Happy Face

Enjoyable film but after a while you start to realise you're never going to have a clue what the fucks going on, until they inevitably wrap it all up neat in the end so just enjoy the brain scrambling mis-direction and wait for the twist. I prefer to feel intrigued than completely at a loss. Probably over my head like, but anyone that followed it first time round deserves the Nobel Prize for concentration.

I like 'The Third Man'. 'Gladiator' was ok but very overrated. I bet there's more than that that are average at best in there though. Yeah, missed off lots of average stuff like Matrix, The Prestige, Usual Suspects etc. Forgot to include 12 Monkeys as one of the really shit ones though. Complete wank.

Shit films in the IMDB top 250... The Third Man A Clockwork Orange Forrest Gump Requiem For A Dream Gladiator Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl

Hardly suprising like. Didn't you think Lebowski was shite too?

Carter Burwell

The films of Martin Scorsese

Hard Eight Paul Thomas Anderson's first film finally got a UK DVD release today. Should have really got the region 1 version a while ago though as it has a commentary the UK release doesn't. Why are all Andersons UK DVD's so shit compared to region 1? Anyway, the always brilliant Philip Baker Hall is Sydney, who seemingly takes an interest in the lives of complete strangers (John C Reilly and Gwyneth Paltrow) and tries to help them when they're low. Samuel L Jackson comes along and puts a cat among the pigeons though. Not much else I can say about the plot without spoilers. I've finally seen all his films now and I'd say this was as good as the brilliant Punch Drunk Love or Boogie Nights. The other 2 are still a class apart though. There's a short compilation of Anderson's films on youtube that makes me moist by the way....

I think the portrayal that he did that was yes (what actually he did do was a bit different to that, although it is almost always portrayed in that very simple way). I'd agree the media portrayal of his U-turn was a media portrayal . The question was, are you saying the act itself was a media invention? Because it clearly wasn't. As I said it wasn't really a "u-turn" though (although it is clearly portrayed and swallowed as such) it was more a long curving arch driven from the same direction as earlier things. Who'd have thought a man taking the opposing view to the one he previously held would have to put up with such devious portrayals of his viewpoint. The media are scum. Yup, who'd ever have thought that the world and situations can slowly change with time. Clearly only snap "u-turns" exist and are "rightfully" portrayed as such. You'd almost think that Stalin could have been a deadly enemy and then a bosom ally, before being a deadly yet enemy again - absolutely ludicrous of course, clearly anyone involved in something like that would be castigated for their monstrous "u-turns" for all time. I've never had a qualm with his "U-turn" whatever it's pace. Nor do I think, have the media.

I think Torres was joking. I think.

I think the portrayal that he did that was yes (what actually he did do was a bit different to that, although it is almost always portrayed in that very simple way). I'd agree the media portrayal of his U-turn was a media portrayal . The question was, are you saying the act itself was a media invention? Because it clearly wasn't. As I said it wasn't really a "u-turn" though (although it is clearly portrayed and swallowed as such) it was more a long curving arch driven from the same direction as earlier things. Who'd have thought a man taking the opposing view to the one he previously held would have to put up with such devious portrayals of his viewpoint. The media are scum.

Around 1955 I think.

If Sven has no say in signings his days are clearly numbered.

Simple solution, bullet registration.

I think the portrayal that he did that was yes (what actually he did do was a bit different to that, although it is almost always portrayed in that very simple way). I'd agree the media portrayal of his U-turn was a media portrayal . The question was, are you saying the act itself was a media invention? Because it clearly wasn't.

Winston Churchill was a tit for most of his life, he just got the order right for posterity. Winston Churchill was instrumental in defeating the Nazi's, Heston was on the radios for a bit and marched so that black people could see his film. They hardly compare. Again I'd wouldn't say he so much did a u-turn on his beliefs (although again the media certainly would) so much as tried to keep to his beliefs as the world moved on. He campaigned for freedom and rights (helping presidential candidates, fairly early and active involvement in the civil rights movement, anti-Vietnam and pro-gun control) in a world (US anyway) still largely controlled by right wing authoritarianism, out and out racism, and the fear of the "commy" and fear of being called a communist. So going from pro-gun control to president of the NRA was a media invented U-turn? I think you're blinded by the affirmative action thing. How could someone who isn't even pro-choice be said to be fighting for frredom and rights?

So it doesn't matter what someone has done or believes, only what is presented now? Well maybe, and that's certainly the way of the modern media, but it's a tad harsh for me. As for demonising, it is pretty amusing that someone that might well have been called "commy" for his political leanings for half his life would be deem "fascist" for the other half. Which means they were doing it well more than anything (well except Moore, how anyone swallows his drivel I dunno). Moore went after Heston as he was then president of the NRA, that's not presentation, that's fact. In a film on gun control, he was a legitimate target and had the NRA's president at the time been someone else I'm sure Heston wouldn't have been featured. I don't see how you can say it's a witch hunt when he's put himself up there as a target given his principles and his activities. Just because he was an alzheimer ridden dithering old fool you felt sorry for in that film, doesn't make the stupidity of his stance any less heinous. I'm struggling to see why you think someone shouldn't be judged on all of their beliefs and actions. Just do one or two canny things and then you can be a tit? He served in WW2, marched for civil rights and opposed Vietnam so he was due respect. But he went Republican in the 80's and had an appaling political viewpoint for the rest of his days. It was the worst political U-turn since Ben Elton said "Nice to meet you Mr Lloyd Weber".

It is pretty funny how his other very "liberal" political stuff (and indeed support for early gun control) doesn't get mentioned much if at all now. He rather doomed himself in his media portrayal though by moving against Politically Correct dogma in the 80's. I think there's more than a bit of truth in his "Political correctness is tyranny with manners", something that earnt him the undying hatred of the PCer than thou crowd - nothing provokes hatred more than the truth, no matter the source. (as can probably be seen in this very thread in fact ) His support of Ragan and Bush (both) and his opposition to abortion are what I don't like about him. I've no qualms with anyones political incorrectness if they aren't talking shite. Well it wasn't really that he was or wanted to be "politically incorrect" (although this does show how well and completely they won the media war over his perception really), as I said look at his strong support for political causes through the 50's, 60's and 70's, very "liberal" for the USA, especially in those times. More that I think he woke up pretty early to the way politically correct dogma was being used and the direction it was been taken and decided to take a stand (which rather fucked him up media-wise as he was always going to be painted as "the debil" after that, even if prior to that he'd been rather a darling of US liberalism). It doesn't matter how liberal he was or was not. If he's saying "I want guns for everyone, black or white" he's a dick. If he's opposed to rape victims having a legal abortion he's a dick. Just because he took his time to face up to being a dick, and he might be liberal on one or 2 issues, it doesn't mean he's been demonised. Aye, Michael Moore is a twat too. I'm not aware of any media war on Heston, but he certainly got hammered in that round. Touch of Evil is class.

Might get that or COD4 today. Bought that today Is it right that it's shit? Same graphics, same maps, less players in co-op etc?

I enjoyed 1984, even at school.

Thought you'd be more of a Communist Manifesto kinda guy. I've read that. Mainly because it's a lot shorter than 'Das Kapital'. Me too. It made so much sense at the time, I had to watch a lot of 50's American Sci-Fi to get the red menace out of my system.

I never followed the viral campaign that explained the film (as it couldn't on it's own terms - poor show) but I think the monster is supposed to be Japanese. Not that it has a passport, but it was created by a Japanese corporation. Happy to be corrected though. The monster is the $ and it was created by a European banking syncicate and is now supported by China as it tears through what is left of the American economy.

Thought you'd be more of a Communist Manifesto kinda guy.

I never followed the viral campaign that explained the film (as it couldn't on it's own terms - poor show) but I think the monster is supposed to be Japanese. Not that it has a passport, but it was created by a Japanese corporation. Happy to be corrected though.

I started Gullivers Travels. ...and War and Peace. Shite the pair of them though.