MovieChat Forums > Druff > Replies
Druff's Replies
None of the studios wanted the movie, Schrader had to seriously wheel and deal just to get it made in the first place, for next to nothing. And then getting a distribution deal was like a whole secondary project. I had no idea about any of that until years later, I was fortunate that I happened to work at a big studio in those days and a co-worker loaned me a tape saying it was the best movie they'd seen in years. That had to be 1997 because I remember that person was gone before the end of that year. I had no idea it wasn't in theaters yet at the time. People I worked with were constantly passing around Academy screener copies, I assumed it was one of those. I remember it had the typical annoying "THIS FILM IS THE PROPERTY OF [studio name]" notification that popped up every couple of minutes.
Confirmation from the original screenplay, the scene where the local in the bar is telling the college boys the story about Wade's father:
...I'll tell you
who was a pisser. Glen Whitehouse.
There was a real pisser. He was mean
normal, but when he drank it was
like he burst on fire. Canadian Club.
Always drank CC.
So like someone theorized in an earlier post, when they shot the movie they changed a real brand to a fictional brand, surely to avoid having to pay for using the trademark. This movie had a notoriously microscopic budget.
Director Paul Schrader said in his Charlie Rose interview when the movie came out:
[paraphrased]
"It's a story about the son of an abusive alcoholic. He completely failed at life, and he thinks he can redeem himself by exposing a murder conspiracy. Then halfway through the movie you realize there never was a murder."
It was a freak hunting accident. Stranger things have happened IRL.
You clearly cannot provide a specific definition of "general welfare" in the context of the Constitution, or you would have done so. If it was as simple as repeating the Founders' definition you would have done that to avoid looking like a complete simpleton. But of course there is no avoiding that obvious fact.
What?! Lindsey Graham is GAY?!
It's like outing Liberace.
"GENERAL WELFARE" can mean pretty much anything. If you're going to define it with specifics, you better come correct and show your receipts. Because otherwise you're just a bloviating moron.
"You don't ask for a rematch if you didn't lose."
OK. But if the loser wants a rematch, you give it to them. If you don't, it obviously means you think your win was a fluke and you're afraid they'll beat you the next time.
But none of this b.s. matters. Trump lost and everyone knows it. And debates are not boxing matches. The point of a presidential election is not just so the two candidates can fight each other. It's to show the voters how the candidates measure up to each other in terms of policy, will, and wit.
Trump already had his ass handed to him in the last debate and he knows damn well he has zero chance of looking any better in another debate. He knows the smartest move is to cut his losses and stick with the MAGA core support he has and keep praying that Satan and Putin will see fit to let him miraculously squeak by again like he did in 2016.
Meanwhile Harris just wants another debate so she can kick his ass even more and more build up even more momentum than she already has, which is a ton. We don't want to just squeak out a win, we want to bury the orange piece of shit because the more we trounce him the less morons out there will listen to his "they stole the election from me again!" lies.
How would her wearing audio earrings cause Trump to say all the retarded shit he said?
Harris could have just read the phone book out loud during the entire debate but she still would have won because her opponent was saying ridiculously stupid nonsense. As usual.
I think Ratatouille was the first one where the trailer turned me off and didn't spark any interest whatsoever. But I did end up seeing it anyway, and I can't say I didn't enjoy it. Not on my list of favorites though. There have been plenty more since then that I didn't care much for, but even the "bad" ones are still pretty good. After everyone talked so much shit about Cars, I was very surprised at how good it was. I saw Inside Out without hearing anyone's opinions of it beforehand and I loved it, was very surprised when I saw so many people calling it one of Pixar's worst. People are effing idiots.
The only people who believe Trump won the debate are hardcore MAGAts.
I mean, even they don't ~actually~ believe he won, they just say it. But they'll do their damnedest to convince the rest of us they believe it.
So, WALL-E marked Pixar's overall peak and then after that was a downward trend... except their very next movie was also a "peak" meaning the downward trend actually started after that.
You're a complete buffoon and your mother is a nickel whore with low sexual performance skills.
The humans in this movie were far more than just "fat." Their skeletal systems had changed shape, way more than just "losing bone density." They'd de-evolved into adult sized infants.
EDIT: Just learned some cool stuff about this. In the early drafts of the story, the ship that comes to earth is totally weird and alien. When WALL-E encounters the lifeforms aboard the ship, they're green translucent gelatinous blob creatures that speak unintelligible gibberish. Then at the very end there's big Planet of the Apes style twist where it's revealed that the alien blobs are the descendants of humans who left earth millions of years ago and life in low gravity caused them to gradually evolve into this weird form. Then Pixar decided it would be a better and more relatable movie if they were cute neo-baby people who had only been gone for a few hundred years instead of millions.
How did humans go through many millions of years of evolution in only 700 years?
How did Bugs Bunny learn to speak English?
I'm surprised that even a troglodyte with half a brain is stupid enough to endorse a greedy obese old low IQ malignantly narcissistic pathological liar, but here we are.
The next feature after WALL-E was Up. That was part of the downward trend? I thought it was still considered one of their 'good ones' with some prestige. What was the problem? The Asian kid?
I remember when I first saw her in Godfather 3, I thought "Yeeesh" and felt bad for her, that her mean father deliberately embarrassed her by putting her in the role of what was clearly meant to be a beautiful young girl. But, IMO she grew up to be genuinely beautiful. Perhaps a bit... unique looking? But very beautiful nevertheless.
> My Father was a great plumber
Well then small wonder you turned out to be a POS.
Adore is a bit strong, but I very much enjoyed it. The acting, the character interactions, the story itself, while it did have its moments, on the whole it was all so austere and barebones it was almost off putting. However, the amazing production design and costumes, wow. IMO totally worth a watch simply on the level of pure eye candy. Second only to Barry Lyndon I'd say.
They should vote for the 'tax cuts for the rich' guy. After 50 years or so now, that whole Trickle-Down Economics thing has to finally kick in sooner or later.
Fuck you, white power Nazi piece of shit. That's why.