz Kaminski's versitility, which has gotten him into trouble with the boringly-shot Lost World and Terminal (the latter a debatable point), and hope that Indy 4 manages to look more like Raiders than War of the Worlds.

Watch the movie again, get your head out of our ass about the subtitles (you do realize that not everyone on the Earth speaks English, right?), and pay attention. Or just go see Night at the Museum with everyone else. We don't want you in the theater when we're watching films that you aren't smart enough to understand.

The film was about how the girl responded to the world crumbling around her. Without the 'Spanish civil war,' it would just be another hokey fantasy epic (Eragon anyone?).

"Actually, evidence would suggest that Del Toro believes that the 'fantasy' world was real. Mainly, the flower growing on the fig tree, but also several things happened to Ophelia that could happen if the 'fantasy' were real."

That's what I found as well. It wasn't like "The Matrix" where, at least in the first one, there's a clear distinction between real and virtual.

In PL some of the fantasy elements sort of bleed into the real story. Took me a number of viewings but I just kept finding new details that actually deepen the mystery of the story. And that's part of why I like the movie - a lot of it is open to interpretation.

And the fantasy was, far from being cutesy wutesy, often grotesque and disturbing.