• "The Watch" -- don't!

    From Don Y@21:1/5 to All on Tue Feb 22 15:31:40 2022
    Rare for me to speak out against a film (series, in this case).

    But, this was really pretty bad! And, thought itself "interesting"
    enough to hint at a sequel! :<

    Not a fan of one-trick pony authors (pratchett, in this case -- but
    there are (too many!) others). But, had hoped this *might* be at
    least a *little* clever. Not. (By comparison, Hogfather was
    almost tolerable)

    Come up with an idea, flesh it out, present it -- then move on.

    [The Lost Room was perhaps the "best" series, in this sense, in
    that they knew when to kill it off. Firefly gains honorable
    mention -- but, only because of Serenity's "closure"!]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Don Y on Tue Feb 22 18:29:21 2022
    On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 at 9:32:07 AM UTC+11, Don Y wrote:
    Rare for me to speak out against a film (series, in this case).

    But, this was really pretty bad! And, thought itself "interesting"
    enough to hint at a sequel! :<

    Not a fan of one-trick pony authors (pratchett, in this case -- but
    there are (too many!) others).

    Terry Pratchett was anything but a one-trick author. I see him as a second P.G. Wodehouse with the advantage of decent education.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Watch_(TV_series)

    doesn't like the series on the basis that it doesn't have anything like enough Pratchett-inspired content.

    But, had hoped this *might* be at least a *little* clever. Not. (By comparison, Hogfather was almost tolerable).

    Adapting literary science fiction and science fantasy to visual media rarely goes well. The people who create the scripts rarely know enough to realise what the original author had in mind - and Terry Pratchett was exceptionally well-informed about
    any number of areas.

    Come up with an idea, flesh it out, present it -- then move on.

    [The Lost Room was perhaps the "best" series, in this sense, in that they knew when to kill it off. Firefly gains honorable mention -- but, only because of Serenity's "closure"!]

    This is nuts. Terry Pratchett used his novels to satirise our world. "The Lost Room" is a sort of grail quest.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Don Y on Wed Feb 23 09:37:15 2022
    On 22/02/2022 23:31, Don Y wrote:
    Rare for me to speak out against a film (series, in this case).

    But, this was really pretty bad!  And, thought itself "interesting"
    enough to hint at a sequel!  :<

    Not a fan of one-trick pony authors (pratchett, in this case -- but
    there are (too many!) others).  But, had hoped this *might* be at
    least a *little* clever.  Not.  (By comparison, Hogfather was
    almost tolerable)

    Come up with an idea, flesh it out, present it -- then move on.


    Terry Pratchett has written some 60-odd books - that's hardly a
    "one-trick pony". While about 40 of them are set in the same Discworld,
    they cover a very wide range of topics with humour, satire, political
    and social commentary, literature, history, "alternative history",
    science, religion, racism, feminism, and much more.

    I haven't seen the series, but you can't really translate the kind of
    humour and commentary of books like these into a screen format. It
    might be possible to make an entertaining series, but it won't be nearly
    the same thing as the books.

    Personally, I think his most important books are the Science of the
    Discworld series (written with Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen), which use a comparison between an invented flat world based on magic, and the real
    world, to explain about physics, biology and ecology. The result is
    very educational and thought-provoking, while being entertaining and approachable.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Don Y on Wed Feb 23 16:11:13 2022
    On 2/23/2022 0:31, Don Y wrote:
    Rare for me to speak out against a film (series, in this case).

    But, this was really pretty bad!  And, thought itself "interesting"
    enough to hint at a sequel!  :<

    Not a fan of one-trick pony authors (pratchett, in this case -- but
    there are (too many!) others).  But, had hoped this *might* be at
    least a *little* clever.  Not.  (By comparison, Hogfather was
    almost tolerable)

    Come up with an idea, flesh it out, present it -- then move on.

    [The Lost Room was perhaps the "best" series, in this sense, in
    that they knew when to kill it off.  Firefly gains honorable
    mention -- but, only because of Serenity's "closure"!]

    I gave Pratchett book a chance many years ago and it was nowhere
    near being able to hold me. Basically I don't like pushy attempts
    at humour, it has to be more subtly intertwined in the story.

    But I was surprised recently, just a few days ago. I thought I'd
    have a look at that "Peacemaker", its IMDB rating was very high so
    I had a look. It turned out to be hilarious in a brutal way, nothing
    like my anticipation of yet another superhero thing. It is 8 episodes
    so it unavoidably does get into some boring "everybody is good inside"
    thing but they manage that well enough, I watched it all.
    Just have a look at the introduction dance, reminded me of that
    "It's all about that bass", perhaps more funny though not as
    polished.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mrr3UNALww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PCkvCPvDXk

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to All on Wed Feb 23 15:52:16 2022
    On 2/23/2022 7:11 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 2/23/2022 0:31, Don Y wrote:
    Rare for me to speak out against a film (series, in this case).

    But, this was really pretty bad! And, thought itself "interesting"
    enough to hint at a sequel! :<

    Not a fan of one-trick pony authors (pratchett, in this case -- but
    there are (too many!) others). But, had hoped this *might* be at
    least a *little* clever. Not. (By comparison, Hogfather was
    almost tolerable)

    Come up with an idea, flesh it out, present it -- then move on.

    [The Lost Room was perhaps the "best" series, in this sense, in
    that they knew when to kill it off. Firefly gains honorable
    mention -- but, only because of Serenity's "closure"!]

    I gave Pratchett book a chance many years ago and it was nowhere
    near being able to hold me. Basically I don't like pushy attempts
    at humour, it has to be more subtly intertwined in the story.

    Agreed. More to the point, it was a single idea (Discworld)...

    Beaten to death.

    When I checked out (public library) the title, I was unaware
    of the Discworld connection. But, soon came to that realization
    as so many of the characters and places (Sam Vines, Angua, Cheery,
    Carrot, Unseen U, Ankh-Morpork, Detritus, Carcer Dun, Death, etc.)
    were copied, literally (even much of the story!)

    It was just a disappointing execution. Especially given how
    (reasonably) well Hogfather had addressed its subject. (There
    wasn't even mention of Discworld and only a passing VISUAL
    reference to the disc -- if you were very observant!) You
    watch a movie to be *entertained* (not many folks WATCHED
    "War of the Worlds" -- either version -- with an eye towards
    Well's opinions of Imperialism!)

    [Death was particularly poorly reimagined vs. Hogfather's vision]

    As I read fast, I tend to look for authors who have written a
    fair amount (it's annoying to read a title, enjoy it, and then
    discover that the author hadn't written much else... so, you're
    back to rolling the dice with ANOTHER untested author).

    I read about 20 of the Discworld titles and was left wondering
    if there would ever be something interesting, going forward.

    [Piers Anthony's Xanth is similarly lame -- though I enjoyed
    several of his other *shorter* serieses]

    It's understandable that "authors" would want to reuse an
    idea repeatedly -- it's easier than coming up with a NEW
    idea! But, as a reader/viewer, it's boring. E.g., nine
    star wars films over 30+ years is also tedious! It
    reminds of Lost In Space -- the same story each episode
    with different color monsters/villains: "Let me know when
    the *final* episode airs... I *might* watch it."

    Likewise for films. (how many "Jurassic _____" do we need
    before the story actually changes?? would you sit through
    the 40th "episode" of yet-another?)

    [The Lost Room obviously *wanted* to be a long-running series:
    "There are 100 objects..." (not 97 or 5 or 113... exactly 100??)
    suggesting they hoped for a good many episodes, each "featuring"
    a new object, no doubt. Just as "Warehouse 13" can obviously
    accommodate a shitload of different "episode subjects (artifacts)"!
    Had Firefly been *planned* with Serenity as it's finale, it would
    have been perfect. Instead, these things either get canceled
    mid-story. Or, set up a cliff-hanger... only to discover that there
    will be no resolution (due to cancellation). The reader/viewer
    then is left *hoping* for closure.]

    I also am more interested in new ideas rather than social commentary.
    I've enjoyed Stross's novels as he does approach new subjects and
    technologies. Gene Wolfe as his works set out in very different
    directions (_Free Live Free_ vs. _The Book of the New Sun_ vs. "Soldier"). Stephenson, Clarke, van Vogt, Heinlein, etc. Yeah, it's more work to
    come up with a new premise for each novel/short series, but "Story, Model 1", "Story, Model 2", "Story, Model 3" seems like you're just "phoning it in"...

    Adams was good at the subtle (and not so subtle) humor. Periodically,
    I go hunting for the title in which a sofa gets impossibly *stuck* on
    a staircase early in the novel -- only to discover (much later) that
    it was possible to maneuver it into that position because a ("interdimensional") *door* happened to exist at that point on the
    stairs as the folks were moving it (and they could shift the sofa
    into the open doorway to adjust its position).

    [ISTR it being _Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency_... not
    _Long Dark Tea Time_]

    The humor lies in the expectation that the reader will recall this
    lame detail later in the story. And have paid attention to it
    at the time!

    Movies have to be much more subtle as they are literally "in your
    face". There, the challenge is to slip something past the viewer
    with just an inkling that he may have "missed" something.

    [Flushed Away -- and many other animated films, for that
    matter -- has several bits of imagery that the animators
    slipped into the film NOT expecting the viewer to have
    time to catch as the camera pans, etc. "Careful Whitey.
    That's a banana!"]

    And, that's not counting the "trivialities" that can add
    humor to a film -- but only for viewers with certain
    foreknowledge. E.g., there's a "hieroglyph" of R2D2 w/ C3PO
    in "Raiders"; a "PacMan" in one of the TRON line-graphic
    displays, etc.

    <https://en.battlestarwikiclone.org/w/images/c/cd/CapricaMessage.jpg>

    ENTERTAIN me! If I wanted to "read the book", I'd already have READ it!
    (why would I now want a below-par, visual representation of the same content?)

    OTOH, there are some films that deviate from the original novels.
    There, the differences are the points of interest (cf. _John Dies at
    the End_ or _The Day the Earth Stood Still_ -- either version -- vs.
    _Farewell to the Master_)

    But I was surprised recently, just a few days ago. I thought I'd
    have a look at that "Peacemaker", its IMDB rating was very high so
    I had a look. It turned out to be hilarious in a brutal way, nothing
    like my anticipation of yet another superhero thing. It is 8 episodes
    so it unavoidably does get into some boring "everybody is good inside"
    thing but they manage that well enough, I watched it all.
    Just have a look at the introduction dance, reminded me of that
    "It's all about that bass", perhaps more funny though not as
    polished.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mrr3UNALww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PCkvCPvDXk

    Peacemaker, himself, is a parody of narrow-mindedness.
    Like the line in _The Blues Brothers_: "Oh, we have BOTH kinds!
    Country AND Western!")

    Watch RED (and, to a lesser extent, RED2). Or, Rubber.
    These have humor and a wee bit of thought mixed in.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to Don Y on Wed Feb 23 18:00:46 2022
    On Thursday, February 24, 2022 at 9:52:36 AM UTC+11, Don Y wrote:
    On 2/23/2022 7:11 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 2/23/2022 0:31, Don Y wrote:
    Rare for me to speak out against a film (series, in this case).

    But, this was really pretty bad! And, thought itself "interesting"
    enough to hint at a sequel! :<

    Not a fan of one-trick pony authors (pratchett, in this case -- but
    there are (too many!) others). But, had hoped this *might* be at
    least a *little* clever. Not. (By comparison, Hogfather was
    almost tolerable)

    Come up with an idea, flesh it out, present it -- then move on.

    [The Lost Room was perhaps the "best" series, in this sense, in
    that they knew when to kill it off. Firefly gains honorable
    mention -- but, only because of Serenity's "closure"!]

    I gave Pratchett book a chance many years ago and it was nowhere
    near being able to hold me. Basically I don't like pushy attempts
    at humour, it has to be more subtly intertwined in the story.

    Agreed. More to the point, it was a single idea (Discworld)...

    Beaten to death.

    Discworld wasn't a single idea, but rather a stage where all sorts of defects in the real world were parodied.

    If you missed that, there's not a lot of hope for you.

    <snip>

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Don Y on Thu Feb 24 13:08:23 2022
    On 2/24/2022 0:52, Don Y wrote:
    .....

    But I was surprised recently, just a few days ago. I thought I'd
    have a look at that "Peacemaker", its IMDB rating was very high so
    I had a look. It turned out to be hilarious in a brutal way, nothing
    like my anticipation of yet another superhero thing. It is 8 episodes
    so it unavoidably does get into some boring "everybody is good inside"
    thing but they manage that well enough, I watched it all.
    Just have a look at the introduction dance, reminded me of that
    "It's all about that bass", perhaps more funny though not as
    polished.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mrr3UNALww
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PCkvCPvDXk

    Peacemaker, himself, is a parody of narrow-mindedness.
    Like the line in _The Blues Brothers_:  "Oh, we have BOTH kinds!
    Country AND Western!")

    The Blues Brothers was good though I had nearly forgotten about
    it after having watched the first one. Then the second one hit me
    and I rewatched the first one and really liked it. The moment in
    the second one when Dan Aykroyd spots the car he wants was really
    good :-).


    Watch RED (and, to a lesser extent, RED2).  Or, Rubber.
    These have humor and a wee bit of thought mixed in.

    These were good, my memory is also that the first one was
    somewhat better.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 24 05:07:02 2022
    On 2/24/2022 4:08 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 0:52, Don Y wrote:
    .....

    But I was surprised recently, just a few days ago. I thought I'd
    have a look at that "Peacemaker", its IMDB rating was very high so
    I had a look. It turned out to be hilarious in a brutal way, nothing
    like my anticipation of yet another superhero thing. It is 8 episodes
    so it unavoidably does get into some boring "everybody is good inside"
    thing but they manage that well enough, I watched it all.
    Just have a look at the introduction dance, reminded me of that
    "It's all about that bass", perhaps more funny though not as
    polished.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mrr3UNALww
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PCkvCPvDXk

    Peacemaker, himself, is a parody of narrow-mindedness.
    Like the line in _The Blues Brothers_: "Oh, we have BOTH kinds!
    Country AND Western!")

    The Blues Brothers was good though I had nearly forgotten about
    it after having watched the first one.

    I'm fond of the music. And, it was surprisingly consistent in the quality
    of performances chosen, along with the talent used! Also, I recognized
    many of the spots where it was filmed, having lived in Chicagoland for
    many years. There's a fair bit of subtle -- and NOT so subtle -- humor
    in it that leaves a pleasant "after taste".

    [We frequently rewatch Flushed Away for similar reasons. The slugs are hilarious and we find opportunities to "quote" them, harmoniously, often!]

    Then the second one hit me
    and I rewatched the first one and really liked it. The moment in
    the second one when Dan Aykroyd spots the car he wants was really
    good :-).

    Never watched the second. I tend to avoid most sequels as they
    are almost always "a disappointment".

    Watch RED (and, to a lesser extent, RED2). Or, Rubber.
    These have humor and a wee bit of thought mixed in.

    These were good, my memory is also that the first one was
    somewhat better.

    Yes. Sequels tend to not meet the level of the first release.
    Part of it being the lack of freshness (and the contrivances
    the author/producer often goes to in an attempt to try to
    reinject some sense of "newness" in the followup).

    E.g., In Jurassic Park, it is the *newness* of the "back from
    extinction" concept that is the most powerful. The scene where
    the two paleontologists *see* the subject of their studies,
    having KNOWN they would **never** encounter one in real life,
    is the most poignant (yet largely glossed over). *Imagine* what
    that feeling must be like...

    We recently watched "Coming to America 2" -- with the same
    sense of disappointment. Not that the original was *great*,
    but the ideas set forth were fresh and chuckle-worthy
    (esp the Don Ameche/Ralph Bellamy cameo).

    [Cameos are often delightful little asides worthy of their own
    special attention. E.g., Gene Hackman's in _Young Frankenstein_
    is perhaps the densest set of laughs in the entire film! By
    contrast, Stan Lee's ubiquitous appearances in the Marvel franchise
    get to be too predictable. OTOH, Howard's appearance at the end of
    _Guardians of the Galaxy_ was completely unexpected! (any thought
    of Howard immediately brings to mind _The Thief of Bagmom_ as I
    found it to be one of the most amusing/memorable "inside jokes")]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Don Y on Thu Feb 24 15:37:59 2022
    On 2/24/2022 14:07, Don Y wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 4:08 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 0:52, Don Y wrote:
    .....

    But I was surprised recently, just a few days ago. I thought I'd
    have a look at that "Peacemaker", its IMDB rating was very high so
    I had a look. It turned out to be hilarious in a brutal way, nothing
    like my anticipation of yet another superhero thing. It is 8 episodes
    so it unavoidably does get into some boring "everybody is good inside" >>>> thing but they manage that well enough, I watched it all.
    Just have a look at the introduction dance, reminded me of that
    "It's all about that bass", perhaps more funny though not as
    polished.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mrr3UNALww
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PCkvCPvDXk

    Peacemaker, himself, is a parody of narrow-mindedness.
    Like the line in _The Blues Brothers_:  "Oh, we have BOTH kinds!
    Country AND Western!")

    The Blues Brothers was good though I had nearly forgotten about
    it after having watched the first one.

    I'm fond of the music.  And, it was surprisingly consistent in the quality of performances chosen, along with the talent used!  Also, I recognized
    many of the spots where it was filmed, having lived in Chicagoland for
    many years.  There's a fair bit of subtle -- and NOT so subtle -- humor
    in it that leaves a pleasant "after taste".

    [We frequently rewatch Flushed Away for similar reasons.  The slugs are hilarious and we find opportunities to "quote" them, harmoniously, often!]

    Then the second one hit me
    and I rewatched the first one and really liked it. The moment in
    the second one when Dan Aykroyd spots the car he wants was really
    good :-).

    Never watched the second.  I tend to avoid most sequels as they
    are almost always "a disappointment".

    Perhaps not as good as the first one but I don't think it will
    be a disappointment. In a distant hindsight if I think of rewatching
    one I think of the first one though.


    Watch RED (and, to a lesser extent, RED2).  Or, Rubber.
    These have humor and a wee bit of thought mixed in.

    These were good, my memory is also that the first one was
    somewhat better.

    Yes.  Sequels tend to not meet the level of the first release.
    Part of it being the lack of freshness (and the contrivances
    the author/producer often goes to in an attempt to try to
    reinject some sense of "newness" in the followup).

    Usually so, then factor in also that the public cannot be taken
    by surprise in a sequel as easily.


    E.g., In Jurassic Park, it is the *newness* of the "back from
    extinction" concept that is the most powerful.  The scene where
    the two paleontologists *see* the subject of their studies,
    having KNOWN they would **never** encounter one in real life,
    is the most poignant (yet largely glossed over).  *Imagine* what
    that feeling must be like...

    We recently watched "Coming to America 2" -- with the same
    sense of disappointment.  Not that the original was *great*,
    but the ideas set forth were fresh and chuckle-worthy
    (esp the Don Ameche/Ralph Bellamy cameo).

    The first one has hit me numerous times over this or that TV
    channel (I watch TV while I eat...) but I could not watch it,
    neither did Lucy want to. Eddie Murphy is too squeaky for
    either of us I suppose.


    [Cameos are often delightful little asides worthy of their own
    special attention.  E.g., Gene Hackman's in _Young Frankenstein_
    is perhaps the densest set of laughs in the entire film!  By
    contrast, Stan Lee's ubiquitous appearances in the Marvel franchise
    get to be too predictable.  OTOH, Howard's appearance at the end of _Guardians of the Galaxy_ was completely unexpected!  (any thought
    of Howard immediately brings to mind _The Thief of Bagmom_ as I
    found it to be one of the most amusing/memorable "inside jokes")]



    But the sequels of these Guardians were not bad at all IIRC
    (not sure how many they were). I did not remember Howard, had to
    look up now who that was...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 24 09:39:19 2022
    On 2/24/2022 6:37 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 14:07, Don Y wrote:

    The Blues Brothers was good though I had nearly forgotten about
    it after having watched the first one.

    I'm fond of the music. And, it was surprisingly consistent in the quality >> of performances chosen, along with the talent used! Also, I recognized
    many of the spots where it was filmed, having lived in Chicagoland for
    many years. There's a fair bit of subtle -- and NOT so subtle -- humor
    in it that leaves a pleasant "after taste".

    [We frequently rewatch Flushed Away for similar reasons. The slugs are
    hilarious and we find opportunities to "quote" them, harmoniously, often!] >>
    Then the second one hit me
    and I rewatched the first one and really liked it. The moment in
    the second one when Dan Aykroyd spots the car he wants was really
    good :-).

    Never watched the second. I tend to avoid most sequels as they
    are almost always "a disappointment".

    Perhaps not as good as the first one but I don't think it will
    be a disappointment. In a distant hindsight if I think of rewatching
    one I think of the first one though.

    I'll look for it. But, John Goodman seems like a good predictor of
    mediocrity in a film. :<

    Watch RED (and, to a lesser extent, RED2). Or, Rubber.
    These have humor and a wee bit of thought mixed in.

    These were good, my memory is also that the first one was
    somewhat better.

    Yes. Sequels tend to not meet the level of the first release.
    Part of it being the lack of freshness (and the contrivances
    the author/producer often goes to in an attempt to try to
    reinject some sense of "newness" in the followup).

    Usually so, then factor in also that the public cannot be taken
    by surprise in a sequel as easily.

    Exactly. You've already "spent" the cleverness (why would you
    "hold back" something, in reserve, for a sequel?). It all
    degrades into variations on the same "trick". <yawn>

    E.g., In Jurassic Park, it is the *newness* of the "back from
    extinction" concept that is the most powerful. The scene where
    the two paleontologists *see* the subject of their studies,
    having KNOWN they would **never** encounter one in real life,
    is the most poignant (yet largely glossed over). *Imagine* what
    that feeling must be like...

    We recently watched "Coming to America 2" -- with the same
    sense of disappointment. Not that the original was *great*,
    but the ideas set forth were fresh and chuckle-worthy
    (esp the Don Ameche/Ralph Bellamy cameo).

    The first one has hit me numerous times over this or that TV
    channel (I watch TV while I eat...) but I could not watch it,
    neither did Lucy want to. Eddie Murphy is too squeaky for
    either of us I suppose.

    There are many funny scenes (the overall plot is lame) that
    are fun to watch. E.g., the barbershop scenes have, at most,
    3 actors: Eddie Murphy (playing the roles of Akeem, the shop
    owner and the white jewish man, simultaneously), Arsenio Hall
    (playing the roles of Semmi and one of the other barbers) and
    the "third" barber.

    [Murphy also plays a few other roles in other parts of the
    show -- as well as Hall playing multiple roles including a
    "3 bagger" woman at the night club]

    [Cameos are often delightful little asides worthy of their own
    special attention. E.g., Gene Hackman's in _Young Frankenstein_
    is perhaps the densest set of laughs in the entire film! By
    contrast, Stan Lee's ubiquitous appearances in the Marvel franchise
    get to be too predictable. OTOH, Howard's appearance at the end of
    _Guardians of the Galaxy_ was completely unexpected! (any thought
    of Howard immediately brings to mind _The Thief of Bagmom_ as I
    found it to be one of the most amusing/memorable "inside jokes")]

    But the sequels of these Guardians were not bad at all IIRC
    (not sure how many they were). I did not remember Howard, had to
    look up now who that was...

    I found the sequel to Guardians to be similarly disappointing.

    [Howard was a comic-book character from the 70's so quite a bit
    of nostalgia, there. The "Bagmom" (BagDAD!) issue particularly so!]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dimiter_Popoff@21:1/5 to Don Y on Thu Feb 24 20:33:55 2022
    On 2/24/2022 18:39, Don Y wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 6:37 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 14:07, Don Y wrote:

    The Blues Brothers was good though I had nearly forgotten about
    it after having watched the first one.

    I'm fond of the music.  And, it was surprisingly consistent in the
    quality
    of performances chosen, along with the talent used!  Also, I recognized >>> many of the spots where it was filmed, having lived in Chicagoland for
    many years.  There's a fair bit of subtle -- and NOT so subtle -- humor >>> in it that leaves a pleasant "after taste".

    [We frequently rewatch Flushed Away for similar reasons.  The slugs are >>> hilarious and we find opportunities to "quote" them, harmoniously,
    often!]

    Then the second one hit me
    and I rewatched the first one and really liked it. The moment in
    the second one when Dan Aykroyd spots the car he wants was really
    good :-).

    Never watched the second.  I tend to avoid most sequels as they
    are almost always "a disappointment".

    Perhaps not as good as the first one but I don't think it will
    be a disappointment. In a distant hindsight if I think of rewatching
    one I think of the first one though.

    I'll look for it.  But, John Goodman seems like a good predictor of mediocrity in a film.  :<

    Well you can see him as that in that film, too - but overall Dan Aykroyd
    does well enough to keep you intact, there is also a police girl,
    Nia Peeples, who adds some charm by her reactions to chase failures
    by the police etc., I think you will watch it until the end.



    I found the sequel to Guardians to be similarly disappointing.

    [Howard was a comic-book character from the 70's so quite a bit
    of nostalgia, there.  The "Bagmom" (BagDAD!) issue particularly so!]

    Ah during the 70-s I have been well isolated on the wrong side of the
    iron curtain, this explains why I did not know about him.

    Did you watch "Cruella"? By far the best film I have seen for many
    years.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 24 12:28:50 2022
    On 2/24/2022 11:33 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 18:39, Don Y wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 6:37 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 14:07, Don Y wrote:

    The Blues Brothers was good though I had nearly forgotten about
    it after having watched the first one.

    I'm fond of the music. And, it was surprisingly consistent in the quality >>>> of performances chosen, along with the talent used! Also, I recognized >>>> many of the spots where it was filmed, having lived in Chicagoland for >>>> many years. There's a fair bit of subtle -- and NOT so subtle -- humor >>>> in it that leaves a pleasant "after taste".

    [We frequently rewatch Flushed Away for similar reasons. The slugs are >>>> hilarious and we find opportunities to "quote" them, harmoniously, often!] >>>>
    Then the second one hit me
    and I rewatched the first one and really liked it. The moment in
    the second one when Dan Aykroyd spots the car he wants was really
    good :-).

    Never watched the second. I tend to avoid most sequels as they
    are almost always "a disappointment".

    Perhaps not as good as the first one but I don't think it will
    be a disappointment. In a distant hindsight if I think of rewatching
    one I think of the first one though.

    I'll look for it. But, John Goodman seems like a good predictor of
    mediocrity in a film. :<

    Well you can see him as that in that film, too - but overall Dan Aykroyd
    does well enough to keep you intact, there is also a police girl,
    Nia Peeples, who adds some charm by her reactions to chase failures
    by the police etc., I think you will watch it until the end.

    I will check the library's catalog. Older titles tend to be hard to
    come by, though; media gets damaged and lack of availability usually
    dooms a title to falling out of the catalog. Especially if it wasn't particularly popular (which means they likely only ordered a dozen
    copies for the entire city to "share").

    Sadly, the library doesn't have a strong commitment to keeping titles
    (not just AV media) around. Instead, they look at viewer/reader-ship
    and *discard* titles that aren't circulating. <shrug> I guess there
    is a certain logic to this; the library expects its collection to
    reside in *homes*, not on shelves. And, if a title isn't popular
    enough for patrons to store it in THEIR homes (temporarily), then
    why should the library devote space to it?!

    [The flipside of this is that one can purchase discards cheaply in
    the many "booksales" they sponsor.]

    I found the sequel to Guardians to be similarly disappointing.

    [Howard was a comic-book character from the 70's so quite a bit
    of nostalgia, there. The "Bagmom" (BagDAD!) issue particularly so!]

    Ah during the 70-s I have been well isolated on the wrong side of the
    iron curtain, this explains why I did not know about him.

    It was not a "mainstream" product, by any means! I suspect few people,
    *here*, ever read a "Howard" comic. And, things like Pat & Nard or Fat Freddy's Cat would likely be a big "Huh?"

    [If you ever find a copy of _The Yum Yum Book_, set aside half an hour to
    flip through it. And, another hour, later, to repeat the exercise with
    more attention to detail!]

    Did you watch "Cruella"? By far the best film I have seen for many
    years.

    On your recommendation, I put in a request for it. Looks like
    that was near the end of *October* (!). I am presently #17 in the
    queue, waiting on 50 copies. So, assuming patrons "behave responsibly"
    (i.e., return titles before their due dates), I should see it sometime
    in the next 3 weeks.

    [Pandemic has screwed up operations -- coupled with a change in library policies that does away with fines and due dates. <frown>]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lasse Langwadt Christensen@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 24 15:22:44 2022
    torsdag den 24. februar 2022 kl. 20.29.13 UTC+1 skrev Don Y:
    On 2/24/2022 11:33 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 18:39, Don Y wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 6:37 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
    On 2/24/2022 14:07, Don Y wrote:

    The Blues Brothers was good though I had nearly forgotten about
    it after having watched the first one.

    I'm fond of the music. And, it was surprisingly consistent in the quality
    of performances chosen, along with the talent used! Also, I recognized >>>> many of the spots where it was filmed, having lived in Chicagoland for >>>> many years. There's a fair bit of subtle -- and NOT so subtle -- humor >>>> in it that leaves a pleasant "after taste".

    [We frequently rewatch Flushed Away for similar reasons. The slugs are >>>> hilarious and we find opportunities to "quote" them, harmoniously, often!]

    Then the second one hit me
    and I rewatched the first one and really liked it. The moment in
    the second one when Dan Aykroyd spots the car he wants was really
    good :-).

    Never watched the second. I tend to avoid most sequels as they
    are almost always "a disappointment".

    Perhaps not as good as the first one but I don't think it will
    be a disappointment. In a distant hindsight if I think of rewatching
    one I think of the first one though.

    I'll look for it. But, John Goodman seems like a good predictor of
    mediocrity in a film. :<

    Well you can see him as that in that film, too - but overall Dan Aykroyd does well enough to keep you intact, there is also a police girl,
    Nia Peeples, who adds some charm by her reactions to chase failures
    by the police etc., I think you will watch it until the end.
    I will check the library's catalog. Older titles tend to be hard to
    come by, though; media gets damaged and lack of availability usually
    dooms a title to falling out of the catalog. Especially if it wasn't particularly popular (which means they likely only ordered a dozen
    copies for the entire city to "share").

    Sadly, the library doesn't have a strong commitment to keeping titles
    (not just AV media) around. Instead, they look at viewer/reader-ship
    and *discard* titles that aren't circulating. <shrug> I guess there
    is a certain logic to this; the library expects its collection to
    reside in *homes*, not on shelves. And, if a title isn't popular
    enough for patrons to store it in THEIR homes (temporarily), then
    why should the library devote space to it?!

    [The flipside of this is that one can purchase discards cheaply in
    the many "booksales" they sponsor.]
    I found the sequel to Guardians to be similarly disappointing.

    [Howard was a comic-book character from the 70's so quite a bit
    of nostalgia, there. The "Bagmom" (BagDAD!) issue particularly so!]

    Ah during the 70-s I have been well isolated on the wrong side of the
    iron curtain, this explains why I did not know about him.
    It was not a "mainstream" product, by any means! I suspect few people, *here*, ever read a "Howard" comic. And, things like Pat & Nard or Fat Freddy's Cat would likely be a big "Huh?"

    Freak bothers are back, https://youtu.be/ah-uikFRW40

    [If you ever find a copy of _The Yum Yum Book_, set aside half an hour to flip through it. And, another hour, later, to repeat the exercise with
    more attention to detail!]
    Did you watch "Cruella"? By far the best film I have seen for many
    years.
    On your recommendation, I put in a request for it. Looks like
    that was near the end of *October* (!). I am presently #17 in the
    queue, waiting on 50 copies. So, assuming patrons "behave responsibly"
    (i.e., return titles before their due dates), I should see it sometime
    in the next 3 weeks.

    afaikt $3.99 on amazon prime, https://www.amazon.com/Cruella-Emma-Stone/dp/B0977RSTF2

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to Lasse Langwadt Christensen on Thu Feb 24 20:35:22 2022
    On 2/24/2022 4:22 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
    torsdag den 24. februar 2022 kl. 20.29.13 UTC+1 skrev Don Y:
    [The flipside of this is that one can purchase discards cheaply in
    the many "booksales" they sponsor.]
    I found the sequel to Guardians to be similarly disappointing.

    [Howard was a comic-book character from the 70's so quite a bit
    of nostalgia, there. The "Bagmom" (BagDAD!) issue particularly so!]

    Ah during the 70-s I have been well isolated on the wrong side of the
    iron curtain, this explains why I did not know about him.
    It was not a "mainstream" product, by any means! I suspect few people,
    *here*, ever read a "Howard" comic. And, things like Pat & Nard or Fat
    Freddy's Cat would likely be a big "Huh?"

    Freak bothers are back, https://youtu.be/ah-uikFRW40

    Ugh! That's just "wrong" -- on so many levels! :< Like remaking _Gone
    with the Wind_ or a CGI version of a _Forbidden Planet_ *prequel* where
    some artist imagines what Krell society would have been like (in addition
    to the biology of the Krell!)

    [If you ever find a copy of _The Yum Yum Book_, set aside half an hour to
    flip through it. And, another hour, later, to repeat the exercise with
    more attention to detail!]
    Did you watch "Cruella"? By far the best film I have seen for many
    years.
    On your recommendation, I put in a request for it. Looks like
    that was near the end of *October* (!). I am presently #17 in the
    queue, waiting on 50 copies. So, assuming patrons "behave responsibly"
    (i.e., return titles before their due dates), I should see it sometime
    in the next 3 weeks.

    afaikt $3.99 on amazon prime, https://www.amazon.com/Cruella-Emma-Stone/dp/B0977RSTF2

    We don't pay for content as the local library is so convenient. If you're
    not interested in "latest releases", then their selection is pretty adequate (8173 DVD titles in the catalog).

    The only issue is having a particular title available *when* you want to
    watch it. But, if you don't care when you *see* it and have many other
    titles immediately accessible, there's no real downside.

    E.g., SWMBO has 20 titles stacked in the living room waiting for her to
    make time to view them.

    Our nearest local branch is a ~2.5 mile walk. There, I can look through ~500 items "on the shelf" (probably 200+ DVD titles -- not counting DVDs that are more of a documentary/reference nature) and carry the title home that evening.

    On-line, I can browse the catalog and locate a title that may be sitting on
    a shelf in some other branch. Placing a "reserve" on one of these will cause it to be transported to my branch (or a branch of my choosing) where it will
    be set aside for me (giving me 10 days to claim it before it returns to circulation).

    If all copies are "in use", then my name is entered into a queue awaiting
    an available copy. I am notified (phone or email) when a copy becomes available for me and it is transported to my desired pick-up location.

    Additionally, the library posts a list of DVDs *ordered* (purchased) each month. So, browsing this list lets you place a reserve on a title *before*
    the library even has acquired it!

    [Of course, I can also *request* the library purchase a particular title.
    Those requests tend to be honored as there is no other way for the staff
    to know what folks *want* to read/view]

    I'm at the library at least twice a week, dropping off books/DVDs, picking
    up titles, requesting technical articles through their inter-library loan service, etc. So, there's never a shortage of stuff to watch (I also tend
    to enjoy REwatching -- and RE-rewatching -- certain titles so if I happen
    to see one of these on the shelf, I am likely to check it out -- again!
    I've probably watched _Serenity_ 4 or 5 times!)

    It's really a delightful (free!) resource. And, they are tickled to see
    their services used -- as it further justifies their "overhead" to the city/county!

    We also own a collection of select titles that we've purchased, over the
    years. Some as library discards ($1/each), some as "knockouts" from
    discount stores ($3-5), and some "full price". These being titles that
    I want to be able to watch *anytime* without concern for whether or not
    the title still exists in the library's catalog, if it is available, etc.

    [I've purchased several $3 copies of Flushed Away to gift to friends...
    I don't want to risk *loaning* my copy. And, other titles that we enjoy sharing with house-guests. (Just purchased a copy of _9_ as "entertainment"
    for some guests as I consider it a delightfully well-made/scripted story)]

    The problem is finding *time* to watch/read everything that is of interest! (so, you really want to be *sure* the time spent on a title is worth it!)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dean Hoffman@21:1/5 to Don Y on Fri Feb 25 09:07:18 2022
    On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 4:32:07 PM UTC-6, Don Y wrote:
    Rare for me to speak out against a film (series, in this case).

    But, this was really pretty bad! And, thought itself "interesting"
    enough to hint at a sequel! :<

    Not a fan of one-trick pony authors (pratchett, in this case -- but
    there are (too many!) others). But, had hoped this *might* be at
    least a *little* clever. Not. (By comparison, Hogfather was
    almost tolerable)

    Come up with an idea, flesh it out, present it -- then move on.

    [The Lost Room was perhaps the "best" series, in this sense, in
    that they knew when to kill it off. Firefly gains honorable
    mention -- but, only because of Serenity's "closure"!]

    Check out the TV show In the Heat of the Night. It's being rerun.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Heat_of_the_Night_(TV_series)>
    Actor Carroll O'Conner was on the CBS shows All in the Family and
    Archie Bunker's Place.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Don Y@21:1/5 to Dean Hoffman on Fri Feb 25 11:51:14 2022
    On 2/25/2022 10:07 AM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
    On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 4:32:07 PM UTC-6, Don Y wrote:
    Come up with an idea, flesh it out, present it -- then move on.

    [The Lost Room was perhaps the "best" series, in this sense, in
    that they knew when to kill it off. Firefly gains honorable
    mention -- but, only because of Serenity's "closure"!]

    Check out the TV show In the Heat of the Night. It's being rerun.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Heat_of_the_Night_(TV_series)>
    Actor Carroll O'Conner was on the CBS shows All in the Family and
    Archie Bunker's Place.

    We tend to dislike serieses because they quickly fall into ruts.
    The author/writer comes up with an idea/world/setting/etc. and then
    runs out of new ideas to explore *in* that context.

    The epitome of this are the "formulaic" shows that just throw a
    different coat of "paint" on the same story, episode to episode.

    _Lost in Space_, _Land of the Giants_, _All in the Family_, etc.
    There's *one* underlying "new idea" and lots of attempts to paint
    it from different angles. You *know* how Archie is going to react
    to any scenario; you know what "Meathead"/Gloria will espouse. So,
    it's how patient you are at being "lectured" about that particular
    social issue (yeah, there may be a few amusing anecdotes -- often
    at Archie's expense/ignorance -- but not enough to lift the show
    out of it's "comfortable rut": "Wow! Sammy Davis Junior *kissed*
    the bigot!!")

    It's like watching Columbo (you KNOW how it's going to end within
    minutes of its start!) -- but, at least, there, you can amuse
    yourself trying to identify *what* clue(s) he is relying on in
    reaching his conclusion.

    Or, _The Road Runner_: You know Wylie is gonna get screwed.
    But, you don't know how the laws of physics are going to
    be *perverted* in doing so!

    Amusingly, one can take this sort of formulaic presentation to
    such an extreme that it becomes amusing. Pinky & The Brain
    fits just such a formula. You don't know what the hare-brained
    scheme will be, in this episode. But, you know what its goal
    will be and that something silly/stupid will foil it. The
    appeal lies in many of the (also formulaic) utterances that
    come along ("I think so, Brain. But, where are we going to
    find a duck and a hose at this hour?") Along with the
    caricatures presented -- and the "surprise credits".

    [N.B. When they were "rewarded" with their own "show", the
    quality of episodes quickly fell as it was too hard to keep up
    with new/original material]

    By far, the *best* spoof on this sort of formulaic approach
    is in the Buttons & Mindy episodes. Taken to an extreme
    in _Les Boutons et le Ballon_ which doesn't *require*
    subtitles for the viewer to KNOW what is being said!

    OTOH, we enjoyed SOAP and Coupling because the situations
    presented were so outlandish and the "quips" so unexpected!
    (It's hard NOT to laugh at throw pillows! And, the hazards
    of bathing!)

    [Of course, Coupling suffered horribly in season 4 w/o Jeff.
    But, the ending to the series was appropriate! (how *do*
    you end a series?]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)