Jump to content
Forums forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

3.7k Excellent
  1. Eagle's Doug Peterson: Dang, winning a SuperBowl and a couple of playoff spots gets you squat these days....
  2. Does toughness of regular schedule translate to better results once playoffs come? I dunno, Just Playing 16 games, if you're not toughened up by the season end regardless. It would be interesting to have statistical data as to how the teams with the best record versus quality opponents do once the post season commences. Now I know before the season started the Ravens were projected to have the "easiest" schedule as opposed to the Patriots having the "toughest" https://www.giants.com/news/2020-nfl-schedule-release-strength-of-schedule-formula-how-it-works Did the actual results flip alot of that? I don't know, just curious.
  3. So that means Diana and Steve went around for basically 5-10 minutes?
  4. I'm torn: It seems that it's a huge advantage for the #1 team in each conference to get a week rest while everyone else dukes it out. OTOH, why shouldn't the best record have the advantage, since it reflects excellence over the entire season. Caveat on the WTF and Bucs game, didn't the last 7-9 playoff team pull off the upset in 2011 ? Not only did the Seattle Seahawks upset the NO Saints, but the Saints with Drew were the defending SB champs. That was a crazy year regardless as the wildcard NY Jets led by Mark Sanchez upset the 14-2 NE Patriots. However back to reality now, if the Bucs/Brady score a couple of TD's early just can't see Alex/WTF getting much offense going.
  5. Mildly shocked they didn't try to insert a couple of Russian skaters just so Johnny could oh so confidently overenunciate their names.
  6. So agree with that. Having said that, I did like the treatment of Steve Trevor in the first WW movie, in that it was his compassionate humanity and self sacrifice, his goodness, that attracted Dianna to him. (Well yeah, OK it didn't hurt he looked like Chris Pine). My bigger issue with this WW1984 movie was that it had been 75+ years since his death and Dianna had not moved on. When you add the Justice League movie it appears that 100 + years she is still pining for the man. It's a narrative dead end.
  7. The masochistic "The Party's Over" gets me every time.
  8. Mercy alive but it grates on me how Meryl Streep seemingly is offered every role between the ages of 35-75. It's not even a rant on her abilities, but the fact that no actress has a range that wide. For example , She is an OK singer, but she even gets first dibs on singing roles.
  9. I've always thought the Holy Grail was Orson Welles' "The Magnificent Ambersons", which IMO is probably gone forever, Some claim a copy of the original uncut film was sent down by RKO to Orson Welles who was in Brazil; I just read there is yet another effort to try to find the excised footage. However back then they would burn all the excess footage found in their vaults/warehouses after awhile. The other lost movie frequently referenced is the silent 1924 film "Greed" by Eric Von Stronheim. Reputedly the first cut ran over 8 hours! Back to the Welles film, even a novice like me can tell where the movie was edited down but still, it's such a great work of art, oh well, coulda shoulda woulda.....
  10. I've watched soo many foreign films in my life that CC on english speaking films doesn't phase me at all. As an American, it's especially helpful on British/English movies/shows where the accents make some dialogue indecipherable to my ears. Netflix shows so so many foreign TV series, let alone movies, that I would think CC isn't that distracting once you get used to it.
  11. The Pre-Code 1933 "Babyface" starring Barbara Stanwyck was something else. The frank depiction of sex as a transactional exchange vis-a-vis men for her character to climb up the corporate ladder was so matter of fact. Spelled out so clearly her father allowed men to abuse her sexually from a young age, yet the emancipated Babyface isn't portrayed as a "victim" perse, nor some wicked wayward woman, but, so help me , someone who translates Nietzsche philosophy to exploiting men instead of being exploited. ( It's hilarious to learn they edited out all references to Nietzsche from the post Code version). Her relationship with Chico, portrayed by Theresa Harris, is unique as far as race relations in that time in films, in that it's established they are first and foremost, friends, even if the conventions of the time have Chico become her maid. A young John Wayne is one of the men she uses, and again, Stanwyck's character upward mobility is contrasted with the men who think they are using her, yet they let their emotions get in the way while Babyface leaves her feelings at the door. Sidenote: Didn't realize so many pre-Code films are *lost* in that the perceived racier bits were edited out in subsequent airings and some footage has not been recovered. It was serendipitous that they "found" the original Babyface.
  12. caracas1914

    Mank (2020)

    At the risk of sounding like a cultural philistine but this is a movie for only the critics to love. The admittedly detailed craftmanship (B/W cinematography) overwhelms the premise of the film and bare bones there is no genuine driving narrative. The film tries to drum up suspense for the gradual reveal as to why Mank "betrayed" Hearst/Marion Davies and my impression was there isn't anything there, it's certainly not even the irony of a "Rosebud" reveal. As others have said, the film is not genuinely about the making of Citizen Kane but more Mank's ambivalence with his Hollywood existence/experience, 30's politics, Orson Welles trying to squeeze a screenplay out of Mank, and the fake facade of tinseltown. Yet all these narrative threads seem half assed. They get some "details" right, but I couldn't help but wonder to what purrpose? I will say It is the first time I've ever seen the MGM wonderkind Irving Thaldberg portrayed as a duplicitous weasel. The title character should be magnetic/charismatic/, Allegedly Hearst loved having Mank front and center at Hearst Castle dinners because of his wit, but as played by Gary Oldman he's one note: washed up, bitter and self destructive throughout the film. However I concur with all the accolades Amanda Seyfried is getting, her Marion Davies in a relatively brief role is a fleshed out interesting person, and she conveys the ambivalence that Marion supposedly had about her own fishbowl existence as Hearst's long time mistress. Another distracting note: We get that Mank was this prematurely aging self destructive person boozing his way to an early grave (though he lived 13 more years after Citizen Kane) but having said that, Gary Oldman is way too old looking. When the character states he's 43 , you do a double take. Gary's Mank appears older than Luis B. Mayer, WR Hearst, etc, and when the film flashbacks to 1930, when he's suppose to be a fairly youthful 33 Oldman still looking 63 + years old is just too much cognitive dissonance for me. All the contemporary characters including his wife and brother seem decades younger than him. Even Gary Oldman is not that good of an actor to pull off the illusion.
  • Create New...

Customize font-size