for sending you so many E-mails, but I was just curious
as to what you thought of Cabin Fever?
didn't see it.
I agree. While how was making the Evil Dead films?
was very difficult. It still ranks as the most grueling
shoot I have ever been on. Have you read my "Evil
see. While I'm doing a video documentry of Sam Raimi
and would like to include a written qoute of what you
think of Sam Raimi as a director and of his filmmaking
I have avoided your question because I don't want to diss
my friend. Sam's the perfect guy to be making comic books
didn't like "Silence of the Lambs"? Can you
elaborate a bit.
What happened to you regularly posting various articles,
critiques, etc? The only new stuff I've seen lately
is regarding Bush and presidental power. Where are all
the new, interesting movie articles? And don't tell
me there's no movies worth talking about, because there
must be a few.
been kind of busy lately getting ready to make this
movie. I'll be leaving Monday. I will still be checking
in and answering questions, when I get a chance. I must
say, though, that no moview lately has inspired me positively
or negatively to write a review. I just saw "American
Splendor" last night, and although it was trying
desperately to be different and new, it's really just
a dull domestic drama about the relationship between
two creepy assholes. By the time it gets to the cancer
it could well be a TV movie of the week. Regarding "Silence
of the Lambs," it's basically just a stupid movie,
where way too much time is spent on Hannibal Lector,
who isn't the bad guy, and almost no time is spent on
the actual bad guy. But what drove me insane was Lector
in a straight-jacket glances down and sees that a pen
was left in his cell, cut away for 30 seconds, then
when we return he has escaped his cell, killed the guards,
skinned one of them and set up a big backlight on the
guy -- that's stupid storytelling.
Where is Bulgaria will you guys be filming?
guess you mean where "in" Bulgaria? In Sofia.
do you consider to be "good" film makers,
since we''ve discussed some bad ones.
Since you didn't say "that are presently working,"
which puts a big damper on the question, here goes: William
Wyler, John Ford, John Huston, King Vidor, Stanley Kubrick,
David Lean, Alfred Hitchcock, Akira Kurosawa, George Cukor,
Joseph Von Sternberg, Don Siegel, Frank Capra, Victor
Fleming, Fred Zinneman, Joseph Mankiewicz, Lewis Milestone,
John Schlesinger, Franklin Schaffner, Francis Coppola
(in the 1970s), Martin Scorsese (in the '70s & 80s).
Well, there's a few.
not sure if you got my last email but I was wondering
if I could get your thoughts on Sam Raimi,
it's for a project I'm doing.
ignored you the first time because you don't have a
specific question. What do you want to know, specifically?
kinds of cigrattes did you smoke in the seventies
what was the most popular .
smoked Larks back in the 1970s, then when they introduced
Malboro Lights I switched to them, then Benson &
Hedges Light 100s. I now buy cans of American Spirit
tobacco and roll my own, by hand, with a filter.
am glad you took the time to watch Sea Biscuit. I agree
with you on most parts of the script and of course the
Cinematography which blew me away, but I did connect
to Chis Cooper's character and I thought he gave a great
performance even if the film wasn't that great.
Cooper is a good actor, but that wasn't much of a part.
And Jeff Bridges (who has more facially twitches than
Renee Zellwegger) has officially become Beau Bridges.
And did we honestly need to start with another actor
playing Tobey McGuire's part at 16 years old? Like he
can't play 16? It's a huge mistake to switch actors
in a part. And why did it begin with Chris Cooper tending
to a white horse, then switch to Seabiscuit? And why
did it begin with a PBS-like piece of Henery Ford and
the Model T, then we pick up Jeff Bridges working in
a bicycle factory? And why did we need a several minute
piece on the stock market crash when one headline, "Stock
Mrket Crashes," would have handled it? It's just
a weak, poor script. But, as my friend said, that's
as good as movies get now, which is really sad.
agree more regards your comments about modern moviemaking.
The folks today seem more intent in creating lush spectacles
while ignoring plots and character development. Sad
trend indeed. I also find much of Tarrantino's stuff
to be absolute crap. I hope that, someday, it'll all
turn around and we can get back to making stories with
good plots, good character development and good acting
rather than the pap Gollywood is turning out now.
with you. Tarantino is the amalgamation of everything
wrong with movies right now --the pretense of intelligence
and imagination, while having nothing to say and no
story to tell, and no real ability to tell it.
on the IMDb we have been debating about whether there
is a patron saint of cinema. We reached the conclusion
that if there is not then none other than Quentin Tarantino
should be the recipient of such an accolade on account
of the pure cinematic majesty that is KILL BILL.
We are putting together a petitition to send to the
Vatican calling upon the immediate beatification of
Tarantino as Saint Quentin the Immaculate and wondered
whether as a director in your own right you would be
interested in adding your name to such a petition. Thank
you in anticipation of a positive response.
you have such poor taste in films that you actually
think Quentin Tarantino is talented, and you also believe
that you need the backing of a horrible organization
like the vatican, then you ought to put all your efforts
into this. No one can ever say you've wasted your life.
think what we have here is a couple (or one using several
names) of nasty trolls who are just trying to rile things
up. Ignore them and they'll go away. Non Illigitimi
that's been going on for years, it doesn't bother me.
I give them one or two chances to something of value,
then I stop posting their questions. Meanwhile, I watched
"Seabiscuit" last night. It has lovely photography
and nice production design (it's amazing what you can
get when you have unlimited money), but has a weak,
flaccid script that bumbles it's way through an hour-long
act one, never gets any empathy going for the characters
or the horse, and never works up a head of steam. The
little, institial PBS-like documentary bits narrated
by David McCullough are entirely unnecessary, and there's
also an historical flaw, when William Macy says that
a horse is "the greatest thing on four legs since
Hope and Crosby," Hope and Crosby hadn't made a
film together yet. Once again, this is the modern version
of a good movie, meaning it's really a bad movie.
couldn't stand the original, and I'll be damned if I
support the remake of anything. All remakes are the
death of originality.>>
that, but what about the LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS remake?
not perfect (they should've kept the greek tragedy ending
where everyone was eaten and they fucked up THE MEEK
SHALL INHERIT) but mostly enjoyable (on second thought,
the original was funnier)... :-( they needed more blood
in that musical, seriously, why did they have to cut
out the blooming heads WHY GOD WHY?!?! more so, wouldn't
it have been funnier if one of the headflowers fell
on one of the onlookers and the face ripped off with
the petals? Wouldn't it have been creepier if we knew
how the hell Audrey 2 could re-pot and resoil itself?
does it even NEED soil? what if it wasn't soil in the
pot, what if it was excrement, making Audrey speech
(seen in the play) about being part of the plant and
being with Seymour everyday sadistically pointless and
funny? Notice how most of the jokes that were funny
in the play... WEREN'T FUNNY IN THE MOVIE. This has
gone on too long, but thanks and kudos for listening.
I didn't care for the musical remake. The songs were
all unmemorable and didn't move the story along. I like
the remake of "Ben-Hur." This recent remake
of "Insomnia" was okay. But, for the most
part, remakes are just a terrible idea.
know if you received this email, so I'll post it again.
If you've already seen it and for some reason decided
not to post it, go ahead and ignore this one as well.
think that your comparison of GW Bush to Nixon is accurate,
but not the way you meant it. I think both men have
been terribly villainized by the left, to the point
where they can do no right in the eyes of Democrats.
When you say that Nixon fucked up everything he had
a hand in, you're flat out wrong. He did plenty of good
in China, and anyone who denies that needs to crack
open a history book and read it objectively. Vietnam
was not his war, as much as you lefties like to make
it sound like it was. With his illegal bombings in Cambodia
and Laos, he certainly didn't "do a good job"
there, but lest we forget, that clusterfuck was started
by Dems, i.e. Kennedy and Johnson. It's also worth noting
that Johnson is the one who threw in the towel when
the going got tough in Vietnam and he decided not to
run for re-election. Nixon was simply trying to win,
an understandable goal considering the sacrifices that
had been made by that point. Nixon's later lies and
coverups surrounding the watergate affair(again, ugly
partisan politics rearing its head) forever marred anything
positive that could be said about him, and perhaps deservedly
so. The single most harmful thing we can do to this
great country is divide our people with such petty partisanism.
The shameful display of the 9/11 commission exemplifies
the "destroy political opponents at all costs"
mindset that has permeated American politics. If only
they showed such zeal for fighting our true enemies...
just finished reading Douglas Brinkley's book TOUR OF
DUTY: JOHN KERRY AND THE VIETNAM WAR. I was wondering
if you've read it, or are interested in reading it?
I found it to be a real pageturner, and very meticulous
considering it's over 500 pages, primarily covering
the 4 months Kerry was in The Shit. Brinkley clearly
thinks highly of Kerry, and paints a rather glowing
portrait, but he's never just blowing the guy. The book
details Kerry's valor in combat, and also his struggle
to end the war as a leader of the VVAW when he came
home. Anyway, I'm sure a bomb-throwing pinko like yourself
would really enjoy it. Highly recommended.
have you listened to the new Air America Liberal Talk
Radio? It's pretty cool, you can listen online at airamericaradio.com
24 hours a day. Al Franken's show just sucks, though.
Surprisingly, Janeane Garofalo's show is pretty decent.
I figure if I watch Fox News and listen to Air America,
I can form my own opinions more objectively.
gotta go. Catch you on the flip.
don't like talk radio, left or right. Nixon got elected
in 1968 based his ending the Vietnam war, and by the
time he resigned, five years later, he still hadn't
ended it. Going to China was okay, but Kissinger could
have done that without Nixon, and we now see, thity
years later, that those trade agreements with China
are all wrong-headed, and are playing hell with our
own economy, mainly through Wal-Mart, which is the biggest
distributor of Chinese goods in the world. Since China
still uses slave labor it's rather difficult for any
country that pays its workers to compete. The Chinese
government doesn't give a shit about human rights and
we won't sanction them due to those trade agreements.
We Americans have to decide whether we want jobs or
cheap Chinese products, but you can't have both. Meanwhile,
Nixon's bombing of Cambodia, who we were not at war
with, backing the genocide of East Timor, then screwing
around in Chile's politics, assassinating the head of
the army and bring down Allende created 25 extra years
of misery for those people. And, like all Republican
presidents, he talked the big talk about the economy,
then completely screwed it up with military spending.
Nixon was a bad president. Ronald Reagan was a bad president.
George Bush, Sr. was a bad president, and Bush, Jr.
is the worst of the bunch, and they're all fiscally
i thought we were trying to keep it pg 13 here. why
do you have to swear? grow up, your like a 12 year old
who just learned his first swear word. except alot gayer.
seriously dude, alot.
dude, wo, dude, yo dude. Expletives happen to be part
of the language and I like them. Whereas having to fall
back on the same meaningless word all the time, like,
say, "dude," simply shows ignorance. And if
you think calling me gay is offensive, it's not.
to clarify something for Nick, FDR did not "abuse
Presidential powers", he tested their limits in
the face of the worst economic disaster since the Irish
Potato Famine. Nothing he did was egregiously clandestine;
there were no cover-ups, denials or, most importantly,
criminal charges. I think if Nick is looking for the
champion of "abuse of Presidential powers",
which is a defined federal offense, he might do well
to examine RMN, Republican.
very good points. It's important to keep in mind that
the previous Republican president, Herbert Hoover, had
thrown in the towel and given up on the economy, just
as Republicans will under severe pressure. So anything
FDR did was great as far as almost everyone was concerned.
There has never been a president before or since that
was loved like FDR, whether he was right or wrong, and
he was the only president elected to four terms. Richard
Nixon is the perfect analogy to Bush jr. He was excessively
secretive, had his own agenda, lied to the public and
to Congress, supported genocide, and basically fucked
up every part of the world he interfered with. I'd say
that Nixon and Bush jr. have to stand as the two worst
presidents of the last 100 years, over possibly ever.
movie question for you. Somebody, AMC or Turner Classics,
showed the movie "Alien" the other night.
It included a scene where Ripley discovers her missing
crewmates who are cocooned and ready for hatching. They
ask her to kill them and she burns them. That scene
was deleted from the theatrical release and I was wondering
if you'd seen it. I thought it was a good scene, and
would have tied nicely with the similar scene in "Aliens"
when the female colonist is found in similar straits.
think that's why they put that scene into "Aliens,"
because it was a cool scene and had been cut from the
do you have to be such a hippie. Trust me if they're
was a right wing conspircy I would be the center of
it. Why do you have to bash Bush man and don't give
me he lied? The CIA/FBI have alot of losy info. Ok...look
at Clinton, he bombed the chinease, Iraq, Africa, Bosnia,
Yugoslavia... yet no slack for Bush. Let see Bush actually
attack terrorism, stop corporate crooks, get rid of
the dumb ass death tax, increase national security and
etc. oh...FYI FDR abused the presidental powers the
most. Your really have your head up ass Josh when it
comes to politics. Maybe some day we can remove it.
being a hippie and all I can't help having my head up
my ass. I guess I got it all wrong, George Bush really
is doing a swell job. Come on, even Donald Rumsfeld
admitted yesterday that things aren't going very well
in Iraq, and if one of Bush's inner circle is admitting
less than perfection then things must be completely
fucked up. And had we sent 100,000 troops to Afghanistan
instead of Iraq, we might actually be winning the war
on terrorism, instead of losing it. Need I remind you,
oh wise surveyor of the political landscape, that Iraq
had nothing to do with 9/11, nor did they have any WMDs.
The war in Iraq, and every Iraqi we kill, is only making
the issue of terrorism worse.
is, of course, correct that the President alone is not
entirely responsible for the state of the economy and
rightly points out the politically unbiased progression
of the boom-bust cycle. The ability to set interest
rates, however, provides the President with an incredible
amount of influence, particularly in the mid-term, over
economic performance. It is also worth mentioning that
the President traditionally sets the budget agenda,
a power which has evolved through the ability of President's
to veto (spending) legislation. In a closely split legislature,
such as we have had for some time now, the veto power
also questions the ability of the United Nations to
rebuild a nation. One might as easily question the ability
of the United States to do so as well. Vietnam is the
classic example of a US failure, but throughout the
post-WWII era we have littered the world landscape with
poorly-run petty dictatorships, the legacies of which
haunt as still today. Any one care to vacation in Haiti?
The United Nations has had some success stories, particularly
in Cyprus where a blood feud stretching back centuries
seems to be nearing peaceful resolution. East Timor
still exists as a stable entity after horrendous civil
war and is essentially governed completely by the United
Nations. While NATO handles security matters in Kosovo,
it is the United Nations which manages civilian governmental
makes the United Nations potentially the best answer
in Iraq, however, is not its track record, but the legitamacy
ascribed to the UN by the world, the Third World in
particular. That view is not without reservations due
to Western domination of the Security Council, but the
United Nations is still the most palatable outside influence
for change of any sort for the governments of the world.
The United Nations, unlike the United States, does not
have to defend its actions against accusations of imperialism.
That is why the United Nations whould have a greater
role in the transition to a sovereign Iraq.
valid points, as always. Yes, the U.N. is who we need
to go to now, no matter what their record, and that's
just what's sort of happening. Of course, were I the
head of the U.N. instead of a reasonable man like Kofi
Annan, I'd tell George Bush to shove it up his ass for
being such a prick leading up to our invasion of Iraq.
But that's just me.
played the female lead opposite john barrymore in the
1938 stage production of Twentyth Century...did they
both play in the movie of the same name and who was
the director of both productions (same director?)
don't know anything about a 1938 stage production, but
the 1934 film starred John Barrymore and Carole Lombard
and was directed by Howard Hawks.
i made a webpage about how much you sucked it would
be more successful than yours.
I have your cat
you've got something to say, then say it. Otherwise
fuck off and drop dead.
you tried Mobius Home Video Forum (mhvf.net)? A lot
of good film discussion there, most of it from film
geeks just as enthusiastic as yourself.
for all the food for thought-
don't do such things, but perhaps there are others here
was just reading the many posts on this board about
President Bush, the situation in Iraq, etc, and I just
wanted to point out a few items for the pundits:
Those "contract workers" who died in Fallujah
were mercenaries, but they had nothing to do with the
U.S. government or the army. The private corporations
involved in infrastructure repair and logistical support
are responsible for their own security, so they hire
people for this purpose. The most popular candidates
for this work: former members of the Special Operations
community, who can't turn down the top-end pay (an experienced
special operative who agrees to leave the Armed Forces
and go to work as a private contractor can make upwards
of $120,000+ for a one-year contract). This has caused
a particular drain on the Special Forces and Delta Force
Based on my personal experience, there is NO such thing
as an "innocent Iraqi." 'nuff said on that
The President of the United States is not responsible
for the state of the economy. The only constitutional
power that he has that directly affects the economy
is his authority to order the Treasury to adjust interest
rates. Historically, our economy works on a reoccuring
boom-to-bust cycle over roughly every twenty years,
regardless of who is in charge.
The UN couldn't manage Bosnia, Haiti, or Somalia, so
what makes anyone think that they could handle Iraq?
8 years of continued weak or nonexistent stands on terrorism
by the Clinton administration, along with continued
budget cuts and the "political correction"
of the CIA and the FBI led to the September 11th attacks;
it is the current naysayers who wish to dump the entire
blame on the lap of the current administration.
Lastly, the current attacks from Muqtada al-Sadr, the
other Shi'a imams, and the terrorist presence were expected
in June, then in August, and periodically throughout
the last year. The enemy simply showed good timing in
launching attacks AFTER the majority of the troop rotations
had already taken place; it's always easier to attack
green troops who are new to the war zone.
food for thought.
home. Regarding Bush and the economy, had he not unilaterally
attacked Iraq for no reason, right there would have
been a multi-hundred million dollar savings, not to
mention over a thousand U.S. soldiers, and tens of thousands
of Iraqs. If there are no innocent Iraqis, then there
are no innocent Americans either. We seem to think that
we're above the standards we set for the rest of the
Josh, I've got three very different questions that I
want to ask you. (Please answer all three!).
1. I don't know why, but my favorite Hitchcock film
(and I have watched all of them except his silent films,
(though I did get to see 'The Lodger') and The Paradine
Case) has always been Family Plot. I just keep going
back to it....I had never seen a film starting with
two stories, ending with one, and doing it without anyone
noticing. I think it is superb, and probably one of
Lehman's 10 best. I didn't see it on your favorite list...how
2. You keep mentioning story structure in your reviews,
and I would like to get > to know it a lot better...but
I haven't gone to film school yet, since I'm still in
High School. What's your opinnion on McKee's "Story"?
If you hate it, what other book do you recommend?
3. Did you get to vote on your state's primaries? I
just wanted to know if Kerry was your first choice amongst
all the candidates.
glad you like "Family Plot," however for the
rest of us it's one of Hitchcock's very worst films.
The tone silly and idiotic, none of his old-fashioned
rear-screen projection is working at all, and he hasn't
got an appealing lead actor. To me it's clearly the
work of a very old man that's no longer in control of
his craft. Seeing the film for the first time, when
it was released in 1976, when I was at U of M, was one
of the great let-downs of my life. Particularly coming
after "Frenzy," which was the best film he
had made in over ten years, since "Psycho."
I honestly believed he had another good film in him,
and "Family Plot" was not it.
for story structure, read my essays. McKee is okay,
but he has a number of "rules" that are utter
nonsense, like no narration, when in fact narration
can be great and has been used beautifully (like "The
Magnificent Ambersons" or "To Kill a Mockingbird").
I wasn't a registered democrat here in MI, so i didn't
vote in the primaries, although I would definitely have
voted for John Kerry, and will do so in the election.
it going man! Like you're website especially the favorite
movies section,But! You have got to get more Steve McQueen
Movies on there!!!! Definitly check out The Hunter (steve's
last movie), The Cincinatti Kid(great flick about card
sharks), and if you can find it, A Soldier in the Rain(with
McQueen& Jackie Gleason) also I didn't see Fear
and Loathing in las vegas!!! WHATS UP WITH THAT MAN!!!
Fear and loathing has one of the best criterion discs
ever made no joke!! I didn't get all the way through
you're list but I'm sure you have the Osterman Weekend
on there, and blood simple, if not go get them right
now, stop reading this and go to the store man!!!! (just
messin' with you dude!!) But if you haven't checked
out those movies check em out!! take it easy!!
didn't mention a single film I haven't seen, and none
of them are on my fav list. "The Cincinnati Kid"
was all right, but it's sluggish as hell, and a major
rip-off of "The Hustler," which is why it
isn't on my list (although I have fantasized about Tuesday
Weld and Ann-Margaret from that film). "The Hunter"
and "Soldier in the Rain" both suck (actually,
the book of "Soldier in the Rain," by Wllliam
Goldman, was pretty good, but the movie completely blew
it), and "The Osterman Weekend" pretty much
sucked, too, and makes a sad ending to Sam Peckinpah's
career. Rutger Hauer as an American newscaster is one
of the worst pieces of casting in history. And, I'm
sorry to say, the film of "Fear and Loathing"
completely, totally, and utterly sucked, and is an insult
to the book, and Benicio Del Torro is not a 300-pound
I see that the US military in Iraq is going to start
placing former members of Saddam's Intelligence Services
in charge of troubled areas of Iraq. No wonder the administration
didn't kill Saddam; they figure they may still need
him. I guess it's too bad about Uday and Qusay.
What a missed opportunity this is for the UN. If Bush
weren't so tied to corporate interests we could turn
the whole affair over to the UN and regain a measure
of credibility. Has anybody noticed that Afghanistan
is headed South as well? I hope Kerry has a large broom
because he's going to walk into a huge mess.
if Bush hadn't made such a complete asshole out of himself
(and us) to the U.N. he might be getting some much needed
assistance now. As Thomas Friedman pointed out in the
NY Times, without a legitimate coalition like Bush Sr.
had (which included Syria and Saudi Arabia), we have
no chance in Iraq. In response yesterday to a question
by a reporter asking what he thinks about what's going
now in Iraq, Bush said, "It's good, very good."
The dumb fucking asshole must eat LSD for breakfast.
April has been the most deadly month yet in Iraq, and
it's not halfway over yet. 76 U.S. soldiers killed and
over 700 Iraqis killed just this last weekend. At this
same press conference, when Bush was asked who it was
we would be turning over the government to on June 30,
he had absolutely no answer, "Well, that is, I,
uh, the U.N. is looking into it." Not only will
no troops be leaving on June 30, but now they're calling
for more troops. And this isn't like Vietnam? When the
Republicans heard Ted Kennedy say that their response
was, "That's irresponsible." Yeah? In what
way? Let's own up to a fact here, okay? Terrorists killed
3,000 people on 9/11. We have killed somewhere between
10,000 and 25,000 Iraqis so far, so who's worse?
know you have read a lot of historical books. Curious,
have you read "An Army At Dawn" by Rick Atkinson?
Its about the North African theatre during WW II. Know
of any (good) movies that take place in this setting
regarding the battles, the men involed, etc. Of course
there are many movies set in North Africa during this
period, "Casablance" comes to mind, but that's
more about civilians than the war. "Patton"
of course, but what else?
Henry Hathaway's 1951 "The Desert Fox: The Story
of Rommel," with James Mason as Rommel, which was
pretty good, and there's the sequel from 1953, "The
Desert Rats," also with Mason as Rommel, directed
by Robert Wise, and also pretty good. There's Zoltan
Korda's 1943 "Sahara" with Bogart that was
quite good. There's also the 1967 "Tobruk,"
with Rock Hudson, which i recall not being so good.
And other than the beginning of "Patton,"
I can't think of any others. No, I haven't read "An
Army at Dawn," is it good?
Im Australian for starters, so where I am there isn't
a big following in film, more TV. I want to shoot a
film, but with MiniDV, do you think this is a good way
too start out? and would you have any advice to make
the shoot more professional, e.g. do's and don't's.
I have tried to write a script, but I can never get
it out of my head, would it easyer for me to tell my
idea to a script writter or don't they like that?
you can find a writer that will listen to you and write
you a script. Otherwise you're stuck writing it yourself.
And if you haven't got a story to tell to write a script,
why do you think you have a movie to make? If MiniDV
is what you have, then it's perfect.
currently working on my first screenplay and was wondering,if
I'm ever lucky enough to find a prospective buyer, what
is a reasonable offer? Are there a lot of factors to
consider, like earning potential and such or would there
be a standard offer for a first time writer?
depends on what is the purpose of the script? Is it
a feature or a TV movie? And who's the buyer? Is it
a big company or an independent? And generally you don't
just sell a script, first it gets optioned. You need
to read some books on the subject. And if this is your
first script I wouldn't worry myself about sales and
script fees. You've probably got at least three or four
more scripts to write before you're anywhere close to
optioning or selling a script.
much equipment and crew do you have to bring with you
to shoot in Bulgaria or is it all local.
camera equipment comes in from Rome. Most of the department
heads are American, like the Executive producer, the
writer/director, the line producer, the production designer,
the 2nd unit director, the 1st AD, and everyone else
will be hired there.
I wasn't going to ask, but something brought it back
to mind again. What is it, exactly, that's great about
2001 A Space Odyssey? Thanks, see ya,
that it doesn't have it's faults, but I'd say "2001"
still remians the most intelligent, adult sci-fi film
ever made. It completely revolutionized special effects
in movies, and every film with effects in it since then
owes it a debt of gratitude. And without "2001"
you certainly wouldn't have had subsequent all of the
silly sci-fi films like "Stars Wars." Not
to mention that during the late 1960s and early '70s,
when the film was re-released annually in 70mm, it was
a yearly ritual for everybody to take LSD, go see the
film, and have a wild, joyous experience.
did you think of the warner herzog/klaus kinski movies
(AGUIRRE: WRATH OF GOD, NOSFERATU, WOYZECK, FITZCARRALDO,
COBRA VERDE, MY BEST FIEND?). also, I think Roger Corman
had something to do with FITZCARRALDO. I also read Mick
Jagger was going to star in FITZ... before Kinski but
should see "Burden of Dreams," a very good
documentary about the making of "Fitzcarraldo,"
which has the footage of Mick Jagger and Jason Robards
before they both split. I must say that I like "The
Mystery of Kasper Hauser" quite a lot, but the
rest of Herzog's films basically bore me. I did enjoy
"My Best Fiend," which is also a documentary,
and shows what a complete crazy man Kinski was, but
otherwise I find Klaus Kinski to be a ham.
Just saw an odd blurb at Sci-Fi.com - you can read it
. Basically, Robert Rodriguez has resigned from the
DGA so that he can "co-direct" an adaptation
of a Frank Miller comic book with the artist. (When
apparently is jeopardizing his next project, which insists
on using a DGA member.)
So I have lots of questions - don't people like the
Farrely Brothers and those brothers who did the Matrix
movies get "co-director" credits? And don't
some Disney features have two directors credited - one
for the animation, and one for the voice talent? And
how are some studios able to use non-DGA members, while
others aren't? (Since I gather everyone has to use SAG
members, unless you're an ultra low low budget shoot.)
And can someone like Rodriguez just join, quit, and
re-join as he sees fit? And is DGA in general as omnipresent
(And yes - I do recognize the irony here, since I think
I've mentioned just about every director you don't care
for except Tarantino and Michaal
not an issue of just co-directing for Rodriguez, it's
that Frank Miller isn't a DGA member and the a DGA director
can't co-direct with a non-DGA director. If your company
is signatory to the DGA, meaning the signed an agreement
with them, then they can only DGA members for the director,
the assistant directors, the unit production manger,
and the line producer. If the company is not signatory
then they can't use any DGA members. I don't know if
you can quite, then turn around and rejoin, but maybe
you can if you're willing the pay $10,000 membership
couldn't agree with you more. There were a couple of
scary earlier presidents, but they didn't have this
much potential for complete destruction. I would also
love to know what the motivation is...pleasing Daddy?
Finishing his crusade? This is turning into another
you related to Gene? And when Ted Kennedy said that
this was "Bush's Vietnam" the other day the
Republicans went nuts, saying "that's completely
irresponsible." Really? How? And some other asshole
Republican senator who said that critisizing the war
and the president is aiding the enemy. Shit, they don't
even know who the enemy is.
turned on CNN and the US just bombed a mosque in Fallujah
where there were many casualties. Over 41 US soldiers
killed in the past few days. The blood of all those
innocent service people and Iraqis are on the blood
of that murderer bush. And then when the caskets of
these brave men and women come home, the scumbag doesn't
have an honor guard to meet them because he doesn't
want the media to cover all the deaths. I read that
you believe that that asshole vile creature won't be
re-elected, but Josh, the company that makes the voting
machines-DIEBOLD-is one of that bastards biggest contributors
and has vowed to insure his ELECTION-NOT RE-ELECTION.
There will be no paper ballot trail so if we thought
2000 was bad, it is going to be worse this year. There
are groups that are trying to guarantee a paper trail,
but I guess the administration is fighting that. Then
there's the Nader factor (who BTW, couldn't get on the
ballet in Oregon, but will still try). He says that
gwb should be impeached but nader is doing all he can
to see that the lying coward gets in. I don't understand
his stupidity in all of this. What an ego he has. That
coward has done everything he can to destroy the environment
and Nader stays in to take away votes from Kerry. This
is a nightmare. And on top of it, the reflublicans are
trying to stop groups like MoveOn, etc. from showing
ads criticizing the asshole. What are we going to do?
got to get together behind John Kerry. I'm not blaming
Ralph Nader for anything, he didn't cause Gore to lose,
running a piss-poor campaign caused him to lose. I just
heard last night that Nader's 4% is equally split between
Republicans and Democrats right now. I really think
he's a non-factor. So let's just think positive and
try to influence the people around us that it would
be a true sign of both stupidity and unAmericanism to
vote for Bush again.
Ian Michael Drinkwater
I've read your rules but I'm not quite sure whether
this one is o.k. as it's xwp related:
I was told by a reliable associate the other day that
the winner of the u.k. xena lookalike competition has
gone to the u.s. to star in a new series which is kinda
xena like, but set in modern times. Do you know anything
of this and if not, err well you might as well ask renee
when you get the chance or maybe even creation ent.
I'm looking forward to the completion of Alien Appocolypse,
it sounds like a fun project.
know nothing, I hear nothing, I see nothing.
believe that shear desperation is why the army needs
mercinaries, and I have no doubt that things are much
worse in Iraq than what we are currently lead to believe.
My greatest fear about Bush's re-election prospects
is that he would go nuts,and attempt to pass every horrible
policy he could think of. It would most likely start
with reinstating the draft, and end with attacking another
country. I hope that people who were too apathetic to
vote last time will want to vote this time. I also hope
that this is the last time a Bush occupies the presidency.
I saw a documentary on the Bush dynasty, where an interviewee
called the Bush family the WASP mafia. BTW-Don't you
think it's pathetic that Bush is attending the 9/11
commission hearings witn Cheney by his side? If he had
an ounce of integrity he would appear alone.
if he had one small testicle, which he clearly doesn't
have. GW Bush's great-grandfather, Herbert Walker Bush,
did business with the Nazis longer than any other American
company, even after Pearl Harbor, and was finally sued
and shut down by the U.S. government. The Bush's and
the bin Ladens are family friends. The bin Ladens invested
in GW's failed oil company, Arbusto. The only plane
to leave the United States on 9/11 right after the attacks,
since all commercial flights were immediately grounded,
was a plane bound for Saudi Arabia containing members
of the bin Laden family, who had been visiting with
George Bush, Sr., and the plane was given special permission
to leave by good old GW Bush. Is there any confusion
as to why Bush was not interested in going after Osama
bin Laden, but instead went after Saddam Hussein? Hello!
Awesome! Those are all cool films. I like the older
alien invasion type films myself, like "Invasion
of the Body Snatchers". And the H.G. Wells stuff
is cool. I remember reading The Time Machine a long
time ago, it is interesting, I was angry at those nasty
Morlocks. But of all those films you mentioned I think
I was most interested in Spartacus, well generally.
But can I ask how that is going to play into a space
or science fiction film like Alien Apocalypse?
Also I was looking at the comments about politics and
the election and everything and I see that you're pretty
set in your opinion but I think in terms of foreign
policy at least the Bush administration is favorable
in my opinion. They may not be as keen on environmental
protection which I think is pretty important but their
goal is to get rid of all those nasty terrorists and
they kind of do it John Wayne or Rambo style. So I think
they are good in that sense although we may never see
exactly the same on this. That's okay though.
Apocalypse" is similar to "Spartacus"
in that it's about a slave revolt and the guy that leads
it. To quote Walter Cronkite, "The war in Iraq
is the single worst foreign policy decision ever."
And now they're calling for more troops? If Bush gets
re-elected you can just bet there will be a draft.
I love the fact that everyone is referring to the four
killed mercenaries as "Contract Workers".
It makes it sound like they were hard-hats who whistled
at one too many Iraqi women.
I am not as optimistic as you are about Kerry's chances.
I think that Bush and company have changed the playing
field. The amount of money they've been able to assemble
and the number of favors they can call in from big business
is going to make it very difficult for Kerry. It's possible
that OPEC might step in, however. If oil prices remain
high the strain that places on the economy might work
heavily against Bush. $2.15 a gallon might well prove
a small price to pay for a return to the rule of law.
Remember that one, the Rule of Law?
On a different subject, if "Eyes Wide Shut"
wasn't Kubricks worst film, then what was? I've said
here before how preposterous I found that film. That
said, we all agree that Kubrick had his share of brilliant
films, something that the previous writer seems to not
wish to grant us.
I've also been wanting to ask for some time which genre,
if any, you think has fared best in Hollywood's twenty-year
malaise. I submit that romantic comedies have done the
best (documentaries generally falling outside the Hollywood
sphere). I think that "When Harry Met Sally"
insured a niche for movies which, if not necessarily
revolutionary, were at least well-crafted. Not great
films, mind you, but nice ones. Science Fiction has
disappeared, Drama is only about the awards shows (as
opposed to story-telling, etc), there are no more Westerns
and Action films are directed by and for kids. I think
that leaves romantic comedies. My thoughts.
I'll read your "Liar" essay now.
suppose you may be right, but there aren't many examples
of good romantic comedies since "When Harry Met
Sally . . ." that I can think of. I was just thinking
today, having bailed within 30-minutes of the last five
or six movies I tried to watch, that movies have truly
become unwatchable. Every film looks and sounds horrible
when I first hear of them, and when I finally see them
they're even worse than I anticipated. I don't think
movies can get any more dreadful than this, but I could
"I'm going to think positive and say no, I don't
think Bush can win. I think he's alienated too much
of his own base, as well as most of the middle. Bush
and his people can get on TV every single day and tell
us the economy is booming, but if you're in business
you know that's just not true. Real estate isn't selling,
houses are devalued, and people without jobs are poor
I'm FAR more pessmisistic about this. It's probably
due to the way things have been going in my life as
of late, as well as seeing the profound stupidity of
people through my own interactions as well as on the
national and international stage.
I wouldn't be surprised if Bush was re-elected in 2004.
In fact, I expect it. The only way I'll be convinced
will be on January 20, when John Kerry is sworn in as
President. Until then, I don't give a shit how many
reports there are of Bush losing in the polls, of how
many people are fed up with his antics. None of that
matters to me anymore. All that will matter is seeing
Kerry sworn in as President in January 2005. Of course,
that doesn't mean the nightmare will necessarily be
over-it just means that **maybe**, there'll be a faint
glimmer of hope at the end of the tunnel.
I'm sorry you're so down, but, surprisingly, I'm not
at the moment. Being a student of history, I believe
in yin and yang, the right then the left, it's been
going on our whole lives. I was born under Eisenhower,
then there were eight years of Democrats with Kennedy
and Johnson, then seven horrible years of Nixon, then
Michigan's one and only president, the unelected Gerald
Ford, then Jimmy Carter, then the horrible Reagan and
Bush, Sr. years, then eight happy years under Clinton,
then these three utterly miserable years under Bush,jr.
It's time for it to switch back.
Firstly, good luck with the new film that you, Renee
and Bruce will be working on.
Secondly, I read your new essay on Bush-and I couldn't
agree more. There are those who've compared the situation
in Iraq to Vietnam. I think that ultimately, it will
become FAR worse than Vietnam. There are those radical
Islamic factions who hate Americans simply because we
*exist.* The fact that we breathe is an affront to them,
and because of this, we must die.
What Bush has done is open a Pandora's Box. He has exacerbated
Arab hatred towards Americans a thousand-fold. Frankly,
I could easily see the American-Iraqi situation becoming
exactly like the situation between the Israelis and
the Palestinians, where they have been at each others'
throats for almost 3 decades, thousands of dead between
them , with no end in sight-as well as countless laughable
attempts at peace, which neither side truly wants.
It's very possible that we are going to be stuck there
for at least 10-15 years, with thousands of American
dead as a result of this invasion. And I'm not just
talking about KIAs-I'm talking about terrorism right
here in the U.S. I was horrified by 9/11, but not shocked
by it. Frankly, anyone who was shocked by 9/11, in my
opinion, is painfully naive and sheltered.
It's just a matter of time-and I don't doubt the U.S
will be attacked again. And I certainly don't doubt
New York will be attacked again.
I must tell you-when Bush won the election, I got a
sickening feeling deep inside me that I couldn't quite
place. Now, I know why.
word is that the 9/11 commission is going to conclude
that the 9/11 attacks were indeed preventable, had the
president, his national security advisor, and his staff
been paying attention. Let's see how Bush spins his
way out of this.
How can a working director like yourself be so ignorant?
Eyes Wide Shut is Kubrick's worst film? That statement
seals your fate as a hack. I don't care what films you
make (i'll never see them now)- you have no cinematic
authority as far as I'm concerned. I'm sorry, but anyone
who doesn't understand the absolute profundity of Kubrick's
last film knows nothing about cinema.
You were bored? If you are as familiar with Kubrick
as you claim, you must have expected something other
than "THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS" or "TORQUE"-
films I'm sure you would love, Mr. Becker.
I'm disgusted at your ignorance and I send negative
cinema karma hurtling your way. Kubrick is/was at the
very vanguard, along with Godard, Brakhage and Fellini.
Too bad you have no comprehension of what you missed
in EWS. "Bored". I'm bored ranting to you...
you're boring me, too. Anybody who thinks that "Eyes
Wide Shut" is a good or profound movie clearly
has their head up their ass, and obviously knows very
little about writing, stories, movies, and people. And
you really ought to read "Eyes Wide Open"
by Fredric Raphael, who wrote the film, and says that
Kubrick didn't have a clue what he was trying to say,
and really didn't even know why he was making the movie
other than to make another movie -- and that's the writer
of the film. But I guess you know better than that,
and I suppose Oscar-winning writer Fredric Raphael must
be as ignorant as me.
my film partner sent me to your site and you are right
on with your thinking... i applaud you.
what websites do you read?
the site i read most often is commondreams.org i like
the global opinion nature of it.
I just got involved with truemajority.org i totally
dig what they are saying, have you been there yet?
geek up the good work.
don't read websites, I read books. That's not entirely
true, I do read the news at NYTimes.com everyday.
on your Bush is a Liar article. Within recent weeks
I have met many moderate "Reagan" republicans
who dispise Bush, and plan to vote against him based
on his despicable record. I am happy that they are finally
seeing the light, and switching sides, but what I don't
understand are the die hard partisan voters; the voters
who will vote Republican or Democrat no matter how good
or bad the incumbant's record is. For instance, assholes
like Sean Hanity are Bush apologists, and would defend
him no matter how bad is record is. You can't deny that
there are no WMDS, you can't deny that there is a large
net job loss, and you also can't deny that there is
a rising $550 billion dollar defecit. My point is that,
like your article stated, this is not the time for partisan
politics, people have to vote against Bush because it's
crucial to our survival. Do you think Bush will win
in November, and would you move to Canada if he did?
going to think positive and say no, I don't think Bush
can win. I think he's alienated too much of his own
base, as well as most of the middle. Bush and his people
can get on TV every single day and tell us the economy
is booming, but if you're in business you know that's
just not true. Real estate isn't selling, houses are
devalued, and people without jobs are poor consumers.
I saw an interesting thing on CNN: The Capitol Gang
was talking to one of the CNN reporters in Baghdad the
other day after one of these endless and innumberable
terrorist attacks, and the reporter was telling how
awful things are there and how scared everyone is. Robert
Novack, the extreme right-wing conservative on The Capitol
Gang, said something like, But you have to admit that
things are better than they were under Saddam Hussein,
right? And this reporter looked honestly shocked, saying,
no, things are MUCH worse for the average Iraqi now.
Bob Novack wasn't having any and repeated, But life's
better now there. The reporter, who was in the midst
of the carnage and clearly not playing partisan politics,
shook his head sadly and said, No, things are much worse.
BTW, why do we need mercenary soldiers, like the four
Blackshear "security workers" that were just
killed in Fallujah, guarding our troops? 130,000 troops
isn't enough, so we have to hire mercenaries to guard
How are you doing? I wanted to wish you best of luck
on your film "Alien Apocalypse" with Renee
and Bruce Campbell. That is a totally cool idea and
title too and I definitely look forward to it. You know
I've been thinking since a lot of the space stuff is
in Texas Renee would fit in well as a Texas gal who
became an astronaut like you said. Was the film inspired
by anything? Are you a fan of science fiction or space
films in general? Like 2001 A Space Odyssey for instance?
Or is this more of an alien invasion type film? Totally
Best of luck with everything I know the film will be
Also if you are ever doing any Rambo films I aspire
to that and would love to try out for the part. I am
glad you are a Rocky fan also.
like "2001" very much, as well as the original
"Planet of the Apes," the first two "Alien"
films, "War of the Worlds," "The Time
Machine," "A Clockwork Orange," "The
Day the Earth Stood Still," the original "Invasion
of the Body Snatchers" (the Donald Sutherland remake
isn't bad, either). Anyway, the films that inspired
this story are: "Spartacus," "Planet
of the Apes," and "Lawrence of Arabia,"
and pretty clearly, too.
gwb has the perfect way of weaseling (no offense to
weasels,who are majestic compared to that crotch rot
bush)out of producing testimony, papers, etc. Just claim
presidential executive privilege. He is invoking that
now with Clinton's papers with regards to 9/11 EVEN
AFTER CLINTON HIMSELF SAID IT WAS OKAY TO RELEASE THEM!!!!
You know each day that goes by, it becomes clearer and
clearer that this scumbag is evil incarnate. When he
doesn't like someone, he smears them but if you dare
say anything bad about him, you're a traitor (according
to the rabid and totally brainless ann coulter)or you
have his mommy and daddy crying about the insults. He
distorts John Kerry's record with lies (big surprise
there)and people give him big bucks. At least when Clinton
lied, no one died. How do we rid ourselves of this stench?
Maybe you can direct a film about him, have Mike Moore
write it, Howard Stern promote it on his radio program,
the Dixie Chicks do the soundtrack and have Susan Sarandon
and Tim Robbins star. That would be the ideal scenario.
Of course your film would be reality as oppose to the
science fiction this country is witnessing today. Keep
up the truth about that vile piece of shit Josh. You
are the voice of reason and sanity.
is a trapped rat and he's freaking out. He clearly had
his pants down around his ankles for the first eight
months of his presidency regarding terrorism, and he's
been called on it. And the best defense is a good offense.
Former Secretary of the Treasury, O'Neill, called him
on it and the guy was immediately investigated by the
CIA. Richard Clarke called him on it and the Republican
smear machine went into overtime. GW Bush really is
the worst president of the U.S. ever, and anyone who
would vote for him now has to be a completely ignorant
moron, who never watches the news or reads the paper
(like Bush himself), and is basically a war-monger who
just wants to see humans die, both foreign and American.
That's Bush's legacy -- 20,000 humans dead for absolutely
no good reason other than his own agenda. We've never
had a president who was this big of a lying asshole
before, not even Nixon, who couldn't tell the truth
from a lie under any circumstances. I say, a vote for
Bush is a vote for terrorism, divisiveness, and hatred.
A vote for Bush is a vote for evil.
I was just wondering what your view on Digital Video
was? And how alot of aspiring filmmakers are being able
to get a DV camera and shoot and edit their own shorts
and features for almost absolutely no money. I'm an
avid DV user myself and I enjoy editing and directing
my own short films and soon (this summer, hopefully)
my own feature. Any words of encouragment as well?
are the spearhead of the future of filmmaking, take
the responsibility seriously. A). Don't hand-hold all
your shots, or even most of them; just because the camera
is small and light doesn't mean you don't need a tripod
and some sort of dolly, like a wheelchair; B). which
relates to A., plan your shots -- beautiful montage
is a big part of filmmaking, C). which really should
be A., write a good script with a story that's worth
telling. Otherwise, have fun and I hope your movies
turns out great.
Alien Apocolypse going to start filming soon? Are Renee
O'Connor and Bruce Campbell going to star in the film?
Is this project being done with Creative Light Ent.?
Also, if it is, Is there a possibility that Renee and
Bruce might promote it at this years Comic-Con in San
Diego? I know thats alot of questions. I am a fan! Bonni
are supposed to begin pre-production in Bulgaria in
two weeks, then start shooting three weeks later, like
May 9. Bruce and Renee and Lee Majors are starring (I
spoke with Renee last night and she's into it). Creative
Light, who are my sales agents, set up the deal, but
are not actively producing. I don't know nothin' 'bout
The Real Bob
is a question that doesn't seem to be asked much yet
in the political campaign. Do you think if George Bush
is re-elected and the Republicans maintain their hold
on the US Congress, that he will introduce military
conscription legislation into Congress?
Assuming that he will not withdraw from Iraq if re-elected,
the question has to be posed of whether the ground forces
are sufficient both to garrison the country as well
as ensure their own security to a reasonable degree.
At present, there are supposed to be something like
130,000 troops in Iraq. I am not sure if that is total
coalition but at any rate around 80% is US. The population
of Iraq is approx. 24,000,000. I read once that to garrison
a territory with a hostile population requires a ratio
of 1:8 troops to population. The real problem area is
the Sunni triangle, but even if the population of that
area were only 5,000,000 that would take 625,000 troops.
So based on rough estimates it would seem to me that
500,000 to maybe 2,000,000 troops would be needed to
do the job that the US is attempting to do. Of course
the government and the military say now that the current
force level is adequate, but maybe that is because additional
forces are unavailable anyway.
Could re-election be interpreted as a mandate for a
The Real Bob:
certainly wouldn't put it past Bush. Whatever is worst
for this country and its people, that's what he'll do.
And over half of Iraq's population lives in the Sunni
triangle, so to say they've got the rest of the country
quiet means nothing. The only real answer to the Iraq
situation is to get the fuck out. We should never have
attacked in the first place, we had no exit strategy,
and now we're caught in a quagmire where there are terrorist
attacks on our soldiers daily. Listening to these knuckleheaded
politcians saying shit like, we need victory with honor,
is the same horseshit they were saying during Vietnam.
There is no victory with honor in a situation like this.
There's only staying and being picked off one at a time,
or cutting and running, just like Korea and Vietnam.
If GW Bush is reelected I think it may mean world anarchy,
and be the first step toward the apocalypse.
stumble across your site buy chance as i was looking
for xena collectibles. is there any chance you have
any xena memorabilia (ie original scripts) you'd be
willing to part with? If not, thants fine. It's always
worth asking ;)
- Leena :)
I'm not willing to get rid of any of that stuff, but
I do have every script that I directed, along with every
draft leading up to the final, shooting draft. Undoubtedly,
the most interesting would have to be "Fins, Femmes
& Gems," which began it's life as the "coming
out" episode, but got rewritten along the way.
you Josh. Not only are you a gifted director (you directed
most of my favorite Xena episodes) but your comments
on that lying coward in the white house are so right
on the mark. Can you possibly tell me how, after all
the deceit, lies, personal attacks on former people
in his administration, that he is ahead in the polls
by as much as 6 points? How is it that after lying about
non-existent WMD's, the deaths of almost 600 soldiers
in Iraq, the worst environmental record in our nation's
history, the Patriot Act, his wish to desecrate the
Constitution etc., people still want to vote for him?
This is why your comments are so important. That is
why your mention of MoveOn is important because they,
along with the Center for American Progress, expose
who the real bush is. And you know why gasoline prices
are so high now, is so that idiot can justify opening
up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for drilling.
Josh, your voice along with others can help defeat that
dicktator and his ilk and I am grateful to you for speaking
out against him. It is people like you who are the real
patriots in this country. THANK YOU.
think they have a corner on patriotism, but they constantly
confuse it with xenophobia. Republicans don't feel they're
real, true patriots unless they're being shit-heads
to somebody else, like gays or Iraqis. And just for
the record, since I perpetuated the false number myself
earlier, it's not nearly 600 U.S. soldiers that have
died so far, it's more like 1,200. The way the miltary
counts battlefield deaths is by who is still breathing
when they're loaded into the medivac chopper. If the
soldier should die enroute to the hospital, or soon
thereafter, they're never reclassified as deaths, they
simply remain casualties. As a little note, a "casualty"
to the military includes any soldier who can no longer
fight, due to injury or death. So, nearly 600 U.S. soldiers
were D.O.A., but over 600 more died soon thereafter.
And another 2,500 anyway are so fucked up they probably
wish they were dead. And, of course, we've killed minimally
10,000 Iraqis, although it could easily be double that
number. So, over 11,000 human beings are dead because
GW Bush had a bug up his ass to bring down Saddam Hussien
where his dad failed. To say America is safer from terrorism
now is the biggest lie of all. There is a terrorist
attack on our soldiers in Iraq every other day. There
have been far more terrorist attacks on Americans since
9/11 than before it, and it's entirely due to Bush's
foolish, poltically asinine "pre-emptive"
attack on Iraq, which so obsessed him that he and his
crew ignored the largest spike in Al Qaeda transmissions
ever in the summer of 2001, demoted the entire counter-terrorism
department, did nothing to aid in the cooperation between
the FBI, who knew that two of the 9/11 hijackers were
in the country, and the CIA, and therefore Bush and
Rice are clearly culpable for the 9/11 attacks. Nothing
Bush has ever done (including his service in the national
guard) has the slightest thing to do with patriotism.
His brand of patriotism is called jingosim.
I just got done watching "The Commitments"
and was suprised by just how much I enjoyed it. It really
seemed much more lively than other movies because the
cast was made up of unknowns. Also it had some good
music and the lead singer was only 16 and had a voice
like Joe Cocker! I know you dislike alan parker so I
was curious if you'd seen that film. Also, they recorded
all the vocals live on the set and I was curious whether
you did that for "hammer", it seemed so but
I was just curious.
I did record all the vocals for "Hammer" live.
"The Commitments" is the one Alan Parker film
I do like, and I've seen it several times. It just goes
to show how good American R&B music from the 1960s
is, that kids from Ireland can do it and it still holds
up. I'll still take Otis Redding, though.
essay on religion made my day! It stuns me that the
more "enlightened" we become through our science
and technology, the more polarized we have become through
blind worship. Like a comet, the crusades are coming
I guess my religion essay must be popping up more often
on Google lately or something. It sure does feel extremely
polarized out there. It utterly astounds me that anyone
can possibly believe a single word that George Bush
or Condie Rice are saying. Here, this is for anyone
with a simple animation program that would like to make
a 30-second commercial for MoveOn.org, but you have
to give me co-credit. Anyway, it should be in the South
Park simple cut-out style and the first shot is a commercial
jet painted red, white and blue that's heading downward.
A narrator would say, "During the first three years
of George Bush's presidency we've lost 3 million jobs,
have a 550 billion dollar deficit, have lost 600 soldiers,
with over 10,000 civilians killed in an unnecessary
war with no evidence of WMDs, and now we find out that
before 9/11 the counter-terrorism department had been
demoted and was no longer considered important, and
even though the FBI knew that two of the 9/11 hijackers
were in the country they didn't tell anybody else, and
this was as plans were made to attack Iraq . . ."
We cut around the front of the cockpit and see that
the pilot is George Bush and the co-pilot is Condie
Rice, and they're both totally asleep, their heads bobbling
around, Bush is drooling. Cut around to the over-the-shoulder
shot of Bush and Rice inside the cockpit and they're
flying straight at the World Trade Centers. Boom! A
big explosion, and the final tag, "George Bush,
asleep at the wheel."
me begin by saying what a pleasure it has just been
for me to read your essay on the evil of religion. It
filled me with a great sense of relief to read such
a perfect reflection of my own perspective, there are
very few people that i have come across with the courage
to express these views, and even fewer who put them
in to print.
This brings me to my question. You have clearly spent
quite some time thinking about the issue of the evil
of religion, and i was wondering if you had any favorite
books or articles on the topic? I was also wondering
how you have found the reaction of others to your ideas?
Personally I have met with so much naked hostility (even
from professed atheists!) when I have talked about the
concept of religion as evil that I often find myself
saying nothing or feigning ambivalence. Once again thank
you, and I look forward to hearing from you.
that evil would naturally charade as good, and thus
you have the deceitful trickery of religion, is my own
little twist, I think. The guy most worth reading, although
he never says religion is evil, is Joseph Campbell.
He's the only scholar I've ever read that puts religion
exactly where it belongs, which is in among all the
other mythologies of human beings, from Eskimo mythology
to the Ainus of northern Japan. All mythologies are
equally as valid as all others because none of them
are true. They're illustrations of ideas, but they're
never literally true. Anyway, I'm glad you enjoyed my
It's been a while!
Just a quick question. I'm shooting my third 16mm short
since buying the Arri BL. BUT - I have two editors who
have access to Avid through their places of work. They're
lovely people. But slow as fuck! I guess if I ain't
paying them I can't expect anything more. But then another
part of me thinks: maybe not getting paid is more of
an indication of their motivation?
I've got to the stage where I've just bought an antique:
an old Umatic hi-band edit suite for £100. Cos
then I can always get my 16mm rushed transferred to
Umatic and edit myself. Although I can't grade. Or do
dissolves. And the titles would be a little shitty.
But I can cut.
So here's the question - have you had this problem (slow
editor/a) and what's the solution? Is it: do it yourself?
I'm just a little frustrated cos our short 16mm films
have been galloping along and we're falling down at
this last hurdle (editing).
On another note. I guess you're kinda busy right now,
but when you get a chance check out the remake of Dawn
of the Dead. It works! I know there's this whole argument
about studios being scared and backing sure bets (remakes
of TV shows/comic books/old movies) but Dawn of the
Dead is good. The thing I loved about Romero's originals
is that there was no explanation. The characters (and
the viewer) were plunged into the situation. You just
had to DEAL WITH IT. The remake uses this contect very
well. And the director really knows how to manipulate
Right. Thanks for your time. Good luck with Alien Apocalypse,
could always cut the film yourself on film, using a
splicer. That's how everybody cut everything for the
first 100 years of filmmaking, and it works just fine.
But the editor who cut my last three films, Kaye Davis
(who also cut "Evil Dead 2"), is a very fast
cutter and I have no complaints. Hell, she had the first
cut of "Hammer" done about two weeks after
we finished shooting. Also, I wouldn't see the remake
of "Dawn of the Dead" if they were giving
out fifty dollar bills at the door. I couldn't stand
the original, and I'll be damned if I support the remake
of anything. All remakes are the death of originality.