Thursday, March 02, 2006

I Went To The Commercials, and a Film Broke Out

:: :: Answer Man

Great article here from Roger Ebert's Answer Man Q & A. Letters from people all stating the obvious problems with going to the theatre and Roger's responses. They even cite some quotes from theatre execs that clearly show how out of touch they are. You hear stuff like -- "Earlier this year, I wrote a letter to AMC complaining about all the commercials. They responded by saying that their research shows 'audiences actually enjoy the ads very much.'" -- and you lose any sympathy whatsoever for dropping box office totals and piracy issues. If that's their attitude, they deserve what they get.

Oh and here's another quote from Roger that I thought was hilarious -- "Speaking of movies that go over the top, "Running Scared" goes so far over the top, it circumnavigates the top and doubles back on itself; it's the Mobius Strip of over-the-topness. I am in awe. It throws in everything but the kitchen sink. Then it throws in the kitchen sink, too, and the combo washer-dryer in the laundry room, while the hero and his wife are having sex on top of it."

Comments on "I Went To The Commercials, and a Film Broke Out"


Blogger The Original LRU said ... (March 02, 2006 4:40 AM) : 

Haha.. this was best quote:

Maybe I have a small bladder, but I've never even been able to buy a soda while going to the theater since an excruciating experience when I was 12 years old, bouncing up and down in agony during the last half of "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade." Why is it that theaters don't offer a few minutes in the middle the movie to make a quick run to the loo? I think they call it an intermission.


Blogger Kris said ... (March 02, 2006 12:17 PM) : 

Sorry, Oilers lost last night! Unfortunately, Wideman didn't score, but McClement did, so I'm happy. Wideman didn't stay out of the penalty box though, which doesn't surprise me...
By the way, you're from Ontario, right? Where in Ontario?


Blogger Eaglewing said ... (March 02, 2006 2:49 PM) : 

yeah, they lost alright. wasn't pretty. outshot St. Louis 37-12, lost 4-2. Good going for Kingston boy McClement, though...

Yes, I'm from Ontario...wonder what will happen in Toronto if the Leafs miss the playoffs. Now that wouldn't be good :)


Blogger Kris said ... (March 03, 2006 12:41 PM) : 

well, they may have bested the oilers, but they couldnt beat the Flames. stupid Iginla insisted on scoring that stupid empty-netter because he's a stupid stat-hog and couldn't just leave the stupid score alone at 2-1. No, he had to be STUPID STUPID STUPID and take that stupid goal that looks the same on the stat sheets, so the stupid idiot gets the credit for a stupid "ugly" goal, as they're called sometimes...
Jerome Iginla is a cheap, stupid, bad winner. (sorry, I'm not happy about that. I could care less that the blues lost, it happens!... but there was NO POINT in taking that goal!!!)


Blogger Eaglewing said ... (March 03, 2006 2:31 PM) : 

Well, you have to score an empty net goal if the opportunity is there. He'd look pretty stupid if he didn't and St. Louis came back to tie the game. It's still a cheap goal though.

An "ugly" goal, however, is like the one Mike Foligno scored for Toronto (back in '93?) when he deflected one in off his ass :)


Blogger Kris said ... (March 06, 2006 12:13 PM) : 

yeah, i know he had to take it. but not everyone does... wasn't there this urban legend about a player who refused to take it, he just shot the puck into the corner and said afterwards that "empty net goals are for fags"? lol, that must have been hilarious. THAT would be a definite ugly goal.


post a comment