MovieChat Forums > Seperatrix > Replies
Seperatrix's Replies
I never really gave a lot of thought about that moment in the film, but now that you've asked the question I realize that I always assumed that MM was telling Fred what to do next -- go to his home and report the death of Laurent.
Given that S3 of Twin Peaks "ends" with Laura Palmer whispering in Coopers ear, I'll have to rethink this one.
Avatar was a decidedly good film in my book. But not upper echelon.
The Force Awakens (TFA) is one of the very worst films I've ever seen. So for a true version of "overrated" look no further than someone who considers TFA anything above horrible.
Well you make an interesting point, and not to dismiss it out of hand, but I can see room where Alonzo meant that he was planning what he was going to do with Roger, the Wise Men, the Russians, etc. all week, not necessarily what he planned to do with Hoyt. But you may be right.
I haven't seen this film in awhile but if I remember correctly Jake was assigned to his division and he was tasked with training him. So Jake was a burden in effect. The fact that Jake was assigned in the middle of a mess that Alonzo was in necessitated that he attempt to bring him on board quickly. It was all bad timing (for Alonzo).
We're left some blank spaces to fill in our own interpretation obviously, so the feeling I get is that some things transcend mere business transactions -- i.e., family. The fact that Hoyt saved his cousin was the bottom line and Alonzo's wishes be damned. But complimentary to that idea is that the gang was so well connected that Alonzo would have had limited pull to retaliate.
If anything has a shot on your list it would be Avatar 2.
According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a fact is defined as โan observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as โtrue.โโ
Opinions can incorporate facts, but at the end of the day is a subjective position.
Yeah I caught that too. And yes, I believe they did.
I hated the film anyway, but that pandering to the "religious fanatics/creationists" was the cherry on top.
When they had the church stained glass windows as a backdrop to Cavil I was thinking "ok, ok, enough!"
Btw, a better way to explain what Darwin was saying is that in evolution you don't have to go fail to go extinct, just succeed less often.
I agree and would go one step further -- perhaps everyone should see it: reminds us all of the power of addiction.
Even for those not susceptible, it could offer a glimpse of insight into the lives that are, and with that, a better understanding.
"But knowing Lynch, this will eventually lead to a new wild and inexplicable ending."
I'd be disappointed if it didn't.
๐
No votes for Evelyn Marsh?
I find there are a lot of people out there that need to understand that "liberalism" and "atheism" are not synonyms.
The problem was Michael Bay.
This was a job for the Coen brothers.
Having a two-disc set would have been nice I suppose: One with the deleted scenes and one without.
Not sure what to make of "choppy and disjointed" . . . it is a collection of deleted scenes.
I understand why he deleted the scenes that he did and I agree with the reason: Having random scenes makes for fan service but not a good film. The film would have been criticized for "being all over the place" and having "random scenes not connected to anything else in the film," etc.
On a side note, I love seeing deleted scenes and I can't think of a single film where I thought they should have been included in the film. Amadeus might be the one exception.
Not to say some of the FWWM deleted scenes wouldn't have worked in the film. But the vast majority should have been left out. But enjoyed seeing them so much -- wish there were more!
"People kill cows and birds at will, what makes this any different."
You might want to give people a chance to answer that question before labeling them "hypocrites."
"Arguing that you should not kill a intelligent (self aware) creature is just a load of ****."
Why? You don't argue for or against that position. You label a particular side (again).
The rest of your post is repetitive. It had the potential to be a good topic: Where do we draw the line (or do we?) when it comes to animal slaughter?
Too bad your emotions took over.
"How much blame does she deserve, and how much sympathy?"
She committed the act, so of course she deserves all the blame. Losing someone you love does not justify a wrong action.
The fact that she may have realized that she was doing something wrong doesn't excuse the fact that she did something wrong.
The film Manhunter summarized this situation rather well. It was a film about a serial killer and the detective tracking him down. The detective sympathized with the abusive childhood that the killer suffered (and presumably led to his adulthood atrocities) but even with having empathy for the child, hating the monster that he had become -- and the actions he had committed -- was justified.
Joan Chen also wanted to be in S3 from what I've read. In fact, for awhile I thought the sound emanating in Ben Horne's office would have a tie-in with Josie (even without her appearance).
I respect the fact that Lynch/Frost stayed true to the vision and didn't force characters into S3 that had no bearing on the main theme/story, otherwise the show would have devolved into annoying fan service.
The one-off scenes in the Bang Bang Bar (Roadhouse) served to illustrate and reinforce what had happened to the town in the last 25 years.
Remember how Major Briggs responded when asked back in S2 if everything was OK: "No, not exactly."
The U2 song is great. The entire soundtrack is great, I still listen to it frequently.
Should have been nominated, definitely. But it seems if a film isn't a giant cash cow it, and the performers, typically get ignored.
Before The Devil Knows Your Dead.