was just wondering if you've ever seen the Hong Kong
film, "A Chinese Ghost Story" and/or viewed
the finale of Xena, "A Friend In Need 1&2"
you see Rob again, you may want to let him know that
the cat is out of the bag on where he got the story
for Xena's finale. In fact, the entire Xena internet
community now knows he practically stole "ACGS"
and just inserted X/G into that story and thus we have
the Xena finale.
this is my opinion and many others as well. Many call
Rob a visionary and a great creator. Sorry, but if he
is such a visionary, why could he not have come up with
an original story for the Xena finale(the biggest show
of the entire series). Instead he stole someone else's
vision and just inserted his characters.
it wasn't just the story he stole, he took and copied
many scenes and shots almost directly; enough that a
case of plagiarism could be made here.
it wouldn't be that big a deal if he gave credit to
where the actual story came from, but instead he gave
none. Instead this finale was touted as 'Rob's vision';
'Rob's baby'. Well sorry, but I think it's pretty damn
low to copy someone else's work and then claim it as
I know your a friend of Rob's so you will take his side
on anything, but I don't think you can sit there a honestly
tell me it's okay for a writer to literally steal another's
work and claim it as your own original vision without
giving any credit at all to the original source.
makes Rob look bad for 2 reasons. One, he's not creative
enough to come up with his own story. Two, how could
he morally claim something as his own when it clearly
you see Rob, ask him about it or let him know that the
cat is out of the bag, and everyone knows who the true
creator of 'his vision' really is(and it's not Rob).
I'm tempted to get in contact to the creator of "ACGS"
and let them know about the Xena finale(since they may
know nothing about it) and let them know their story
was pretty much copied by Tapert. They may not give
a rat's a$$, but then again, they could view it and
be pretty pissed their work was stolen and used without
my God! The cat's out of the bag. Now people will know
that there are unoriginal ideas on television, and the
apocalypse will follow soon. And you're the cause! If
you hadn't let the cat out of the bag we could have
all continued along in blissful ignorance believing
that shows like Xena contained new and original ideas,
but no, you had to ruin everything. Damn you!
currently constructing a website dedicated to the world
of cult film, and would like to include a section interviewing
cult film personalities not so much about their own
work, but what their favorite cult films are, what cult
film icon ( alive or dead) they'd love to work with,
what cult film they would have loved to have been a
part of, favorite cult genres, and thoughts on the current
state of film. It is a non-profit site aimed at broadening
the appeal of my favorite films, which include Paul
Schrader movies, Bruce Lee ripoffs, Italian Mad Max
ripoffs, etc. If you're interested in being interviewed,
please e-mail me.I was also wondering if you know of
any other filmmakers personal websites where I can contact
for your time,
game. Send the questions. The term "cult"
confuses me, but as far as low-budget goes, I like guys
like Edgar G. Ulmer, Joseph Lewis, and young Anthony
Mann. I don't know that that's what your after, though.
read your structure essays, My wife and I have been
borrowing old movies from our local public library (on
your beloved VHS format) to see if they are really better
than the current crap.
you're right! We saw Sparticus (10,000 non-computer-generated
extras?), Lawrence of Arabia (good, but long), On The
Waterfront (GREAT ending!), and Paper Moon (a perfect
movie in every way). Now we just consult your recommended
movie list & no more stinkers! Afterward, we argue
about where all the standard 3-act beats were.
for setting us straight. A lot of Houston filmmakers
(well, mostly safety training films...) are now big
fans of your essays.
you know about the three-act structure, it's very obvious,
I think. The connection between all the good movies
is that that all have it. The connection between all
of the bad movies is that they don't have it.
luck with the humidity in Houston.
glad Bruce is doing the intro and his writing arm has
not snapped off from book signings.
you ever read Joe Queenan's Confessions of a Cineplex
Heckler? Interesting but bizarre movie criticism.
I haven't read it. I was brought up reading critics
like: Pauline Kael, Dwight Macdonald, Penelope Gilliatt,
James Agee, and Andrew Sarris, so I'm spoiled. As for
Bruce, he says he looks like Bob Dole after a signing,
with his withered arm clutching a pen.
was an interesting article in the LA Times recently
by Patrick Goldstein. He's got a few odd ideas (like
that American Beauty is a 'daring' film, as if). But
overall he makes a good point about the decline of film
and film criticism in the last 20 years. Seems like
his ideas are similar to your own.
a link to the story if you don't have the paper:
friend of mine already sent me that article. I pulled
a quote for my preface, about when the NY critics go
to screenings they look like prisoners of war being
marched into a refugee camp. We are not alone!
you please tell me the final episode of Xena's death
(by being beheaded), and what happened to Gabrielle,
and Joxer. And more importantly Xena's baby daughter
after Xena's death. What are the circumstances, and
what happened afterward too. Please let me know.
I'm going to miss them very much. And their adventures
and Joxer get married and move to the bottom of the
sea, where they have a squid baby. Get with the program.
I just wanted to tell you that I rented Lunatics: A
Love Story a few weeks ago and loved it! Is there any
chance it will be released on DVD anytime soon? I'd
love to get my own copy.
love to get my own copy. No, there are no plans that
I know of, not that anyone would check with me, or even
think of keeping me informed. I'm glad you liked it.
my name is Richard Langis. I am looking for help, I
have a story about an abused child and where that abuse
had taken this child in life. I am looking to hopefully
turn it into a screen play or movie of some sort. I
am sure you may get crazy questions like this but this
is for real and is very dramatic. If you cannot help
me could you please direct me to someone who can??
you for your time and consideration,
what's your question?
wanted to say, enjoy your work, and love the things
you have done with this web page. I think its great
you take the time to respond to fans no matter if its
good or bad. I like the fact you very honest and open
with all people that write to you. And you kinda cute
It's odd, but I get cuter by the day, too. I can't explain
Dear Mr. Becker,
like your essays, and when your book comes out I will
buy it in a minute. However the title "Film: The
Lost Art"; it sounds like something from some snobby
academic. I'd prefer "Why most movies suck"
if you can get away with the s-word.
my quesion: When you're developing an idea, if it starts
becoming something you're not too crazy about, do you
put it aside for later, or force yourself to fix and
finish it? (I assume even experienced writers come up
with bad ideas, but I guess they can detect them earlier
than the rest of us)
you seen the little known movie "A Shock to the
System"? It stars Micheal Caine as a burned out
executive who climbs the corporate ladder by offing
the competition. Anyway, I liked it.
did see it, but it's gone in one ear and out the other.
Regarding ideas, if you outline first, then write a
treatment, meaning like a short story, if it isn't working
you'll know it long before you've ever started the script.
If you can't tell the story and make it function in
8 to 12 pages, you'll never make it work at 100 to 120
doesnt get a black eye because she is clearly a replicant.
man! I wasn't going to reveal that until they released
the director's cut. Thanks!
was very glad to read that you're submitting your book
proposal to a publisher. I really enjoy your writing
and your insights, and the books of essays and instruction
on film that are now available, with the exception of
William Goldman's books (which I enjoy), are either
painfully formulaic (::cough, cough, Syd Field::) or
just collections of people reminiscing about how they
got into the business, which is interesting to a point
but not *useful*, especially to people who have already
gotten past the entry level in "the business."
Your essays on structure really serve a very pragmatic
purpose: to get film/tv people thinking about what makes
a film work, e.g., structure.
of structure... I went to see "The Anniversary
Party" this past weekend. I really enjoy Jennifer
Jason Leigh and Alan Cumming as actors, so I was curious
to see what they'd come up with as writer/directors.
It started out amusingly enough as a satire of Hollywood
egos on parade. **SPOILER ALERT** I mean, hey, it's
nothing new for a movie to say, "Wow, film industry
types are amusingly self-involved and neurotic,"
but the jokes were funny and the actors were playing
characters that were similar to their usual "types"
-- Kevin Kline as an acclaimed but egotistical and hammy
actor (but still a nice person), Phoebe Cates as an
actress who retired to become a full-time mom, etc.
-- so that added to the enjoyment. It was seemingly
well-structured, too: First act, introduce the central
couple and their friends, point to potential conflicts.
Second act, the couple and the party guests mingle and
the conflicts arise.
then, it all went to hell. At the end of a LONG sequence
in which all the guests presented their gifts to the
couple, the last guest (Gwyneth Paltrow as a shallow,
really young, politically correct starlet) gives them
enough Ecstasy for everyone at the party. And suddenly...the
second act started all over! Once again, the party guests
were interacting and conflicts were arising, the only
difference being that now everyone was wasted. And it
wasn't like this was a short little scene to cap the
act -- this was LOOONG, and made the film feel like
it was approaching Kevin Costner-length. Some very emotional
dramatic developments also arose, but I had lost interest
by then because I had been primed for the film to move
on to the third act (and resolution/conclusion!) before
this whole detour began.
tell you, Josh, I just sat there in the theatre thinking
about how pissed off you would have been, because *I*
was totally pissed off, too. I wanted to spank the filmmakers
(just metaphorically speaking, not in reality!) and
make them sit in front of their computers and read every
one of your structure essays until they were memorized.
When will they ever learn?
F. R. :
been rewriting for the past several days based on the
edit of my good friend, who also happens to be an editor.
It's good to hear someone say something nice about my
stuff because right now I'm having trouble looking at
it. It's also good to know that I'm what comes to mind
when you see a shitty movie. The same thing seems to
be happening to Bruce Campbell, who calls me on his
cell phone as he's leaving the theater in Oregon so
he and his wife can bitch to me about how much they
didn't like the film. Elizabeth, the editor, has sent
me a few articles recently backing up my assertion that
movies are in a sad state (she doesn't see many films
and thinks maybe I'm overstating the issue). In one
article, it said that when the New York critics go to
screenings they look "like prisoners being marched
into a gulag." Another article was about how all
of the films aimed at younger audiences (as though that
weren't all the films) are all dropping dead, including
"A. I." Interesting, eh? Perhaps a change
is in the air.
Cynthia E. Jones
agree with you that P.K. Dick's work has been greatly
tampered with. I'm pretty content in the knowledge that
the "Valis" trilogy will never make it to
screen. But isn't it funny that some people don't think
a sci-fi tale is fully told until it's in celluloid
another note, regarding myths...have you seen "Requiem
for a Dream?" I apologize if you've mentioned it
before, but I feel that it's definitely a modern-day
myth. True, painful, and lesson-giving. Of course, that's
helped by the participation of Hubert Selby, Jr., who
wrote the original material as well as the screenplay
(with Aronofsky). Plus Ellen Burstyn kicks ass. And,
of course, I'd much rather be disturbed by a film than
a great day!
haven't seen it yet, but I will. I liked "Pi,"
(which I must say did remind me of "Lunatics").
I watched John Huston's last film, "The Dead,"
for perhaps the 4th time and it's really exceptional.
A beautiful rendition of Joyce's story.
gave me some advice when I was just an aspiring filmaker,
and now I may have let you down somewhat. because now
my friends and I are making commercials for television
and radio. we still have the ultimate goal of making
a movie, its just that commercials are easy to make
and we make lots of money doing them. It's almost like
an addiction. We have saved buckets of money but still
we have no drive to make our movie, we haven't even
started yet on what we want to do. please give us another
nugget of wisdom and some inspiration.
ps. please do not give out my new email to the public,
too many people want it.
"Annie Hall," Paul Simon is showing Woody
Allen around his Beverly Hills house, takes him into
his private screening room and says that he no longer
has to wait in lines or stand outside. Woody replies,
"Yeah, then you grow old and die." The way
the film business works, most aspiring filmmakers will
drop out somewhere along the climb and do something
else, like post-production, lab work, or making commercials.
You're caught in a standard trap, and you can either
get out of it, or grow old and die.
there. It's Noelle again. Been awhile and it looks like
all kinds of new stuff is going on here. First congrats
on getting that draft out to the publishers. Will there
be any new material or is it stuff that you already
wrote. I hope Ted does the intro. Heck I hope Ted does
his own book.
speaking of Ted the Lunatics screenplay is up and I
read through it pretty quick--maybe the fastest read
so far of the screenplays. I don't think its really
very different from the movie. A couple of scenes were
shorter and the scene when Hank melts would have been
so cool. And if I'm recalling correctly there is a scene
in the hallway when Nancy looks back at the door as
if she has her doubts about leaving which would have
made it clearer that Nancy really liked Hank.
thing though, why doesn't Nancy get a black eye when
Hank clobbers her right in the face? Just kiddin'
Campbell wrote the forward for my book -- he's the bestselling
author in the bunch. The last I heard his book was on
the 6th printing and had sold over 50,000 copies. Regarding
Nancy's black eye, I wanted her to have one, but we
screwed up the continuity on the first day of shooting,
then there was no correcting it.
am trying to find my mentally handicapped sister in
Great Britain. She lived at London Doclands 12, Tally
House Manchester Rd. E14, but after skipping her meds
this last weekend, she escaped and is loose in London.
She knows her way around a computer, so if she contacts
you, please let us know. Like most English people, she
has great difficulty in spelling and proper grammar.
So, hopefully, if you hear from her, you will know her
by her use of badly spelled words like; banguli, diseaster
and cheapin and the use of the word Oly.
Thank you for your time.
Lord Pompous Ass.
Lord Pompus Ass:
heard of her.
really think your film is a diseaster cheapin other
words but l want to ask you a question why are you ugly
and why did you pick such a horrible name l have told
all my friends and lam going to tell everyone i live
in london doclands 12 tally house manchester road E14
oly vist me please because l hate you iam a girl am
when I was a small child I only dreamed of being ugly,
so that's what I've worked at my whole life. I have
no doubt you must be gorgeous since your use of the
English language is so beautiful. Regarding my name,
I once said to my Mother, "Mom, I'm glad you named
me Josh." She asked why, and I said, "Because
that's what everyone calls me,"
Ted Raimi as nice a guy as he seems?
he is. And he's one of the funniest people I've ever
met, too. He's also very bright and well-read.
if you thought my Blade runner rant was directed at
you personally. I was just adding my two bits to the
points you made.
you ever see A Simple Plan. I thought it was a pretty
solid film. One of the few that was better than the
source material it came from. I read the book first
and thought it was pretty unbelievable but I thought
it was handled well in the movie.
Sam's my buddy and I don't want to pick on his film.
Hey Josh Becker,
you run some screenwriting seminars, or are you going
to any more? You should post big events like that somewhere
on your site.
think you said that most of the independant films are
just bad as the hollywood drivel, but I've seen a few
good films, most recently "Pi", from other
filmmakers who seem to get the idea of good storytelling.
Since you're in the thick of it, do you think that there
are any current writer/directors, besides you, that
know how to consistently tell a good story?
and last week your name was in the newspaper, twice,
in article about Bruce Campbell's book. How long til
yours hits the stands?
never run a screenwriting seminar, although I did think
about it for a brief moment. I liked, "Pi,"
too. It's an interesting story and it's well-shot.
just got back from your neck of the woods. I spent a
week in L.A. where I was at a film festival seeing my
debut feature projected at the Sunset 5 on Sunset Blvd.
(know it?) God, how I hated every minute of it. I don't
see what a fest (unless it's a big one) can do for a
director who's not famous. I'll bet there wern't 30
people in the theatre, and not a single person was from
any of the distributors I invited. Nothing I wasn't
already expecting, but you always hope.
fire, I even thought I saw you while I was there! Basically
because I was so close to Santa Monica, but also because
this dude was a dead ringer for you from a distance.
I walked closer and realized it wasn't you...Unless
you were at the Radisson on Wilshire this last week?
did wind up seeing "AI" at Mann's chinese
theatre. It isn't very good, but I'm still glad I saw
it, and I definately like that theatre. BTW, do you
know if Orson Welles has a star on the walk of fame?
I searched for a while, but then the homeless guys started
talking to me, or the air next to me, and I rushed back
to the hotel, looking over my shoulder left and right.
the way, beer tastes like shit in L.A. Don't know why,
but it does. And I'll be damned if the sun ever stops
burning out there!
this Missouri air!
a good one.
that wasn't me at the Radisson. Sorry about your screening,
although I've had many just like it. I sort of like
that theater, but not where it's located. The same company,
Laemmle (relatives of Carl Laemmle, who started Universal),
has a theater in Santa Monica I like much better, which
is where I showed "Running Time." But that's
exactly my assessment of film festivals, too. What's
the point? And I don't think Orson Welles has a star
on the Blvd. Francis Coppola doesn't have one, either.
Luckily, Mickey Rooney has five.
do birds suddenly appear every time you are near?
I'm close to you?
Harrison Ford say he feels the character in Blade Runner
is not a replicant? If this aspect of the film is so
crucial then why is it so friggin ambiguous? Shouldn't
the actor be aware of this during the making of the
film, "Hey by the way Mr. Ford your character is
not human." In a last ditch effort to make the
film coherent they add in some voice over narration.
Although I liked the film , there was some lazy thinking
in the screenplay. This whole discussion reminds me
of a really long essay I read that tried to make sense
out of Lynch's craptacular Lost Highway. (i saw this
pile of dog shit in the theaters and i've never seen
a more numbed audience in my life) In spite of its thorough
research and sincere effort it just doesn't hold water
because what it came down to was justifications and
huge gap fillers that should be in the film itself not
in an essay about the film.
cool website by the way Josh.
what I said, but no . . . This Deckard-is-a-replicant
explanation is a bullshit latter-day fix for a illogical
E-mail: No thank you
your cvomments on Blade Runner and found it hard to
believe your Blade Runner fan webmaster hasn't explained
a couple of points to you. I'm not the world's biggest
Blade Runner fan myself but even I know that:
It is made clear in the film replicants can be made
to differing specifications. They can indeed be made
extra strong (compared to humans) but it isn't inherent
in the basic design.
What is implied in the 'normal' version of the film
and then made explicit in the 'director's cut' is that
Ford's character is actually a replicant although he
only finds out himself at the end of the film. This
is made very clear in the director's cut and has been
confirmed by the director. I'll write to you with some
of the scenes that "prove" this if you want.
I suspect you don't want me to though...
of my favourite films is the first Mad Max. For all
it's faults I love that film (and not just because it
has a guy wearing mirrored shades while driving "the
last of the V8s." I'll tell you why I like it only
if you promise not to be nasty to me (and one of my
Deckard is indeed a replicant, then I think it makes
the whole film duller still. So, are you trying to insinuate
that the Brion James replicant hasn't got the strength
to kill Deckard? How about Rutger Hauer? Or isn't he
strong enough either? And if Deckard is a replicant
and Darryl Hannah is just a "pleasure model,"
why doesn't he tear her head
off? Come on! This is a dumb science fiction move that
besmirches Phillip Dick's good name, as did "Total
Recall," too. BTW, I liked both "Mad Max"
and "Road Warrior" as well.
I've been waiting for the Lunatics screenplay. I'll
be sending off a message to Teddites in my newsgroup.
I hope you like it. It was a bitch to write.
actually got TWO comments (OK, one's a comment and the
other's a question), so please bear with me.
I thought you might like to know how much I enjoyed
your "Verisimilitude" essay. I came across
it quite by accident (as is usually the case with the
ol' internet). I had used the word "verisimilitude"
in a newsgroup message, and for the sake of those who
may have not been immediately aware of its meaning,
I wanted to point them to a couple of Web sites in which
it was defined. When I did a WebFerret search, your
essay popped up as one of the results! Anyway, to make
an already long comment a bit shorter, I thought it
was pretty darn good, and quite amusing too, as was
your "Kids These Days" rant. I hope to find
the time to read some of your other online efforts very
soon... your "Ode to William Wyler" sounds
I couldn't help but notice that "Blade Runner"
is significantly absent from your "Favorite Films"
list... is this because (a) you haven't seen it yet
(difficult though that may be to believe), or (b) you
genuinely didn't much care for it? I'm just curious,
very much for your time, and keep those cool essays
you for the nice letter. Yes, I have seen "Blade
Runner," but no, I didn't like it. Gerry Kissell,
the co-webmaster here, is also webmaster of Bladezone.com,
the big "Blade Runner" website, and just asked
me why I didn't like "BR" for that site, so
I'll repeat myself. Replicants were designed and built
to have massive strength on distant planets and can
lift like ten-ton rocks on Titan. The entire film Deckard
keeps fighting replicants -- first Brion James, then
Darryl Hannah, then Rutger Hauer -- all of whom should
be able to kill him in one second. I honestly thought
Darryl Hannah had twisted his head off the first time
I saw it. It's complete nonsense, with good photography,
terrific effects and a moody score.
Hi Josh and JT,
since we're all discussing October Sky (which was renamed
from Rocket Boys, why I don't know) It reminded me of
How Green Was My Valley, with the whole coal mines vs
an academic career thing. I did like October Sky too,
but I love How Green Was My Valley, the former is touching
and has some good acting but I don't think it comes
close to McDowall and OHara(I think it was OHara as
it's a very young, lovely, and incredible Maureen O'Hara.
I'm just trying to be a somewhat positive guy when I
say that "October Sky" is a good film. It
is in recent memory, not compared to "How Green
was My Valley," which was shot in the San Fernando
Valley here in L.A., by the way.
confusion of society at this point is well-displayed
in our contemporary movies.
statement reminds me of something Joseph Campbell said
once in an interview -- that much of the confusion in
our cities stems from the fact that we don't have a
well-defined series of cultural myths to pass down to
each successive generation. Ever read his stuff? You'd
probably find it very interesting.
read a number of Mr. Campbell's books and like them
a lot (I believe I have one on my suggested reading
list, too, "Myths To Live By"). Anyway, our
movies are our myths now, and that's what I'm complaining
about -- we're now handing down useless myths. When
you watch "Casablanca," you are given a good
example of how to deal with real life problems, and
how to live your life as an honorable, respectable human
being. What lessons are we getting now? That three cute
chicks can kick ass? That rubber chickens want to escape
the coop? That gladiators get to fight the emperor in
the coliseum? Bullshit. Useless.
I noticed that you were talking about liking the movie
"October Sky". I saw the film myself a few
weeks ago and though it was a bit better than your average
Hollywood-fluff the last thirty minutes or so got so
sentimental that I thought I watching a Steven Spielberg
movie. Didn't you have any trouble with the overkill
drama at the end?
also have a real question that came to my mind while
i was looking at some old moviemagazines. You wrote
to someone that "Running Time" was shown at
Helsinki sometime few years ago. The article I read
wasn't that clear so if you could set this one straight:
did you attend some kind of an filmmaker-panel or discussion
after showing "RT" (and possibly "Lunatics")?
"Running Time" and "Lunatics" showed
at the Helsinki Film Festival in 1998 and I did a Q&A
after both of them. And I absolutely agree with you
that "October Sky" is a just a bit better
than the usual crap, but it's still better. I think
it has a better sense of reality than a Spielberg film.
The problem is, like a Spielberg film, it's all so pat.
Everything works out exactly as you'd expect it would.
I did like the relationship between the kid and his
have been shaving with Rise Super Foam (menthol) for
over 30 years. However, I'm nearing the end of my supply
and I can't find it anywhere. I live in the greater
Wash. D.C. area. Do you know where I can get some more?
that place on the corner. No, not that one, the other
you sell refrigerated foods?
course. What do you need?
that essay by Robert Fogel - does the idea of technology
outdistancing information apply to basic storytelling?
After all, we've esentially been telling the same themes
since time began.
themes may not change, but the ability to tell the stories
certainly does. "From Here to Eternity" and
"Pearl Harbor" may be similar in a number
of ways, but they are also highly dissimilar as well
-- the former is a brilliant classic, and the latter
is an inept piece of junk. The confusion of society
at this point is well-displayed in our contemporary
wanted to pass along this great line from Elvis Mitchell's
review in The New York Times of the latest computer
game-based movie inflicted on the marketplace.
Mitchell writes: "Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within"
is the first film with human leads played by nonactors,
if you don't count "Pearl Harbor."
Mitchell also describes one of the characters in the
movie as looking like "a combination of Ben Affleck
and B-movie leading man Bruce Campbell." I give
the NY Times reviewer credit for knowing his B-movies.
Mitchell started his career in Detroit and knows who
we are. He may be from Detroit, too, but I don't know
that. I still think that Russell Crowe is a digital
effect, but that seems to just be me.
is Stuart Devenie's 50th birthday. Any memories of directing
him, or good stories? (He's a big fan of your site,
so he'll see this sooner or later.)
was a complete pleasure working with him. He's a fine
actor of the old school, meaning he's prepared, has
actually thought about his scenes and has good ideas
to improve them. "The People's Dragoon" began
with him making a toast at the head of a long table
of dinner guests. Stuart took his napkin and smeared
some of every kind of food available on it, then put
it in his collar. He may be the governor and quite well-bred,
but he's still a slob. I think it's very funny. Best
wishes to you, Stuart, should read this, and happy birthday.
Nope I haven't seen Infinity. But i'll keep an eye out
there is a film coming out called "Julie Johnson."
I find this somewhat unsettling because it is my name,
well it's a common ame but its mine. Imagine if you
found out there was a movie coming out called "Josh
there is that Ted Danson show "Becker," which
I've never seen, but I think he's supposed to be kind
of an obnoxious prick. My dad's named is Arnold Becker
and that was Corbin Bersen's character's name on "L.A.
Law" and my dad had to deal with that for about
six years, plus reruns. There was a film for a brief
second called "Josh & S.A.M." which seemed
like it might be about Sam Raimi and I, but I don't
think it was.
Name: Tony Mitchell
I'm very interested about your comment that the last
decent film made was Godfather Part II (please don't
quote me). It seems that nothing "special"
has been made since that time which strangely co-incided
with the full-blown "McDonaldisation" of society.
A friend of mine gave me the following advice about
seeing movies: "go in without any expectations
and you won't be disappointed" to which I replied,
"then I will always be disappointed because I expect
to be entertained". He also saw Perfect Storm because
it had "awesome special effects" so I don't
take any notice of him. It just seems to me that cinema-goers
these days seem to go to a movie not expecting or even
demanding anything special, happy to just sit through
the same lousy crash, bang, blow-em-up rubbish time
after time. And then sit down and eat their identical
burgers and fries with their fingers at one of the clone
restaurants and go home thinking they have had a good
night. Any thoughts?
just reading a fascinating interview with historian/economist
Robert Fogel in American Heritage Magazine. He is discussing
"The Fourth Great Awakening," which he says
began in the early sixties. His point, basically, is
that technology moves faster than human development.
Thought has to catch up to technology, which is presently
occurring. Technology has moved far past our human thought
processes -- information can be delivered immediately,
there simply isn't any new information to deliver. Human
thought will catch up to the technology, but it will
take another 10 to 20 years.