ValentineXavier
-
Posts
6,917 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by ValentineXavier
-
-
I do like 3D, when it's done well. But, there are only two films I know of that HAD to be in 3D to do what they do - *Hugo*, and *Cave of Forgotten Dreams*. It's odd, but I was dreading that they would convert some of Melies ' films to 3D. But when they did, it was magical, and really worked well in the film.
-
Obviously, if only one person opts for a channel, or a low percentage opt for a channel, under an ala carte system, that channel would be dropped. Again, I'm not saying that an ala carte system is practicable. Here's what I am saying would happen if a provider went ala carte, and did things in an evenhanded manner:
1. There is no inherent need for an over-all price rise, but the cable or sat. co. might use it as an excuse for one.
2. Channels to which few people wish to subscribe would be off the system.
3. Popular channels would cost the subscriber less, because the carriage fee would be spread over more subscribers.
4. Less popular niche channels that remained would cost the subscriber more, because the cost would be spread over fewer subscribers.
5. A subscriber's bill might be more, or might be less, depending on how many channels they subscribe to, and their popularity.
6. Presumably, there would be no change for premium channels, since they are already ala carte.
So, as I have said, I don't think we will ever go ala carte, and whether it would really save an individual any money is hard to predict. I just want to dispel the notion that everyone's cable bill would have to go up, if we went ala carte. Simple math shows that is nonsensical.
Edited by: ValentineXavier on Jan 30, 2012 11:40 PM
-
> {quote:title=Sprocket_Man wrote:}{quote}
> > As you probably know, almost all of the official footage of D-Day was ruined, too. Must be aliens messin' with us.
> No, the only thing ruined were all but six frames of still photos taken on Omaha Beach by fames war photographer Robert Capa. It's only considered an unfortunate loss because Capa (best known for his combat pictures from the Spanish Civil War) was considered the best of the best. There's actually plenty of motion picture footage from D-Day.
>
I saw/heard about that alleged loss of film in a doc on TV within the last couple of years. Thanks to you, Fred, and Snopes for setting me straight. I'd swear that the doc I saw presented what it claimed were the few surviving feet of moving film remaining of the official filming, and claimed the rest of what they showed was unofficial, made by GIs, etc. Wish I could remember the doc, but I watch a fair number of them. Hmmm... maybe they said color film...
-
Cable companies are hardly a "free market." Most areas have only one, with maybe a satellite option. There are zillions of cable channels we can watch, or cable companies can choose to carry. I did say that I think that cable co.s should be more like a utility, thus the "not allow" comment. Also, the structure I was suggesting was less onerous that the one I was offering an alternative to.
-
> {quote:title=infinite1 wrote:}{quote}
> >
> I don't think you can fairly compare the SEA HAWK to MASTER and COMMANDER although I basically agree with everything you are saying. THE SEA HAWK was a fictional swashbuckler while MASTER and COMMANDER was more HISTORICAL DRAMA. I think the more valid comparrison is to compare SEA HAWK, or for that matter, CAPTAIN BLOOD, to JOHNNY DEPPS' PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN films. The reason we will never see a new film on a par with either CAPTAIN BLOOD or THE SEA HAWK is that 1. Errol Flynn is dead and he was the only one who, in my opinion, could carry it off without the CGI effects, and 2. CGI EFFECTS.
On the whole, I disagree with you. *The Sea Hawk* and *Captain Blood* are excellent films, *CB* being my favorite Flynn film, and my favorite swashbuckler. I wouldn't really want to see either remade today. But, *Master and Commander* shows that it is perfectly possible to make an intelligent, entertaining, period sea adventure film today. Much as I like Johnny Depp, *PotC* is none of those, it is a cartoonish joke, and no fair comparison to *TSH* or *CB*.
Further, I think there are any number of modern actors who could do a credible job in such a film. Crowe, obviously, Daniel Craig, and Clive Owen, to name just two more.
I do agree that many modern adventure/entertainment films are often over done, even to the point of absurdity, and they can go wild with the CGI. But, there are plenty of fine films where that is NOT the case.
-
I'm sure it was not TCM that screwed with the music. Why the distributor would, I can only guess. Perhaps a rights issue? Well, thanks for the info. I have recorded it, but not watched it yet. If we're lucky, maybe someone who knows for certain what's up with that will let us know.
-
> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}From the comments on these boards over the years, I believe that REBECCA is just about everyone's favorite Fontaine performance
>
Definitely not my favorite. In fact, I dislike *Rebecca* because of her performance. But, I haven't seen it in decades, because I disliked it so much. I should probably watch it again.
-
> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}I got carried away with the stars. It really should have been ****.
And I thought you meant flesh balloons...
-
While both The Fugs and The Mothers were definitely social satirists, Zappa was far and away the best musician. The Fugs, led by Ed Sanders, were poets, more so than musicians. They did use language to outrage people, and push the envelope. Their influence wasn't very wide, but it was deep. Most people on the left, in that day, knew their work well. Their early albums were both artier, and coarser, than their later work. They would intersperse songs like River of Sh*t with songs composed of poems by Swinburne, and Blake. Their later work, like Johnny **** was more obvious and accessible. I think they were trying for more listeners, while staying true to their message.
Zappa, on the other hand, had a caustic wit, was explicit when he wanted to be, w/o any four letter words, as you have said. He was one of the greatest composers of his generation, perhaps the best. I own all of his earlier albums, and was lucky enough to see him in concert at Cobo Hall a couple of times.
-
Most of those are good films. But, I vaguely recall *City Beneath the Sea* as being one of the worst films I ever saw. But, that was 30 or 40 years ago.
-
Agee sums up my feelings on *Jane Eyre* perfectly. I'd say that he took the words right out of my mouth, but I would not have said it so well.
-
Actually, no, the *KT* films were commercial free. I did record *In Bruges* and another recent film from their commercial hours. But, when I read the disclaimer, saying that they had been cut for the time slot, and weren't in their OAR, I deleted them, posthaste. Yeah, I miss the old FMC too. And to think, some cable co.s just started charging for FMC as a premium channel. Argh!
-
As you probably know, almost all of the official footage of D-Day was ruined, too. Must be aliens messin' with us.
-
They've also shown the third and fourth installments of *Attack of the Killer Tomatoes*.
Only die-hard John Astin fans should take note of that... -
I'm looking forward to watching *Possession*. I noticed that they showed the full length version, not the 80m US version that the cable guide listed.
I've seen *The Vanishing*, and I didn't like it. I'm not saying it's a bad film, or that others shouldn't watch it. But, it was just too bleak, hopeless, depressing, and cruel for me.
-
> {quote:title=SansFin wrote:}{quote}
> > {quote:title=ValentineXavier wrote:}{quote}
> > My argument is a simple one. If a cable co. goes ala carte, why couldn't they just continue to send the same total amounts to all their providers? If so, their costs would not go up, so the total of the cable bills their subscribers pay need not go up. They would just be apportioned differently, based on which channels people selected. This would lower bills for some, and raise them for others.
>I am sorry to say I do not understand this. It seems to me that if they are to send the same total amount to all of their providers then they can not stop charging customers for those channels which are not selected.
>
As I pointed out, and JJG pointed out, they would still be charging customers. But, however many customers selected a channel would determine how much they were charged, because they would now be paying for the whole amount.
> It also seems to me that apportioning the fees based on usage would be the death knell for all but the most popular channels. The less popular channels depend on the carriage fees for their survival and any income less than they currently receive would mean closing their doors.
>
As I said previously, the channels that have little viewership would fold. This would decrease the costs of the cable company. That's the way things are supposed to work, in a free market. If no one buys your product, you go out of business.
> I would personally advocate a simple system where any channel which has advertisements within their programs can not charge carriage fees and are expected to subsist on their advertising. Only those channels which provide commercial-free programming can charge carriage fees to supplement their income.
I think that channels with ads in their programs should be allowed to charge a basic, low carriage fee, but the cable co.s should not be allowed to charge premium prices for them, or put them on higher tiers. This would make cable more like the utility it should be. But, your way, or my way, it will never happen.
-
> {quote:title=fxreyman wrote:}{quote}
> > Very nice idea. But thanks to the *crooked politicians and the crooked politicians*, it won't ever happen, and the viewing audience loses.
> You mean to say that there are two groups of crooked politicians?
Obviously, there are a lot more than two groups of crooked politicians. Perhaps he thinks only the GOP and the Dems are corrupt. Or, perhaps he works in the Department of Redundancy Department.
-
Didn't *Z* get best foreign film? I agree with that.
-
*Yellow Sky* has run, uninterrupted, often on FMC, but not lately.
-
You're right. Well, that is in *Britannia Hospital*. I had forgotten. At best a fair film, not in the same ballpark with the first two of the trilogy, *If*, and *O, Lucky Man*.
-
> {quote:title=OtisCriblecoblis wrote:}{quote}
> I didn't realize that the f word was sung in Baba O'Riley. I know it's not in
> the lyrics and can't remember hearing it in the song, but then again I wasn't
> listening for it.
>
You're right. If we were in the same room, I'd turn around and let you kick me in the be-hind. It's not in Baba O'Riley, in fact, I'm sure it's in Quadrophenia, in Bell Boy, I think. Years ago, I could have recited every lyric by heart, except for a few words I couldn't understand. Guess I watch too much TCM these days, and don't listen to the old songs enough. The actual line is "Oh, f... him, really."
-
Ah! The voice of authority! Good to have something better than my suppositions, but, it does seem that my observations were on the mark. Um... no pun intended.
-
Okay, I finally watched it, and here's what I posted about the ending in another thread:
>
>In the parole hearing, Darin convinces the parole board that he is sane, reformed, and Poitier just hates him, because Poitier is prejudiced against him for being white. Later, Darin tells Poitier that of course the parole board believed him, a convict, rather than Poitier, a Dr., because Darin is white, and Poitier black. All this takes place while while Poitier is packing up, because he has resigned his job. Poitier responds by putting Darin in his place, verbally, and Darin is obviously taken aback by it.
>
>Flash forward to present day - Peter Falk asks Poitier what ever became of Darin. Poitier says that 10 years later, he killed an old man for no reason, and was hung. Falk decides not to resign, but to go back to try and help the black kid he has not been getting through to. He says that he will see the kid in black face next time, and Poitier says that's a good idea.
-
Suffocation by filling the mouth and nose with sand fleas would be better...
Only die-hard John Astin fans should take note of that...
*CANDIDS* 2
in Films and Filmmakers
Posted
I also appreciate your thread very much. Sorry for the nitpick, but I thought you might want to correct this, from below:
GENE HANKMAN