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 0.6991 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 could have sworn there was a thread here once where somebody said that.
Actually, it was more of a "tee-hee" ...
Probably no one ever wrote publicly "George W Bush is a lunatic chimp with a penchant for genocide & a sense of loyalty to no one other than his fellow oilmen, & anyone who would deny any part of that statement is living in a total fantasy world & probably at least potentitally dangerous to him/herself & others, & also Quentin Tarantino or however he spells his silly name is vastly overrated, the smug piece of crap, & while I'm at it Frank Miller isn't much better & for that matter may well be worse," either ... but that doesn't necessarily make it untrue.
Recently I signed up for a ticket subsciption and they had a "title" requirement they had hundreds of choices evertyhing from Duke to Senator to... Rear Admiral. I could not stop myself. I now get an increasing numbers of letters addressed to Rear Admiral. The mailman has become much friendlier.
is really stupid. It's as if he thinks no closeted gay man has ever married a hot chick and had a baby to throw people off his trail.
A single tear runs down Derek Jeter's cheek...
I've said this.
She was SMOKING hot in her centerfold shoot.
If you were in need for a "beard", she'd be a pretty damn good choice.
- Johnny LaRue (on a live broadcast on the SCTV network circa 1980)
He used to be good. "Pulp Fiction" is fantastic. "Kill Bill" and pretty much everything he's done in this decade is pure drivel, though. He's also a smug piece of crap, you're right.
I'm a Mets fan and I never really gave a crap about the Piazza-is-gay rumors. I wouldn't be surprised if he's gay, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's straight. I just don't care. And if he is gay, and he wants to say in the closet, well, that's his business. It would be cooler if he didn't, but it's not exactly the role of pro athletes to provide community leadership.
Also, comparing Tarantino & Orson Welles is sort of like comparing, I dunno, Albert Schweitzer & Paris Hilton. You can do it, but that doesn't mean you should.
edit: also, Jackie Brown is a good movie.
Well, I do care. I am happy to admit that I am extremely interested in whether or not Piazza is gay. I certainly wouldn't think any less of him if he were, but I think it's hard to deny that the story of a great athlete coming out would be fascinating. Certainly a lot more fascinating than "great athlete marries Playboy centerfold."
We're all interested to one extent or another in baseball players' personal lives, whether that's Mitch Williams being a champion bowler, or Carlos Delgado's political stances, or Moises Alou peeing on his hands, or Roger Clemens' giving all his kids names that start with K. I understand why people feel the need to claim they have no such interest when it comes to players' sex lives, but what I think they're really trying to say is that such things should be the players' own business, and it's up to them how much they want to divulge of that.
I think it would have been great if Mike Piazza had come out when he was playing for the Mets, although I understand why he wouldn't, especially if, as it appears, he's not actually gay. I do think such things should always be the athlete's own choice, but I'm rather sorry he didn't.
True Romance
From Dusk till Dawn
Pulp Fiction
Natural Born Killers*
There's also the Jeter Phenomenon. I mean, he'll tell you where he stole the idea and many of the shots from Reservoir Dogs, but that doesn't stop everyone from ignoring that fact.
I have never heard anyone call Death Proof "great". I didn't like but I'd be curious to hear why you did.
Tarantino is kind of like Derek Jeter in that he is really good and probably still overrated. There is definately a group that would fall under the "He walks on water" column and others who would fall under the "I'm not going to like him just because a lot of other people do" column for both of them.
I think Pulp, Dogs, Jackie and both Kill Bill's a legitimately great movies but I understand why others don't. I thought 3/4 of Death Proof was mind-numbingly boring. Maybe I owe it a 2nd viewing.
QT greatest talent is the ability to recognize greatest in something that is unknown to the American mainstream and not his own.
Then he grabs it (with the other artists' permission) and makes it popular. That's not a bad thing and it's a very important skill, but it's not the same as being a visionary filmmaker.
Well, Heston helped wring one last good movie out of Welles, but then OW's career redisintegrated.
I dunno ... stealing ideas from other movies is the basis of most good movies. All movies with intercut stories steal ideas from DW Griffith. The better ones do it less ashamedly.
There is a lot of play for individual taste in these things, but I would argue that many of the greatest Hollywood films are basically "about their own coolness," from Chaplin and Keaton through the best screwball comedies through All About Eve to Bonnie & Clyde, The Graduate, The Godfather, Chinatown, Woody Allen's better films (Annie Hall, Manhattan), Goodfellas, Charlie Kaufman's films. This would go for some of the best foreign imitators of Hollywood, too (Sergio Leone, e.g.). Not much high purpose or innovative art there. But that's my taste: snappy dialogue and lurid melodrama. Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. There are a lot of other excellent films in other modes, I will grant that.
And yes, QT is a pretty repellent screen presence. For that reason I think he cast himself perfectly in Pulp Fiction.
Lyrics.
Song.
Playboy has a "data sheet" for Alicia from October, 1995. If you read what she felt back then, it seems like Mike Piazza was the perfect man for her all along:
Touch of Evil is fine, but you don't like Citizen Kane? I know the hype for that movie is pretty outlandish but it is the rare thing (like LeBron James or Illmatic) that lives up to the hype.
It will soon. A new Robinson plaque has been cast for the HoF that does mention this. It was supposed to be unveiled earlier this month by Rachel Robinson, but a family emergency put the ceremony on hold.
New Jackie Robinson plaquw
I'm just a Kill Bill kind of guy, living in a Haggis kind of world.
Why? Is he gay?
This, in itself, is one well-groomed beard.
I thought Magnificent Ambersons was boring. Pulp Fiction has some good things about it but mostly pisses me off.
Touch of Evil is great. I think I liked Jackie Brown but I don't really remember it. Didn't like Kill Bill.
We can all play this game:
Kill Bill and Deathproof are the kinds of movies that little boys who became men but never outgrew watching wannabe film buff flicks in their parents' basement love. I wouldn't expect them to accept this appraisal, but I would expect it to piss them off.
Seriously. "People who love movies" come in all types and walks, and while we might think our own perspective superior, this type of ######## demonstrates nothing but one's own insecurity.
What I would say that people who love movies have in common is that rush you feel walking out of Facets with the knowledge that you've just seen one of the best movies in the history of creation and it's your responsibility to--in the most humble, thoughtful way possible--spread the word to as many people as you can so they can experience the same rush.
Does it really say that? Not "player"? Why not? It sounds like he was in the crowd, entertaining the fans between innings....
And Quentin Tarantino sucks. Robert Rodriguez's film blew Tarantino's away in Grindhouse. C'mon, a chick with a machine gun leg? That can somehow shoot when she wants it to, without even having to pull a trigger? Seriously, how cool was that?
I'd as soon not.
I'm sure somewhere I can also find a critique by some demented moron who loves Britney Spears' latest album, but what would the point in reading such tripe be?
As someone who averages watching about, I guess, 300 movies a year, I might go so far as to say I "love" them. I also by god know unwatchably self-indulgent garbage (& shamefully see-no-evil fanboyism, for that matter, no matter what sort of hifalutin rationalization it might be wrapped up in) when I see it.
That's ... that's the most bizarre misspelling of Night of the Living Dead that I've ever seen.
Please report to the Sports Illustratred comics cover thread. A few of Miller's remarkable shortcomings as a creator & even as a human being have been touched upon there.
As for "saving comics" (which I wasn't aware that Dark Knight Returns did, unless that's an alternate title for Watchmen that I wasn't aware of ... & please note for the record that I'm not a particular fan of Watchmen), I would say that a major part of the myriad problems the field still faces is an inability to shake off the absurd "grim-'n'-grittiness" of 20 years ago, & if you're saying that can be laid at Miller's doorstep... well, I guess I think even less of him than I did before. Which I wasn't even sure was possible.
Which apparently means you hate movies. Sorry about that.
I think that Doc Nabbitt agrees. I liked Deathproof myself, but I liked stuff like Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry growing up.
Nice. Here's facets.
This is my problem with Tarantino's recent output: it seems like he's forgotten that he's got to make a film to entertain the audience as well as himself.
ummm... Dark Knight preceded Watchmen by 7-8 months. It's fine if you fancy yourself a revisionist, but that doesn't make you necessarily right.
and if Dark Knight and Watchmen are both apparently too low-brow for your taste, why would you even claim to be a comic fan? I've read issues of basically every comic that's come out over the past 20 years and 99.9% of them are stupider or more derivative than the two afore-mentioned books. Comics are supposed to be fun so if your thing is Czech-language surrealist comics or something along those lines, you're more pretentious than you are claiming Tarantino and his fans are.
I loved Independence Day. I didn't really like The Godfather. Do I have bad taste? Sure. I think I still like watching movies, though.
I'd ditto all those dissing on Tarantino.
Miller saved comics via Daredevil and Year One too. And I am not exactly a Miller fan. Not a lot of his stuff anyway.
I wish Walt Simonson's Thor had saved comics, that path would have been fun.
Richard: I don't know about this. I couldn't stand Kill Bill vol. 1, but Deathproof is a really solid, fun movie directed as far as I can tell at the audience, and not QT. If you've not seen it, give it a chance. It's super fun.
I respect your opinion, but beyond irritation at the general plot and character writing, the fact that one of the main villains can't pronounce her own name was troubling.
As for Tarantino's writing/non-directorial projects: "True Romance" is terrific, but "From Dusk to Dawn" and "Natural Born Killers" are both awful. Though Oliver Stone's at least as much to blame for this as Tarantino, I find "Killers" absolutely unwatchable.
I'm sure somewhere I can also find a critique by some demented moron who loves Britney Spears' latest album, but what would the point in reading such tripe be?
As someone who averages watching about, I guess, 300 movies a year, I might go so far as to say I "love" them. I also by god know unwatchably self-indulgent garbage (& shamefully see-no-evil fanboyism, for that matter, no matter what sort of hifalutin rationalization it might be wrapped up in) when I see it.
Wow, this seems a bit harsh. There's serious, fun, monthly discussion of movies in the forums. I'm not sure why you feel so threatened by this. I often disagree with what people say there, but I also often learn more about movies I've already seen, or find out about movies I'd like to watch in the future. And while I frequently disagree with some of the posters opinions there, they are not "demented morons", nor is the output there "tripe".
My god, you're so off-base as to border on Czech-language surrealism yourself. You're talking to someone whose all-time favorite comic series are Sgt Fury & His Howling Commandoes & Not Brand Ecch, & whose proudest achievement as a fan is assembling all 89 of DC's 80-Page Giants, & whose sig at Comic Book Resources (quoting another poster there) reads as follows --
And to be honest, claiming that "comics are supposed to be fun" (a sentiment with which I totally agree, obviously) in one paragraph while extolling the questionable (to me) virtues of Dark Knight Returns in another seems ... strikingly inconsistent.
And I see that you're right about the respective publishing schedules of Watchmen & Frank "Little Mary Sunshine" Miller's paean to lightheartedness & joie de vivre. Since I'd stopped buying comics in '78 & didn't come back till around '04, thereby missing a complete quarter-century of good-natured hijinks like those Frank "Mayor Chuckles" Miller so jocularly portrayed in Sin City, I was relying on dim memories of others' accounts.
You're right, & I take it back. Just consider it testament to how visceral my revulsion toward Death Proof was. I've seen some awful movies in my time -- we all have (Graffiti Bridge, anyone? Last Tango in Paris?) -- but this is the only one I've ever found insultingly inspid. Which I guess is an achievement in itself.
Alright, cool.
It's kind of like that old Fox show "Banzai". It was supposed to be a quirky, zany, bizarre show based on the quirkiness, zaniness and bizarreness of Japanese variety shows. But viewed in Japan, in Japanese, with understanding of the cultural context, Japanese variety shows aren't quirky, zany or bizarre. They're just over-the-top slapstick. So I could never get into "Banzai" show. It was non-idiomatic (and frankly, dancing dangerously close to being racist).
All that said, Kill Bill 2 was better than Kill Bill 1. Really, I think it would have been better all around if Tarantino had simply compressed them into one movie.
Isn't part of the appeal to Death Proof how crappy it is? I figured that both movies were style parodies and not meant to be taken seriously.
Note: I felt Death Proof was mediocre and the other film was much better. Rodriguez did a much better job capturing the goofy dialogue of a B-movie.
Well, it could've still been set in the 70s, if Tarantino went to the same school of filmmaking as the creators of Dirty Dancing and Footloose (movies set in the 50s/60s, but with 80s music). Why not have a 70s movie with the tech trappings of the oughts?
Careful.
I'm not a Footloose expert, but are you sure it was set in the 50/60s? I just thought it was set in a town that was 20-30 years behind the times, as it were.
Never saw either of these. FWIW, my favorite movie anachronism is Oddball in Kelly's Heroes.
You may be right, as I'm no Footloose expert either.
Dirty Dancing, however, was definitely set in the late 50s or early 60s.
You may be right, as I'm no Footloose expert either.
Footloose is definitely set in the 1980's. It's the best part of the movie. Kenny Loggins was just too edgy for this small American town! I wonder what they would have thought of Killing Joke?
Recovering from the weekend.
I have kind of the same feeling about Tarantino doing Kill Bill that I did about Scorsese doing exploitation work for Roger Corman in the '70s: The results are entertaining, and he does a decent job with the genre material, but you kind of wish that he'd hooked onto a project with more ambition and substance.
I'd also really like to have Tarantino stop blatantly inserting his foot fetish into his movies. The long, lingering closeups on Uma's toes in both halves of Kill Bill, the scene where he drinks out of Salma Hayek's shoe in From Dusk Till Dawn... for me, it breaks the fourth wall and plays hell with my suspension of disbelief. He can do what he wants on his own time, of course, but right now it's affecting the quality of his work.
Frank Miller did a great job during his run on Daredevil, and the first Dark Knight is neat, but he's kind of gone off the rails over the last ten years or so. I'm terrified by his trailer for "The Spirit", because if the movie is that bad it might scuttle all modern memory of how awesome Will Eisner really was.
Call it an alternate history, and you're good to go.
Speaking of which, is anybody else here really excited about the Coen brothers doing "The Yiddish Policemen's Union"?
I bet they could make a #######' remake of "Sextette".
As for Dirty Dancing, all the "in movie" music is correct for it's time (1963), it just has some incidental 80s montage music, and the finale, which was written and recorded especially for the movie.
Wait a minute. "She's Like The Wind" didn't knock "Surfin' Safari" off the charts in 1962 and shape the direction of American pop music for decades? Crap, there goes that Master's thesis.
Fair enough. However, seeing Batman beat on Superman for awhile is pretty fun. I see why you may think that Miller is too joyless or maybe misanthropic, I just would tend to disagree. I can see how many of Miller's stories seem like revenge fantasies (especially Sin City) or things along those lines, but I think that they are more explorations of the genre in much the same way Chinatown was an exploration of noir. I don't see Miller as advocating going around killing anyone who crosses you (as his comics seem to suggest), but I could be wrong. He could be genuinely filled with hate and I guess that's something I'll have to think about more. I just always thought of him as somebody who could write a really cool story about beating ass.
But again, it's Patrick Swayze singing especially for the movie. I mean, if we're going to say that "She's Like the Wind" and "I've Had the Time of My Life" constitute anachronistic 80s music in a film set in the 60s, then the musical Grease is anachronistically filled with 70s music.
Just walk into your thesis defense, look 'em straight in the eye, and announce, "When I'm wrong, I say I'm wrong." Works every time.
He sounded even more like John Cafferty in that flick.
Oh, I'm sure there are boatloads of BTF Footloose experts, even if they're closeted as to their expert status (and rightfully so). I'm just not among them.
And if I were, I wouldn't tell anyone.
You make good points, which I can appreciate. But, c'mon, how many times did Polanski make Chinatown? Once, right? I might think a little more of Miller's, um, mental state if we didn't have so many volumes of Sin City, all lovingly dwelling on pretty much the same scenario.
(And if All Star Batman & Robin didn't exist. And if certain repellent subtexts in 3000 weren't so apparent. And if it turned out that Batman: Holy Teror, or whatever it's supposed to be called, was just a joke idea he tossed off one day while in his temporary new guise of Frank Miller, Super-Patriot [even so, that one might be less distasteful than the latest one, Frank Miller, Defiler of Will Eisner's Grave] ... though of course, given the "speed" at which he works these days between, I suppose, Hollywood cocaine poarties or whatever, by the time that one comes out, Iraq will have prevailed & we'll all be speaking Arabic anyway.)
The band or the comic? (The latter of which is also not really to my liking, BTW. IMHO, Moore was at the height of his powers with "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow" & V for Vendetta. Top Ten is incredibly fun, too.)
I really can't emphasize this enough. I'm just fine with him creating whatever crappy books/movies of his own that he wants to create, but if he screws up Eisner's legacy, I absolutely will infiltrate his Fuhrerbunker and blow off his ####### kneecaps.
The problem with V for Vendetta in my eyes is the obviously disjointed nature of it. It's a great book, but I feel it could have been better with a little editing for the trade paperback. I realize that editing books (comic or otherwise) after they've already been published is rare, but it's not unheard of.
As for Will Eisner, I've never been able to get into his stuff for the same reason I've never been able to get into DW Griffiths, Al Jolson, or Popeye cartoons. I've enjoyed some of his later stuff, but I just can't bring myself to embrace him.
The preview makes the movie look kind of awful. Could be wrong, I suppose.
edit: also, until I just recently looked him up on wikipedia to see when Sin City 2 was coming out, I was unaware of his apparent hatred for all iterations of Islam. That sucks, but truthfully, it's kind of hard for me to get real worked up about someone not liking religion.
JoeHova, JoeHova, JoeHova. You're talking about an industry in which editing books before they've been published is rare. I've mentioned before that I was trained as a book editor, made my living for at last half my adult life as a newspaper editor, & am now an online editor, so maybe I'm more prone than most to hold my quasi-counterparts (rather than the writers) accountable for idiotic missteps ... but if these guys do anything other than play computer games & go to lunch, I never see even the slightest evidence for it.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main