Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: What Did You Watch? 2024-12-18 (Wednesday)
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 07:26:37 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 201
Message-ID: <vk9b3d$m320$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vk1fbc$2tcju$1@dont-email.me> <vk2kl8$34lve$1@dont-email.me>
 <222425295.756437259.655779.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
 <vk5s3h$3ucc2$1@dont-email.me>
 <1921701780.756471194.323422.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
 <vk7cpl$7oo3$1@dont-email.me>
 <523599476.756517295.214136.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
 <vk83ih$f9lv$1@dont-email.me>
 <1640957898.756540914.398994.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 16:26:38 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ee2b8d3865a5e84e8f10a7f2e67870fd";
	logging-data="724032"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19K1Av7J0bpc7MDEtAjNWhhShSM/a3jTbw="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:DICpwD/G37nFTvKFDnCSq6ITSjs=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241222-2, 12/22/2024), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <1640957898.756540914.398994.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
Bytes: 10662

On 12/21/2024 10:36 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>> On 12/21/2024 6:33 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>> Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>>>> On 12/21/2024 3:22 AM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>>> Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/20/2024 5:29 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>>>>>>> Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12/19/2024 7:50 AM, Ian J. Ball wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Finished grading the final for the first of my two sections, and then
>>>>>>>>> did a little bit of finish up work on the lab class... With that, I got
>>>>>>>>> through:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> soaps: Y&R - Mon's ep. Billy tells Filis[sic!] his Revenge! plot against
>>>>>>>>> Victor; Filis balks at getting involved because of her kids - I wasn't
>>>>>>>>> sure if she agreed to participate or not. Sharon gets hypnotized by
>>>>>>>>> Traci's boyfriend, and remembers that she didn't run Filis off the road.
>>>>>>>>> Ian Ward eavesdrops on a conversation between Claire and Mariah & Tessa,
>>>>>>>>> while Aunt Jordan remembers back to when Ian Ward reeled her in on his
>>>>>>>>> Revenge! plot.
>>>>>>>>>     GH - Tue's ep. Bitch Carly wants Revenge!! on Drew (and Willow), but
>>>>>>>>> Jason tries to talk her down from that. Willow is working some public
>>>>>>>>> charity thing for Jordan, and of course Drew stops by to see her,
>>>>>>>>> witnessed by both a visibly displeased Jordan, and by Felicia. Nina,
>>>>>>>>> with Ava present, discusses Willow's upcoming potential divorce and
>>>>>>>>> custody case with lawyer Martin Gray. Curtis and Michael implement their
>>>>>>>>> plan to eject Drew from Aurora co., but Curtis gets it in writing from
>>>>>>>>> Michael up front. Despondent Josslyn discusses her grief with Trina, who
>>>>>>>>> understands the situation intimately because of Spencer's death.
>>>>>>>>>     DOOL - Tue's ep. Mostly stuff about Cat and her family, or Chad with
>>>>>>>>> Jack and Jennifer, and I really don't care much. NuGabi is already
>>>>>>>>> starting to work on seducing JJ - this girl's libido won't quit!!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Broken Innocence (Tubi) - This 2024 effort is one of those flicks that
>>>>>>>>> gets you to wonder - if this film had had a budget, a better script, and
>>>>>>>>> better actors and better direction, would it have been a "good film"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that question applies to just about every bad movie, and the
>>>>>>>> answer is yes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I’m not so sure about that. I love Batman 1966 but it’s full of cheap shots
>>>>>>> that you would think would benefit from a reshoot. But I’ve had discussions
>>>>>>> with people and we pretty much agree that if you made Batman 1966 into it
>>>>>>> technically better movie, it would probably not be as much fun to watch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I re-watched it tonight. There’s less to be fixed than I would have
>>>>> thought. The main thing is, I would like them to use New York for all the
>>>>> shots of the city. It’s kind of embarrassing when they keep cutting
>>>>> back-and-forth from stock footage of New York footage of LA which hardly
>>>>> had any skyscrapers at the time.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But the Gotham City on the TV show felt like a small town with hardly
>>>> any skyscrapers.  Weren't the New York shots supposed to be the UN in
>>>> New York?  Or was it some Batversion of the UN?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> They actually shot Batman and Robin (possibly stunt doubles) running down
>>> the streets of New York through the crowds. And they used the real United
>>> Nations building although just stock footage we didn’t see anybody with it.
>>>
>>> But even in the show at least early on the establishing shots of Gotham
>>> were always New York.
>>>
>>> Another change I’d like to see although I’m more ambivalent about it is
>>> instead of just a cheap office set with a table being the United Nations
>>> world Council. I want to see the fancy round wood covered council chamber
>>> from voyage to the bottom of the Sea ((The movie) or when worlds collide.
>>> The cheap set ads to the cheesiness, but a little grandeur would add to the
>>> threat level.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, they should have gone with a better set.
> 
> It’s like they ran out of money and had to finish on a weekend and that’s
> the best they could do.
> 
> I’ve always disliked the aircraft controller set as well. You would think
> they could’ve sprung for some mystery equipment and cluttered it up.
> 
> 
>>
>>> http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film4/blu-ray_reviews_60/voyage_to_the_bottom_of_the_sea_blu-ray_/large/large_voyage_bottom_sea_blu-ray_subs.jpg
>>>
>>> https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/batman/images/5/56/United_World_Security_Council.png/revision/latest?cb=20240628045936
>>>
>>> Here’s a review of the 1966 movie although he gets a lot of stuff wrong
>>>
>>> https://www.cbr.com/things-never-made-sense-about-1966-batman-movie/
>>>
>>
>> This guys complains they are wearing masks while committing crimes?
>> They're criminals.  Of course they are wearing masks!  LOL
>>
> 
> Yes!  And Catwoman had apparently never been unmasked at this point, which
> kept them from recognizing her as Miss Kitka!
> 
> Yeah, that’s a stupid complaint. Especially since two of them don’t wear
> masks and Miss Kitka wears a lot more mask than he claims. So he’s really
> only talking about the Riddler. And I bet if you tried to get somebody to
> identify a villain in court. His lawyer would make a big deal out of the
> fact that he was masked so how can you be sure?
> 
>> And the navy didn't sale a boat to The Penguin.  They sold a surplus
>> boat to a Mr. Guin.  Who could have possibly known Mr. Guin would be up
>> to no good?
> 
> You have to wonder how much money the penguin had that he’s buying a
> submarine and completely refitting it in order to commit another crime!
> 
>>
>> Regarding Batman letting Penguin into the cave, maybe I'm misremembering
>> it, but didn't Batman always see through the disguise and *know* it was
>> really Penguin?
> 
> Yeah, Batman and Robin agreed it was obviously the penguin when they first
> met him on the docks.
> 
>>
>> And is this guy really complaining that there's kissing in the movie?
>> Who is this guy?!?
> 
> That was weird.
> 
> I will give him that the bat boat just sitting there unguarded in the
> middle of nowhere is a bit odd.
> 
> But he’s wrong about the bat cycle. They don’t just leave it there in the
> bushes. It was obviously planted for them to use, when they faked the
> breakdown of the Batmobile.
> 
> 
>>
>> Maybe I'll give him the porpoise scene.  That was a bit farfetched.
>>
> 
> Yeah. Maybe less so in 1966 when we were still watchingFlipper.
> 
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But don't forget, "better script."  I'm thinking Plan 9 Outer Space
>>>>>> redone as "Ed Wood" or "The Room" redone as "The Disaster Artist."  Two
>>>>>> examples of bad movies that mocked because they were so bad, yet given a
>>>>>> new *everything* it becomes entertaining.  Not a mock it level, but a
>>>>>> good actors with a good script level.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then there are the straight remakes like "Little Shop of Horrors"or
>>>>>> "The Thing." Not that the originals were necessarily bad movies, but
>>>>>> between the originals and the remakes, I'll take the remakes.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the 1951 version of THE THING (from another world) is one of the
>>>>> best movies ever made. Classic Howard Hawks.
>>>>>
>>>>> I like the 1982 version as well. But from a rewatch viewpoint, the 1951
>>>>> version has it beat.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think I've only watched the 1951 version all the way through once,
>>>> maybe twice. It's interesting as compared to the far superior John
>>>> Carpenter version.  But other than as a curiosity I have no real use for
>>>> it. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> I don't think I could even force myself to watch it if I wasn't going to
>>>> watch the remake next.
>>>
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========