User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.6725 seconds
50 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
I may not be following this, or that article isn't very clear. Kirby did work for hire for a number of years at Marvel (that seems indisputable). At some point in the 1980s or 1990s, he signed a contract governing ... we don't know what. Years and years later, Disney bought Marvel, and Kirby's heirs sued for ... something. A share of the sale? And they did not win ... presumably due to the contract he had signed? And because of this, people shouldn't see the movie? Would this all be okay if Marvel just wrote Kirby's heirs a check? For how much?
Captain America was awful. The ending was ########.
Avengers was fun and good. Most people who saw it don't give a crap about the comic books. Same for Batman, Spiderman, Superman, X-Men... you know, every comic book movie. The average movie goer knows about the characters, probably had some comic books growing up but not a lot and in the case of Batman and X-Men probably watched the animated series but they don't care that much about the characters. And so what? They don't make these movies to wow the fanboys (unless it's a Zach Snyder movie), they make them to wow the general public.
The earlier-mentioned Steve Bissette summed it up last year a lot better than I can (or at least a lot quicker ... as noted, to cop from Eric Burdon, I've gotta get out of this place). His screed is actually addressed to comics fandom (who, as DA Baracaus very correctly noted, are certainly not the target audience for this or any other big-studio comics-based movie), but he addresses the legal concepts & any number of other issues.
Nobody cares more than the guy who writes big long justifications for why they really don't care about something. If you really didn't care, you wouldn't bother justifying it.
Is there any group of people won't won't question either my patriotism or my humanity at a drop of a hat?
I'm pretty sure you're human. For all I know you're patriotic (I'm certainly not).
I can write a long post on why I don't care about, say, classical music, too. And believe you me, I care infinitely less about (or for) classical music than I do the worst superhero comic movie ever, ever made.
I just now found out Satoshi Kon died almost two years ago. Cancer is such ########.
I liked Paprika a lot, although I didn't like the ending much. Inception did nothing for me, seemed a like a self-important popcorn movie, none of the characters were developed enough to care about.
I am not sure what the proper response to this is, but a personal boycott of The Avengers is not it. The world is an easier place to make noise these days than it used to be. Making a very loud noise for a very long time about how important Kirby was vs. how unimportant Marvel seemed to think he was sounds a lot better plan for the average concerned Joe.
Also, Paprika is more mindbending than Inception, has a better story than Inception, looks better than Inception and came out like 6 years earlier. But it does not have Leonardo DiCaprio.
I have tried, but outside of AKIRA, I just haven't been able to get excited about anime at all. Ever. By this point I feel like it's a character flaw, but there it is.
I've felt more strongly in favor of this movie as the years have passed, probably concurrently with the degree to which I actively miss Kubrick's presence as an artist. The Blu-Ray transfer is absolutely sumptuous and every set just seems bursting with rich texture and detail.
Those links you posted to relevant reviews of "Eyes Wide Shut" were both well worth a read, I'd recommend anyone interested in the film to give them a read.
Regarding "A.I." I continue to feel as if that movie fell a mere 15 minutes short of true greatness. End the film just a bit earlier, with David at the bottom of the ocean hoping for rescue and redemption as his batteries slowly drained, and I think you have a much more powerful and interesting resolution to the story. That crap at the end with the robo-aliens and bringing his mother back was just too obnoxiously manipulative for my tastes.
The first forty minutes or so of the movie, however, are legitimately fantastic, and possibly the best thing Spielberg has ever done, and possibly the best forty minutes of cinema we've had this century (at least until The Tree of Life).
Welcome to the wonderful world of internet message boards.
(Also, anyone who can't go on at some length about something he doesn't really care about must never have taken any sort of literature classes requiring essays, themes, papers or what have you. How lucky you are.)
So it's not just me. That's a relief, sort of.
The Day the Earth Stood Still
Them!
Invaders from Mars
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
Village of the Damned
Five Million Years to Earth
Silent Running
The Thing (remake)
Blade Runner
Event Horizon
Mothman Prophecies.
(OK, that's 11, but I can't bear to omit any of those. Furthermore, you can't make me.)
Again, that's completely off the top of my head. I could easily come up with 5 other '50s films (Village of the Damned came out in '60, so obviously it was made in '59, at the latest) I adore -- The Monolith Monsters, original The Thing & Earth vs. the Flying Saucers come immediately to mind -- & could easily do the same with films from the '70s-on, like Close Encounters, the Invasion from the Body Snatchers remake, Man Facing Southeast, Cronenberg's Scanners & The Fly, etc. Hell, probably 10 from the last decade alone, though I'd have to consult my Netflix rental history to come up with several of the likely suspects. (Children of Men is an obvious example.)
I'd take Videodrome over both of 'em in a heartbeat. Mmmmm Deborah Harry.
I forget who joked that Inception should have been called "Men Without Personalities". Loathed that movie, just like every other Christopher Nolan movie I've ever seen.
I really need to watch that, having caught only a portion of a network TV broadcast (which seems sort of unlikely, but I know very well that we didn't have cable in my first off-campus apartment back then) circa 1979.
Which IMDb telle me is impossible, because it didn't come till '83. I blame Cronenberg. And Phil Dick, just because false memories & space-time distortions are right up his alley, & there's no doubting that mutliple readings of his novels over more than 3 decades have warped my mind.
At any rate, yeah. I need to see it even more now, especially since I've seen everything else Cronenberg did through, at least, Crash on VHS or DVD. Or so memory tells me.
I think I watched Paprika right after he died, so when I tried to research his stuff, I found out. It is always painful to find an artist you really like and then find he died before you even discovered him.
I have tried, but outside of AKIRA, I just haven't been able to get excited about anime at all. Ever. By this point I feel like it's a character flaw, but there it is.
Anime isn't for everyone. There's a translation issue with a lot of it and sometimes you really just have to grin and bear some of it (like with Trigun for example). But it is a deep source of sci-fi, although most of the best of it is TV Shows. Along with AKIRA, and the others I mentioned, there is Cowboy Bebop, Memories, Neon Genesis Evangelion and a host of hit or miss stuff like Darker Than Black or Here and Now, Then and There. I think the biggest problem with anime is that 98% of it is ####### unwatchable, melodramatic trash. Sifting through it to find something worthwhile is exhausting. If you ever give it another go, the most accessible works are Cowboy Bebop and Samurai Champloo, which also happen to be two of the best anime (or just TV in general) series ever made.
BTW, I think Prometheus is the first Sci-Fi movie that I am genuinely excited for in at least a couple of years, maybe since Wall-E. I enjoyed Avatar, but didn't really get excited for it the way I am getting amped for Prometheus.
I also really liked The Prestige, which I thought had more clearly delineated characters and a better sense of fun than many of Nolan's other films.
As a member of the House of Nerd, I'm certainly even aware of most of these, and have heard from multiple sources of their awesomeness. I think mostly the problem you mention next about the popular dreck being so difficult to wade through that is a big part of it.
Also, however, there is a personal distaste for cartoons of any sort. The endless INCREDIBLES - BEST SUPERHERO FILM EVER OF ALL TIME is bewildering to me. Part of it is the utterly boring FAMILY FAMILY OH FAMILY message, but a big part is me just not being interested in cartoons. Which, of course, is also bizarre as I'm a comic-book guy. -shrug- I think I just may not like it and have to accept that. Thanks for the suggestions for further good ones, though, we'll see.
Nolan appears to believe, sadly, that he has Important Things to say about culture and men and reality, which gives these films an air of self-importance, and his fans buy into Nolan as a Sayer of Important Things.
I agree with basically all of this but I guess would have the need to annoyingly say that Nolan does indeed have some important things to say, and some of them he says very well. It's just not nearly as much as probably he or his most ardent supporters think.
However, I will also say that the Whedon/Nolan fanboy internet flamewars after The Dark Knight Rises are absolutely going to be worth the price of admission; Nolan deserves a lot of credit for quite a bit of upcoming entertainment there.
Wow. We differ on quite a few subjects (read: you're wrong on several things I'm right about), but on this we're in perfect accord. Animation just doesn't do much for me, to the point that I've never felt any interest in seeing The Incredibles. I didn't realize till after I'd logged off last night that I'd completely forgotten about it & its sequel (there was one ... right? or maybe I'm thinking of Toy Story, which for similar reasons I'm also not interested in watching) when trying to think of superhero heroes not based on actual comics, which subject I'm not even remotely interested in, according to the all-knowing & all-wise Los Angeles Genius of Geniusville.
One exception (not superhero-based, but certainly a very fine sf movie) -- The Iron Giant.
This is pretty much my all-purpose default position on everything, of course.
My stupid fantasy team is pitching lights-out but went 3-for-30 last night to prolong a horrendous offensive slide? Frank Miller must die.
That's an interesting connection: all three are like houses of cards (done with smoke and mirrors?) and you are fascinated as you watch to see whether they'll stand up or collapse. They have their flaws: The Prestige is too long and has too many false endings, the various layers of Memento are too similar and have too much military action, and Memento is too aggressively inscrutable. But Nolan does have an aesthetic theory at work, and he's done a lot to make postmodernism safe for summer movies :)
Yes. Went back & corrected that before I saw your post, as it happens. Given my high regard for it, probably I should consider The Incredibles after all; either I'd forgotten the connection or it never registered to begin with.
Though I enjoyed Inception immensely, it didn't really add much to any sort of serious conversation about dreaming and the unconscious. The Matrix, which Nolan fans like to compare it to, pushed a set of bubbling questions about the relationship between the real and the virtual to the forefront of pop culture. The Wachowskis had Reeves reading Simulacra and Simulations in advance of even seeing the script. This isn't to say the film is without problems*, but it asked timely questions in a provocative and productive way; I don't think the same can be said for Inception.
*Baudrillard was reportedly asked to appear in the film, and a version one of his books is used as a prop. His response to the film? The Matrix is surely the kind of film about the matrix that the matrix would have been able to produce.
===
According to the wife, I have already seen BSG The Razor, and we were both thoroughly entertained. Don't know how I forgot about that. Something else to rewatch, I guess.
I didn't particularly like the Incredibles, which is odd because I love comic books, superheroes, and Pixar movies. But the "it's ok to be special!" message seemed really forced.
Fun film. I'm OK with it as sci fi. Another film I liked that along the lines of sci fi/survival horror fusion was Event Horizon, but I might be all alone on that one.
Everything Brad Bird touches turns to gold, including Mission Impossible apparently, which I didn't think was possible.
Another film I liked that along the lines of sci fi/survival horror fusion was Event Horizon, but I might be all alone on that one.
I also enjoyed Event Horizon. A surprising number of people hate that movie, I'm not sure why.
And just to be clear, I'm the only one who thinks Spider Man 2 is far and away the best super hero movie to date (I have not seen Avengers yet), right?
It's in my Top 11 list from last night, actually.
Totally missed it. Duh.
I'll take this one, as it directly refers back to my post on Sunshine. Event Horizon had everything in it I hate about sci-fi. The I'M FIGHTING MY MIND storyline, a mysterious undefinable consciousness/villain, religious overtones, and finally horror/splatter/torture porn. It was no Black Hole, neither was it Prince of Darkness. It is just a horror movie in a sci-fi setting and for me that just means it was an incredible bore and a waste of good settings and concepts to watch people get vivisected.
I don't consider Pitch Black in this group as it had serious and hard sci-fi behind its terror and violence.
And just to be clear, I'm the only one who thinks Spider Man 2 is far and away the best super hero movie to date (I have not seen Avengers yet), right?
I'd say yes.
You're perfectly entitled to be wrong on this, of course, and we can leave it at that :> But I'll just add that without Event Horizon I don't think there's a Dead Space, and those are fantastic games.
Hell, just getting through the opening theme song is often a challenge.
One thing I always do when I start a new series, is to watch with the subtitles on and the english dub. They are frequently not the same translation. Normally, I would prefer not to listen to the dubbed version, but it is often the better (or seemingly better) version.
I think the stuff you mentioned are the best starting points, though I'd say that for some people Evangelion doesn't get interesting until about episode 8. I love it. I have pets named after characters from it. It's one thing I've found when loaning it out to friends, though.
I despise the very concept of gaming, of course, but the couple(?) of comics miniseries I've read based on that were really, really good.
Yes, shitty sci-fi spawning inconsequential media is a real trump card. -insert triple snap-
Is this just the concept of video games? Or does this extend to things like Strat-O-Matic and Diplomacy.
Aaaaaaand Lassus goes back to being dead wrong again.
What is it the kids say? SMDH, I think.
Video/computer/RPG/Magic/Yu-Gi-Oh/etc.-type crap.
I.e. basically anything that not only doesn't interest me (with which I am by definition obsessive, I'm told, as counter-intuitive as that might seem) but whose very appeal baffles the hell out of me.
When it comes to such forms of gaming, I'm apparently the equivalent of an aspie. Oh, well.
Kon was a pretty atypical anime director, I don't like too much other anime either, a lot of it leans fairly heavily on formula and genre conventions. His stuff seemed more unique, he's about the only director (from anywhere, not just Japan) I can think of that was able to make animation directed toward adults that could consistently find an audience in American art house theatres.
Sylvain Chomet has the makings of a great career so far with "The Triplets of Belleville" and "The Illusionist".
Then there's the wacko stop-motion works of Jan Svankmajer and the Quay Brothers.
What was that, Ebert?
(I'm also mostly teasing. I felt the tremors from the end of Mass Effect as much as anyone not playing.)
Holy crap did I not get the end of that movie...
Of course, I was 8 at the time and haven't seen that since, but it seemed like a pretty straightforward adventure movie up until the end. Then it was like someone took acid and wrote the last 2 minutes.
I couldn't finish that (DS1). 1) It was so scary that I could only stomach 30 minutes to an hour at a time (I scare easily, so don't take this as universally applicable) and 2) I got to the point where you encounter the giant revolving drive thingy and couldn't figure out a way past it. That section just seemed too difficult and took too long to redo over and over.
Which generation would that be? I gather you're younger than me, but if not, there are at least 2 of us.
I have a friend who sounds similar. He just can't get into any kind of game (cards, video game, board game). I'd say sports as well, but I think that has more to do with his...athleticism, shall we say.
I'm not much of a "gamer" myself. I don't really have the mental faculties to keep up with most modern video games. I almost exclusively play games where I control everything in the universe and can move at my own pace. So, a strat-league where I GM every team and act as commissioner. Or playing Civ where I control every nation on Earth. To each their own I suppose...Everyone has certain elements of human behaviour that make absolutely no sense to them. Mine probably include: anger, competitiveness, cell phones, and ketchup.
He seems even more hopeless than me. I liked the usual card & board games well into my 20s, & it wasn't too terribly long ago that I enjoyed playing hoops & softball.
On #1: the game is scary as hell. Like play during the middle of the afternoon with the shades open scary.
On #2: I'm not ashamed to admit I fall back on walkthroughs when I get stuck. Just don't have time to lose an hour trying to figure out some impossibly obtuse puzzle.
==
Well, I meant inconsequential to ME. I think I'm the only member of my generation to never even once have used one of these.
Not even once? You're missing out on so much good stuff. If you haven't read Tom Bissell on video games, you should give him a try-- he's refreshing b/c he's the first to admit there's a lot of meaningless/forgettable/regrettable crap out there, but also a lot of creative uses of the medium. I enjoy the Nolan Batman films, but they're nothing next to the Arkham Asylum/Arkham City games, in terms of immersing you in the world and character.
Night Skies
Dreamland
Alien Raiders
The Man from Earth
Cashback
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Carriers
Blindness (borderline sf at best, perhaps)
Visioneers
Daybreak
Automatons
The Divide
Did you see the version that starts out with young Adama on the Galactica in the first Cylon War? Do you feel it redeems Cain as a human being?
I feel one of the best examples of this is the Matrix Online, which I didn't even play.
Some random thoughts he had:
1. He is a huge fan of Wrath of Khan, but considers it merely a submarine movie, not sci-fi. Incidentally, we have a running argument about submarine movies: I prefer Crimson Tide and he prefers Hunt for Red October.
2. He considers Quaid as good a Doc Holiday as Kilmer, which I obviously lambasted him for.
3. He thinks Scarlett Johansson is wonderful in everything.
4. He argued vehemently -- I didn't even disagree with him -- that Sunshine is not a sci-fi movie despite the use of advanced technology as it's a movie using it as a device to talk about relationships and feelings. Also his comment on the movie is that it's the best movie where every character is thoroughly unlikable.
The orchestral soundtrack for the movie is pretty fantastic, too. Youtube it.
I don't disagree with that, but plenty of superhero games have had great cutscenes and terrible or poorly-executed gameplay (that seems to be the formula, especially for those timed to coincide with film releases). AA and AC manage to capture what it feels like to be Batman; I think they do so by embracing the comics moreso than the films. From a financial perspective, you're absolutely right-- no one takes a chance on such a dark Batman game in the first place without Nolan's successful films.
===
Did you see the version that starts out with young Adama on the Galactica in the first Cylon War? Do you feel it redeems Cain as a human being?
I have no recollection of seeing the film, so I can't say; obviously it left quite an impression. After this thread I have a lot of stuff to rewatch and hope to get to it, but it'll be a solo project as the wife remembers it vividly and isn't interested in a second viewing.
Hmmmmm. Saw him in Retreat just a few weeks ago.
Intriguing. Him I know from Captain America, of course, & Push.
And, IMDb tells me, a short-lived WB(?) sitcom I think I watched back in 2000 called Opposite Sex. Good lord. I knew I had no shame, but still ...
Of course. There doesn't need to even be any "science" at all.
I presume he's not the same guy who was arguing in a favorite sf movies thread on comicbookresources a couple of weeks ago that Star Wars (of which the guy in question is a gigantic fan) isn't sf, either, because none of the characters are actually (supposed to be human). WTF?
I really liked Push.
As did I. Only reason I knew about it, I think, is having read the comics adapation a couple of years earlier.
As I said: Odd.
You have to be very, very careful with a genre bender and I don't think EH was careful enough.
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956)
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
Star Wars
E.T.
Wall-E
Plan 9 from Outer Space (in a reverse sort of way)
Cocoon
Haven't seen "Metropolis" or "Things to Come" yet. Do not like "2001, a Space Odyssey" or "Close Encounters of the Third Kind." "Spaceballs," "Planet of the Apes," "The Incredibles," "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" (1978), "The Empire Strikes Back," and "Return of the Jedi" are all good if maybe the next level down for me.
Edit: if we're including "Iron Giant," add that onto one of the lists as well.
Rather creaky (as am I, to be honest), but I remember liking it a lot.
Even earlier, Invisible Man is a strong contender. Ditto for Island of Lost Souls. Hell, Frankenstein & Bride of.
Pandorum I liked a lot. That's what I get for neglected to check my Blockbuster history (which for some reason goes back only a couple of years).
Also, from the '50s, It! The Terror from Beyond Space growls "hi!"
Lots of blah blah blah blah in this one. Talky talky talky about immortality and such. A lot of very interesting themes within one of my absolute favorite topics that were all lost in the tiresome conclusionary TWIST! that just proves one specific inescapable about something that permeates nearly every narrative around us, the audience.
A crossover, seems to me. A scientist creating life in a laboratory is basically pretty science-fictional, no?
Whereby I missed remembering, till now, one of my favorite movies -- sf & otherwise -- of the last several years: Never Let Me Go. Just outstanding.
Also: Skyline (hated by many, I know, but damn if I wasn't surprised to find I liked it better than the celebrated Battle: Los Angeles), Ghost from the Machine, Monsters, the very fun Gentlemen Broncos, the also very fun Paul.
I probably liked it because it reminded me of certain BTF threads.
Perhaps my initial rejection of EH was just a matter of not expecting what I got. Comparing it to, say, Solaris -- I got the movie I expected with Solaris... Like I said, I've changed my opinion of EH after multiple viewings. Still not one of my favorites, but I did leave it on in the background just last weekend.
Very much agreed.
Good question. I'd consider it horror, but it's a judgement call.
The only horror films I like come from the canon of 30s-40s Universal and the like:
Frankenstein (1931)
Dracula (1931)
The Mummy (1932)
Bride of Frankenstein (1935)
Nosferatu (1922)
The Wolf Man (1941)
Much as I love, love, love many of Alfred Hitchcock's films, I don't at all like either "Psycho" or "The Birds." In fact, with the sole exception of "Frenzy," I don't like any of Hitch's movies from "Psycho" onward.
Re Kubrick: I haven't seen all his films, but the two I most definitely like are "Paths of Glory" and "Dr. Strangelove." Besides "2001," am also not at all a fan of "Clockwork Orange." "Spartacus" is pretty good of its type, if probably not what most folks consider typically Kubrick. Am in no hurry to see "Full Metal Jacket" or "The Shining," as they're not the type of film I usually seek out.
It's not a bad list (the movies are here), but a weird title. Can people really be expected not to have seen Day of the Dead? I don't think of myself as a Horror expert, but I've seen 23 of those movies.
Or the Invasion of the Body Snatchers remake or even Don't Answer the Phone, for that matter.
I've seen about 80, though in fairness about half of those I made a point of either renting/acquiring or digging out of my own collection after I got the book.
Bram Stoker's Dracula
Interview with a Vampire
Silence of the Lambs
Poltergeist
Jaws
The Ring
Omen I/II
Exorcist
Serpent and the Rainbow
Near Dark
Hellraiser
comments:
- I think Poltergeist is the scariest, most nightmare-inducing film I've ever seen.
- I have nothing against slasher films as cheap entertainment but can't be arsed to actually think about them as serious movies outside of the original Halloween
- I'm a sucker for vampire stuff in general (non-Twilight category). I love, love, love Blade but it seems more action-y than horror-y. Same for the Underworld stuff, which is mostly just a device for Kate Beckinsale to look great in. Lost Boys is great fun.
- no desire to ever see The Blair Witch Project
- can't stand zombie movies
- Edit: Evil Dead 2 deserves mention here.
*gasp*
Must ... go ... lie ... down.
-raises hand-
Zombies generally bore me, but to be fair, the horror genre bores me for the most part anyhow.
I.e. basically anything that not only doesn't interest me (with which I am by definition obsessive, I'm told, as counter-intuitive as that might seem) but whose very appeal baffles the hell out of me.
When it comes to such forms of gaming, I'm apparently the equivalent of an aspie. Oh, well.
I'm sort of the opposite of you in this regard: I can't understand why anyone would not like SOMETHING in as broad a category as video games. It would be like someone failing to see the appeal of music or film. I could see someone saying "I don't like twitch-based games" (games based on quick and precise input, like shooters) the same way I could see someone saying "I don't like jazz." I can't imagine being unable to find anything in the world of computer/video gaming that has any appeal at all. There are word games, puzzle games, twitch games, turn-based strategy games, competitive games, cooperative games, games that are about exploring worlds, and games that just tell a story in a different way. (Of course, there are games that do many of these things at once too.)
I'm also curious if you're at all familiar with modern video games. The medium has really come quite a long way in the past decade or so. Some games can behave like interactive movies (and the music and voice acting talent can be very impressive). Some stories actually work better in an interactive medium because it is simply more immersive.
One recent example is "I Am Alive." This is far from a perfect game, but there are some incredible elements that simply work better here than within any other medium.
Some of the action sequences are just like what you'd expect in a high-budget movie, except you're doing the action. The game offers little in the way of explanation and there's a lot of unpleasant moral decisions. It's one thing to watch a movie where the hero has to decide whether to give his last bit of medicine to a dying man or keep it for himself in a dangerous world. It's a totally different experience to be controlling that hero. The margin is close enough that you might actually die because you gave up that medicine, but you also might be fine without it.
You've got a gun but often you have only one bullet. You hear the screams of two people asking for help, and you can see that they're locked up behind a gate, guarded by two men. You approach, and it's obvious that the guards are cannibals. If you leave, you'll be condemning those people to death, but you'll have to risk getting hurt facing two armed guards. Even if you defeat them without injury, you've got another problem. The two people are begging for help, and the only way to open the gate is to shoot the lock with your one remaining bullet.
It's compelling because if you allow yourself to be immersed in the world, it's not "this guy" making the life-or-death decisions. It's you.
I would say it should be clear that the rhetorical question you're responding to is of course referring to those of whom the latter part of your post doesn't apply.
I blinked and it was out of the theater in this area, which was disappointing. I knew the film editor rather well in college.
flip
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main