Uni

This was tougher than I thought it would be.... Neither film stands up well to multiple viewings, so in the end I had to go with my impressions from the initial viewing of each. I remember seeing the trailer for STV and getting really juiced about seeing the movie (yes, it was a cool trailer, Justin...!). Then I had to sit through the movie itself. I can't express the disappointment I felt. I kept waiting for it to get good, for the story to start getting interesting, for the action scenes to get exciting, for the--but it never happened. The stuff that was supposed to be funny rarely got laughs, whereas the rest of the film--the serious stuff--earned unintentional laughs (or were those groans...?). I've made my overall opinion of Clones no secret around here, certainly. But I do recall my initial reaction to the film--not to mention my first post about it here--and I'm not ashamed to say I did enjoy that one the first time around. I was able to suspend my disbelief (sure, it took and industrial-size crane to do it, but at least it got off the ground). I felt that the campiness from the original trilogy had filtered into it on some microscopic, unconscious level. There's no question about it being one of those flicks that you walk away from wondering just what it was you were having so much fun with; the "substance" of it dissolves almost as soon as you leave the theater. However, at least I got to enjoy it while I was there. In STV, my heart began sinking from the first few minutes, and like the Titanic, it was completely submerged in about two hours. - Uni P.S. The fifth big-screen installment of Star Trek made one of the best Mystery Science Theater 3000 episodes ever. Some of the best lines I remember: - The three shadows chanting Rocks, rocks, rocks, rocks! every time anything resembling stone appeared on screen--which was pretty often. - McCoy looking at his dying father: "My God, I've forgotten how to act!" - When the curved monoliths rise out of the ground on the destination planet: "The Spare Ribs of God!" Hilarious.

I was seven, and I was awestruck. Superman remains one of my favorite movies to this day. Yes, it's a little dated; sure, CGI has spit-'n'-polished effects to squeaky clean; I'll even allow that there's a thing or two that doesn't quite connect with logic (logic as it applies to a fantasy like this, that is). But it remains a superior film. It's far more than just a "superhero" movie; there's an epic depth in its patience and superlative timing that translated easily even to a seven-year-old back in the day. It also sports one of the slyest rapports with its audience that you'll ever see. The script got gaggles of miles and smiles out of the simple knowledge that everyone knows who Superman is, who Clark Kent really is, and all the common habits and trained mannerisms inherent to both sides of that same coin. Throughout the better part of the film's first half, we forgot our anxiety to see the Man of Steel in action because we were being entertained by both the heartfelt longing of his special legacy and the stylish sense of humor that played with a wink and a nod to everyone who knew better. Sure, I remember the huge (and well-deserved) laugh the phone booth engendered; but I remember just as well the sheer joy of the audience as Clark manages to retain his composure through the irony growing thick around him during his first scene at the Daily Planet. (I love--I LOVE--the exchange between him and Lois: "Any more at home like you?" "Uh....not really, no.") That's one of the many things that makes me shake my head in wonder at those who would call Spiderman the better film. It's a good movie, sure, and I had a lot of fun with it....but when the best of its sly humor has to rely on a reference to its far more worthy predecessor, you have to concede that it's waging the losing argument. As for the SPFX--well, I suppose there were a few shots in Superman that looked a little faded, lacking the proper depth. But as far as I'm concerned, most of the effects shots in Spiderman were totally bereft of depth. CGI simply can't convincingly reproduce human movement. There was never a single shot when I soared with the web-slinger, because the web-slinger never soared. That inherent knowledge killed the effectiveness. I may as well have been watching a computer game. Superman completely convinced me. Call me gullible, but I know when I'm looking at a real person, and even if I know that building flashing by behind him isn't real, he's still as much flesh and blood as that ridiculous little kid who always went home, tied a towel around his neck, and made whoooshing sounds as he ran around with his arms stuck out like a zombie on speed. I'm not even going to go into writing, character development, and the comparitive quality of the scores. That I would have to convince someone on those accounts means they'll never be convinced, so it's a wasted argument. But--if you'll allow me the pretense--I feel sorry for those of you who didn't grow up during those last years of the declining Golden Age of film. Movies will never be the same. I know there are those of you who don't see that, but trust me. Trust us. There's a difference between DVD retro and the thrill of the big-screen, and the basic, unconscious knowledge of the difference between real people and sets and bitmapped versions of the same is a chasm only Superman could cross. - Uni

When I wrote my three reviews for the page back in '97 or so, Scott gave me an incredible response to them. I was pleased to have contributed, and would have done more if I weren't cut off from the net for the following three years. When I came back to it in January of 2000 (the same month as his final update), my first action was to e-mail him and express an interest in submitting more reviews. I never got a response. As I checked back in with the site over the following months, my heart sank deeper each time I found it frozen in time. I'd love to talk to Scott again, but frankly I doubt it's going to happen. He seems to have permanently given up on the site, and after this long, his life has doubtless undergone so much change that returning to it is probably the last thing on his mind. Still, there's a legacy there that will serve anyone who finds the page and wants to learn more about our favorite composer. And, in the long run....I'd have to say that I like this place better anyway. The community that's been established on these boards alone surpasses any other site on the net, if you ask me. - Uni

You know.... - Me

It happened again. I don't understand why that other computer can't keep track of me, even though I use it every other day. Sorry again. - Uni

Oooooh....a Moments post. S'been a while.... I think it's hilarious how distinctly the lines are drawn. There's the Star Wars generation, and the Jurassic Park generation. Pass the Geritol--I belong with the SW's. I don't know that I can remember a time in my life when there wasn't John Williams. I was four when Star Wars hit the screens, and had the Zubin Mehta album not long after. My brother and I used to roller skate in the basement to the Main Theme, Cantina Band and Last Battle. The music was a part of me almost before I could make a conscious choice to make it a part of me. However, Jurassic Park had its great moments too, and probably none finer than "Journey to the Island." That score came out about a month before the film, and having read the book three times, I snatched it up to get an idea of how it fit with Chrichton's work before I saw it translated to the screen. I therefore had most of it committed to heart when I saw the film on opening day....and though it wasn't the first, I'd have to say that the helicopter's approach to Isla Nublar was one of the grandest JW moments I'd ever experienced, because I'd never really had the chance to know the music inside and out before seeing a blockbuster. Take my word for it (if you haven't done it before yourself), to be able to inwardly conduct to a movie you've never seen is a marvelous experience. - Uni

Doggone it! Sorry, folks....that was me. - Uni

Stanley and Iris is okay, I guess....it would be better if it didn't sound like every other BLOCKBUSTER SCORE THE GUY'S WRITTEN!!! Sorry. I just had to try that on for size. Nope....still doesn't make any sense. :roll: Back on track: S&I is a wonderful score, one of those rare Williams scores that's based so predominantly on piano. If you liked Stepmom (which is, for me, a taste acquired far more recently; I've owned the S&I CD for years), then I can't see how you wouldn't be enchanted by this gem--and you really ought to get your hands on it anyway, if for no other reason than to have one more JW rarity in your collection. - Uni

Time enough only to drop by and see what's going on....and this. What can I say that hasn't been said? This quick reply is great (avoiding four separate screens for those with slllllllllllooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww computers)! The white is an interesting change....a little dull, actually, on first impression. I think color gives a screen depth. But it's nothing worth complaining about. In any case....great job, Andreas! - Uni

Know what's really funny about this? If Williams ever did such a thing, we'd all be the first in line to buy the CD, spend hours debating its merits, start a petition to get our hands on every last metallic thud, and wonder how long it would be before he did the same thing with a butter knife. Ah, the life of a JW fan....:roll: - Uni

I agree....most of the time I really don't think it's strictly about the music. The popularity of the film plays a big role, and there have been countless years when the true best score lost out to one that was riding on the coattails of a sweep, or where the soundtrack made the big bucks and therefore was the only one the voters seemed to remember. Then of course there's the perennial question of who best to honor. This is true in most categories; how many times I've shaken my head sadly to see the most qualified contender sit and clap politely while someone else goes to collect the award that should've gone to them--not because the "winner" deserves it necessarily, but simply because they've been shut out too long, and everyone figures they're due. Not the most just way to determine the "best" of anything, but there's no accounting for the democratic process when applied to a system that is every bit as political and popularity-driven as it is appreciative of sheer effort. Having said that, I think this board will prove more accurate than EW. Elmer's had to wait a while, and he may not get another chance. The career he's had, no one should begrudge him one last thanks and a kiss on the cheek. Road to Perdition is gaining a lot of support, though, and if it gets a lot of other gold this category could easily follow suit. If Phil Glass wins, that'll be just another straw on the tired camel's back, proving my point about politics over pure skill (simply because the score doesn't deserve it). John has another nomination on a list so long and distinguished you could almost fashion a statue the size of the ones they have outside the theater with it. As long as he gets at least one every year, I'm satisfied. Consider how many names you see in any category for more than a year or two consecutively, then consider that for every year Williams composes a score, he garners at least one Oscar nod. It's a blessing and a curse, I suppose; perhaps most of the voters think (after all this time) the continuing nods are enough. Same with this year; I think Catch Me If You Can is as deserving as the rest, but I can also see the Academy types thinking, "Does he need another one?" Besides, one of these days he's gonna get a Lifetime Achievement Award to cap off that incredible list. It's not like he needs more nekkid baldies to prove to the industry (and the world) that he's worth his salt. However, should the Best Man win out....well, there'll be no end to the noise in our living room for the better part of an hour. And this place wasn't around in '93; I'd love to see the celebration around here if he picked up another mantle ornament. Here's hoping.... - Uni

This thread is like a stenographer's version of a chat room.... Friday night I actually made my first appearance in the chat room in ages. (Where the heck were you, Steef?) It's been too long since I've gotten to hang out with Neil at his workplace and gab about our esoteric little interests (while several others put in a line every five minutes or so). Be nice if we could try it again this week. My son dressed up as Obi-Wan when he was five, shortly following the release of TPM. Small galaxy.... Another thing we (or our kids) have in common. Since he was about four years old, I've been able to whistle a number of different themes from at least twenty different films--most with Williams scores--and my son's been able to nail the title, and often the theme, after only a few notes. It's important to raise these kids right. - Uni

All right....since no one's even gonna try to track down the in-jokes, I might as well let them out: The most obvious: I.J. and the Temple of Doom rests on Indiana Avenue (where else would I have put this group?). Slightly less obvious, but no less appropriate: Born on the 4th of July sits on States Avenue--as in United. Finally, my favorite: Jaws is swimming in Atlantic Avenue. For what it's worth. - Uni

No, no....like I said in the original post, it's the other way around. Someone needs to take the Monopoly man, give him a beard, a black turtleneck, and a baton. That's how we make him ours! - Uni

Because so much depends on the emotions conveyed by a specific piece, I'm having a hard time settling on just one instrument to enthrone as my favorite. However, I will say this: one of the things that makes John so endearing is his ability to constantly make use of every instrument in his orchestra. I mean, you get a lot of composers who adore one section or the other, and milk it ad nauseum (John Barry's strings, anyone?). John always seems to find a way to give even the more obscure instruments center stage from time to time. His compositions for the harp are one example; there's an instrument that's too often neglected by other composers, but John not only uses it, he demonstrates his usual mastery through it--and not just for some throwaway piece, either, but as the centerpiece of major themes and secondary motifs. There are plenty of other examples, but you get my point (I hope). That's why a "favorite" instrument is tough to decide on; he uses so many, so well, that I don't feel right slighting any of them. - Uni

Geez....make a guy feel bad, why dontcha? :roll: Just kidding. Still workin' on 'em. They're coming, but no release date is available yet (on account of the uncertainty concerning the completion date). - Uni

Not necessarily. Actually, there's another old and accurate saying (not quite so tongue-in-cheek...!) that avers that the guitar is the easiest to pick up but the hardest to master, while the piano is the hardest to pick up but the easiest to master. Having learned to play both, I can say this is (for the most part) true. You can pick up a guitar and, without any lesson, be strumming chords and playing songs within a few minutes time. But at a certain point the learning curve plateaus. Playing chords is very different than finger picking and playing specific notes at the correct rhythm--something that must be learned and polished before there can be any talk of mastery, and that's where the climb to proficiency gets steep. With piano, it takes a lot of time and effort in the early stages to learn even the most basic fundamentals--all the scales, proper fingering and technique, even the right posture--but once the basics are in place, the momentum tends to pick up, and with commitment and consistent practice, one can almost "slide" into a fairly deft mastery of the instrument. So, in a sense, what you said was true: the piano's pretty tough to pick up and play (pretty tough just to pick one up, when you get right down to it ), but it's not quite so hard to master as some might think. - Uni

Only instead of catching it between two sticks, he's trying to skewer it with only one....a far more impressive feat. Ol' Miyagi's got nuthin' on our Maestro.... That was, without question, the most hilarious response on this thread yet. ("Wait....I think it's a trick!!) Thanks, Justin. ROTFLMAO - Uni

Dogvomit....stupid login! - Uni

He's in a fencing match with a rep from Sony Classical. And he's winning. - Uni

Doggone it....forgot I was on a different computer. Sorry. - Uni....for real.

Why am I not surprised by this...? Which is what is totally baffling here. Try to see what we're struggling with: 1) You say you don't just type without thinking; 2) You think deliberate insults are unacceptable in any circumstance; 3) You still manage to offend a number of people on this board on a regular basis. The logic doesn't jibe. If you're putting people off, but you know and mean everything you say....yet you don't intend things deliberately....sorry, it doesn't add up--unless you simply do not understand, on a basic, ground-floor level, how to socialize with people without rocking the boat. Which, all things considered, would appear to be the answer. I'm never anything but honest and candid about my feelings and opinions on this board....and yet how many times have I caused offense in the last three years? There's a better way, Morn. It's a pity you can't see it. Your methods are as "least risky" and surgical as a man randomly firing a shotgun in a crowd. Yeah, when I was 16 :roll: Ahh....but now you're nineteen, and you've found wisdom. What was I worried about? But that's exactly why I am asking you to clarify just what you did mean so that I may understand your intentions which is a necessary for an understanding. I don't see how my posts are arrogant and demeaning. Which, again, makes my point for me. If you could only see your words through everyone else's eyes.... But, in the end, Ricard's probably right: this is likely a vain effort. As you said yourself, Morn, you aren't about to change who you are, and I think it's just in you to act this way. Honestly, I'd much rather see you getting along with everyone that to see you banned (and by "getting along," I don't mean that we can't have debates and arguments and the like; that's part of what makes the dealings real around here); but I'm definitely another one who's just plain tired of watching your bull-in-the-china-shop routine. I've usually been the one working to patch things up between people, but at some point I've gotta concede that this one's probably outta my depth. - Uni

All right....time for a tension-breaker.... While in a game store the other day I spent a few minutes perusing the wall full of theme-based Monopoly games--y’know, they’ve got one for Disney, Star Trek, the NHL (why the heck aren’t the Avs in the Boardwalk spot?!), and so on. In the middle of it all was one I hadn’t seen before: Make-Your-Own-opoly. With computer and color printer, you can actually create your own customized version of Monopoly. Naturally, it took me all of twenty seconds to decide what I’d do with it. I’ve worked it up over the last couple of weeks, and now it’s time to share it with the people I know will appreciate it most. (I’m putting the finishing touches on my own board, although the colors are different and the quality’s pretty chintzy....however, I’m giving serious thought to sending it to the Maestro himself.) So here it is, complete with modified rules, space changes, and new cards: Johnnyopoly All the rules and dollar amounts are basically the same as standard Monopoly, except instead of trading real estate, players are buying, selling, and trading the copyrights to original Williams scores. Each “property” represents the rights to a single score. Rather than paying rent, when another player lands on a space you own, they are purchasing the rights to a single performance or a re-recording of that score. Instead of Houses and Hotels, we have Recording Studios and Concert Halls (respectively). While you can’t “mortgage” the rights to a score, you can put them up as collateral for a small loan from the bank (equal to the normal property’s mortgage value). Instead of Railroads, we have Venues (places or symphonies where John commonly works his magic), which are similarly “rented out” for performances to players who land on said spaces. And in place of the two Utilities, there are two “Alternate Works” spaces--Concert Works (Electric Company) and Commissioned Works (Water Works). The Tax spaces are replaced with Expenses--Royalties (Income Tax) and Concert Tickets (Luxury Tax). Naturally, all my favorite scores make an appearance, along with a few honorable mentions to round off the list. I’ve arranged the scores around the board based on two factors: 1) My own opinion of their worth (the better scores usually--though not always--occupy the higher value spaces), and 2) giving each “group” a common theme. Therefore, though I don’t consider the Harry Potter scores to be of less worth than any of the others on the board, it made sense that since there are only two of them, they should go in the natural two-property group at the beginning (sorry; I like them, but they’ll never be Boardwalk material). Keep in mind that the last space in a group is worth more than the others. The ordering came pretty naturally for me, and there’s even a sly in-joke or two hidden in there for those quick on their feet.... So then, here’s how my board worked out (in order, from “GO”), by colors and my own theme for each group (again, “property” and “mortgage” rates remain the same, and note that I’m using the original Monopoly colors and groups, not the pasty Make-Your-Own-opoly colors): Purple (“Diagon Alley”): Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets Light Blue (“Olympic Spirit”): Olympic Fanfare and Theme Call of the Champions Summon the Heroes Maroon (“Historical Works”) JFK Born on the 4th of July Empire of the Sun Orange (“The Early 90’s”) Far and Away Jurassic Park Schindler’s List Red (“Indiana’s Avenue”) Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom Raiders of the Lost Ark Yellow (“Masterpiece Theater”) Jaws Hook Superman Green (“The Original Trilogy”) Star Wars Return of the Jedi The Empire Strikes Back Dark Blue (“Alien Encounters”) E.T. Close Encounters Venues (Railroads): Skywalker Symphony Tanglewood Boston Pops London Symphony Alternative Works (Utilites): Concert Works (Electric Company) Commissioned Works (Water Works) Expenses (Taxes): Royalties (Income Tax) Concert Tickets (Luxury Tax) And, of course: Free Parking = “Long Rest” The two stacks of cards are renamed as well--Leitmotif (for “Chance”) and Concert Suites (for “Community Chest”)--each respective space on the board remaining the same. I kept the dollar amounts on the cards pretty much the same, changing only the events portrayed on them. (A few--such as the “Advance to Go” cards--didn’t change at all.) They are as follows: Concert Suites (yellow): - “Advance to Go” - “Get Out of Jail Free” - “You are caught stalking John Williams - Go to Jail (Do not pass Go, etc.)” [Originally this one read, “You are caught naked in John Williams’s bedroom,” but I thought that might be taking it a bit far....] - “You are assessed for street repairs: $40 per Recording Studio, $115 per Concert Hall” - “Tanglewood Night - Collect $50 from each player for tickets ($75 from each player if you own the Tanglewood Venue)” - “Sell Collector’s Edition CD - Receive $45” - “Win Second Place in Amateur Composing Contest - Collect $10” - “Score Collection Matures - Collect $100” - “Xmas Gift Certificates (for new CDs) - Receive $100” - “Sell Autographed Copy of Williams CD - Collect $200” - “You are Hired to do a Radio Show on Williams - Collect $100” - “Conduct Love Theme at Wedding - Collect $25 for services” - “Sell Williams’s Old Baton - Collect $20” - “Take Itzahk and Yo-Yo to Lunch - Pay $150” - “Tympani Player Out Sick - Pay $100 for lost recording time” - “Bad Deal on EBay - Pay $50” Leitmotif (orange): - “Advance to Go” - “Get Out of Jail Free” - “Go Back 3 Spaces” - “Caught Selling Illegal Bootlegs - Go to Jail (Do not pass Go, etc.)” - “Phone Home - Advance to E.T.” - “Beat the Nazis to the Prize - Advance to Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade” - “Check out the Grassy Knoll - Advance to JFK” - “Conduct the next Star Wars Compilation Album - Advance to Skywalker Symphony” - “Advance token to nearest Venue and pay owner Twice the performance fee to which he/she is normally entitled. If Venue is Unowned, you may buy it from the bank.” - “Advance token to nearest Alternative Works space. If Unowned, you may buy it from the bank. If Owned, throw dice and pay owner a total of ten times the amount thrown.” - “Make General Repairs on all your Property - For each Recording Studio pay $25; for each Concert Hall pay $100” - “Buy used CD - Pay $15” - “You have been elected next ‘Stickman’ at Academy Awards - Pay each player $50” - “Find Johnny’s Five Missing Oscars - Collect $150 Reward” - “Sell CDR Collection - Collect $50” The M-Y-O-opoly comes with a set of cruddy, plain pawns. It’d be great for this if we could make a set of metal character pieces, like E.T., Indy on his horse, the Mother Ship from CE3K, the Golden Snitch, a Raptor, the Great White, etc..... And one last, essential change: Take the Monopoly man, add a beard under that moustache, replace his tux with a turtleneck and his cane with a baton....and we’re ready to go! Anyone wanna play...? - Uni (P.S. I’m working on a way to run a game through the chat room; if I can get it figured out, we’ll have a special “Johnnyopoly” night for the first five or six to show up.) (P.P.S. If you were to make your own board, based on how you'd value or group his scores, what would yours look like...?)

WHOOOOOHOOOOOO!!!!! Sorry. Had to get that out. That's not meant to express support for one "side" or the other; just releasing a little of the excitement this thread has engendered. Now this is drama! Naturally, I had to get in on this (especially after Stefan invoked my name, calling me hence like the Batsignal on a cloudy night). This is one issue in which I feel I have a little stock set aside for a rainy day. I have something to say, but before that, let me make it CLEAR: I'm really not taking sides on this. I'm not going to say anything with the intention of "bashing" Morn (as entertaining a pasttime as that sounds...! :)). Per my (hopefully well-established) reputation, I just want to speak my mind, hoping to add a little clarity. Whether that results....well, that's up to people who're not me. (One more thing....this has nothing--nothing--to do with Ricard or his decisions.) Well, Morn, there's no question that you're a unique presence on this board--in my mind, because you've been able to accomplish something no one else has: you have offended me in the past, something that's very difficult to do in a forum like this (though I have been offended for other people's sake a time or two, and not just on your account). I mean, there's nothing about people expressing their opinions that I could ever take personally (why some do is beyond me), but when things have gotten personal, you're nearly always the one on the scene. I'm not about to go digging through the archives for specific incidents; just know that I wouldn't say it if it hadn't happened. However, I've been tolerant for the most part because of something Ricard has touched on: I honestly don't think you stop and consider the effects of your words very often. Now, you unquestionably have as much right to speak your mind as anyone on this board; but I believe the problem in this case stems from your too often taking the role of the proverbial tree in the woods--that is, you're making a sound, but you don't stop to think who's going to hear it, or how they might feel or respond as a result. I've known my fair share of people like this in the past, and can definitely say that it's not an uncommon malady, though an unfortunate one. I've seen you lay people flat (myself included), and have at times thought to take issue with you over it....but the thing is, in the end I sincerely don't think it's your intention to hurt or offend. I just think you take the notion of freedom of speech at face value--if you think it, why not just up 'n' say it? What you often don't seem to grasp is the finer points of vocal liberty. Sure, you can say what you want, but how you say it--your tone, your bluntness, and your attitude (as Ricard rightly pinned as the trouble) will all affect how people receive it, and how they will return your serve. If you want people's attention and respect, you have to earn them. The freedom alone won't grant them to you. As an example, I will cite one instance that was mildly off-putting (nothing big, but it made me blink at the time), when you said I "wasted words." Now, that was your opinion, and you're welcome to it. But did you stop and think what I might think when I read that? I don't believe you meant to stick it to me, but I also don't think you considered what its ultimate effect might be. (In the end, I couldn't take it all that seriously, since....well, who's the bigger waster of words: one who's tallied less than 200 posts and crammed as much as what he hopes is substance into each of them, or one who's marking posts off by the thousands, and yet has spent them railing against his fellow members...?) I disagree....explaining your actions--i.e., backing up your opinion--seems to be easier than anything else around here. And I agree with others that you've seldom (if ever) apologized before this. You'll find that'll get you a lot more milage out of a "Sorry" than digging into the foxhole of your point of view. (You'll also find that most people around here, if they're called to the mat on some inflammatory remark, will be quick to apologize for it.) I marvel that you say you're trying to avoid offending people....just because I'm wondering what form that effort takes, and why it bears so little fruit.... You're right, to some degree, about not needing to lie....but at the same time, the "truth" need not be so painful. There are infinite ways of expressing it without fashioning it as a knife and twisting it while it goes in. Ahh, but I clearly remember (as I'm sure others will) that you took that very stance concerning The Empire Strikes Back several years ago. At that time, any of us who didn't laud it as the best of Williams's works were, in your eyes, complete morons and fools. I can well say that you've grown to avoid that extreme in the intervening time, but you've been proven guilty on the same count before. I'm trying my best to help you see something here, Morn (while hoping fervently that I'm not offending you in turn, either). I don't for an instant believe you should be banned; no, you're not a troll, though you won't likely be winning any Mr. Congeniality awards around here anytime soon. I would be nice, though, if you'd consider that people do actually read the things you say, and they can often have results far different than what you intended. (If not....well, you're still entitled, aren't you? ) As for the rest of this thread....I think this is one of the best discussions we've had in a while. Many of us have called this place a "community;" I'd go so far as to say that when something like this comes up, and so many people jump to either smooth the waters or use the opportunity to get some stuff off their chests, we're drawing pretty near to the level of "family." (And every family has issues that need--or ought--to be dealt with like this, don't they?) And Miz was right....if Morn's the worst we have to deal with here, then we're still a damn sight more civilized than most boards on the web. - Uni....who's just realized how many more words he might've just wasted....

Finally....I can answer this question. I just saw MR the other night for the first time (further ensuring my spot in this group as the one who's always a good six months behind the times), and now I can safely compare the two. I remember being caught up in A.I. the first time I saw it. I was deeply intruiged by both the central concept and the futuristic world Spielberg unraveled before my eyes, and even after an iffy ending I considered the experience justified (both the making and the viewing). However....I can't say that the film held up too well to further scrutiny. I think I wrote a post last summer detailing my thoughts on why the ending didn't work (it attempted to manifest at least three different modes of faery fiction, and all three went bankrupt). Also, the pivotal questions--can a robot love, and should it be loved in return?--don't stand up much better as logical premises, which weakens them as dramatic premises. Minority Report, on the other hand, laid out another complex futuristic tapestry that was woven with a much stronger story. The cerebral ground was less fallow, to be sure, since the questions were less moral and more self-contained (whether the Precrime program worked or should have been supported was primarily a political question, and neither required nor asked for any real empathy on the part of the audience), so there was less to think about; but maybe that's what I liked about it. A good thriller keeps the watcher guessing until the critical moment, and that was certainly true in this case. And I was far less concerned with the ending as some of you were--as was Anderton, who by the time his life had been so wrung out didn't care whether he lived or died. The important issues had already been dealt with, and I was satisfied. So yes, I voted for MR, though I would hardly call A.I. Spielberg's worst hour (the honor of which belongs to the likes of 1941, or the droner far more pointless than A.I.--Always.) But I think it's worth mentioning the common emotional thread I felt for both films, summed up in a single word: gratitude. Whatever problems I had with the substance or execution of either one, they afforded me the opportunity to see sights that lay beyond me until Spielberg allowed me a look through his eyes. I could sit and watch either one simply to see them again, to visit those places and just imagine. Regardless of the dramatic impression they leave with us, it is to be hoped that we don't too quickly lose sight of the privilege we have over the generations of filmgoers who have gone before us. As for the rest of this stuff....there's enough material here for a good 17 threads. Either I answer it all (tempting), or leave it alone. Time constraints will dictate things, as usual. However, I do want to hit on one issue.... I'm in no position to say for certain, and I could be direly mistaken, but I would guess that Ricard is having a little fun with us, tailing off his similar radio silence a few months ago (and the reaction that followed). At least I hope that's the case.... - Uni