Replies: 89 Unseemly Comments
Considering the current state of affairs, don't you think it would be festive if we offered to hold the Oscars online here at HHW? Or would that be unseemly?
Posted by JMK @ 03/19/2003 08:28 AM PST
My Ask BK question is prompted by some postings at the end of yesterday's notes regarding an internet review of the DVD of WEST SIDE STORY. You and a few dear readers called the critic who wrote it a few names, and based on the review I would tend to agree with you. Therefore I'd like to ask what critics (in any media) either current or past do you most respect and which do you think don't know what they are talking about? Also, how much influence do you think critics actually have on the success or failure of a film/play/tv show, etc.?
Posted by William E. Lurie @ 03/19/2003 08:28 AM PST
This is kind of a leftover post from yesterday...
Ron Pulliam: FYI, the "making of" feature on the DVD of 7 Brides for 7 Brothers includes an interview with Tommy Rall (whom I admire at least as much as you do!). One of the great unsung talents. I loved him in films, and was lucky enough to see him in Milk and Honey.
Posted by Pam @ 03/19/2003 08:35 AM PST
Dave - due to the nature of the internet...you have four answers from me to the question you asked ... check the archive for yesterday... 8-D
Yes, yes, yes. The internet is wonderful. I have contacted fans and found information heretofore unknown to me about the Misses Allison Hayes and Frances Farmer. I have also been able to share my knowledge of said beauties with others. Unfortunately, I have been unable to locate Miss Allison Hayes' three nephews - the sons of her half brother William - but one never gives up hope.
My ASK BK question for the day is one that I have been wondering for sometime.
The television sitcom nowadays has what has come to be known as an A story and a B story. They run along through the 22 minutes. When I was little...and beyond...one story per episode was fully explored. I LOVE LUCY, MY LITTLE MARGIE, I MARRIED JOAN, etc....took the entire episode to develop and wrap up a storyline.
When did this A/B stuff start? And do you, BK, think it is because television performers today can't sustain a full 22 minutes, or are casts so large two stories are needed? And do you prefer the one-story style of sit-com or the A/B style?
Posted by Jrand52 @ 03/19/2003 08:37 AM PST
I just read the late posts from yesterday. I'm sure that Dave doesn't mean it to come across that way, but I really understand why Lulu reacted and responded the way she did - the post had real "tone" to it. As for "Steve" - well, we all know the game by now and it's laughable and not even worth paying attention to, which no one is, thank goodness.
My comments on that "review" and the "reviewer" stand. He cannot write a sentence in English, he has no sense of film, and, most importantly, who cares about his opinion of the film? The Internet is overrun with these guys - all of whom are very young and all of whom do this to get free DVDs. Anyone can start a site, say they're a "reviewer" and get on these lists. And I wouldn't even take what he says about the transfer with any worth, having seen his criticism of other transfers which have been wonderful. I always have to laugh when they go on and on about "grain" or "excessive grain" because they simply don't understand what an optical is, and that this is the way the film looked when it came out. Most of these people have never seen any of these classics in a theater, so they cannot and do not know from whence they speak. However, I still would have no problem with them reviewing the DVD itself (even thought I always take it with a grain of salt, or at the very least, pepper), but I don't want an in-depth review of a film from the likes of these people, because they have no writing skills and no critical skills.
And let me just say it loud and clear - I don't find Natalie Wood OR Richard Beymer bland, I thought she did a terrific job and I thought he was fine. And I thought his several references to "pretty boys" was offensive.
Lulu's points were all well-taken and she expressed them very well (not just because I agree with them, which I do).
Posted by bk @ 03/19/2003 08:38 AM PST
Pam - thanks for reminding me of the Tommy Rall interview. 7B47B and THE IRON GIANT were the first two DVD's I purchased. They are still a couple of my favorites.
I still think that if they had found a way to do the barn-raising onstage, 7B47B would have had a much longer Broadway run!
Posted by Jrand52 @ 03/19/2003 08:54 AM PST
Thanks, Pam, for letting me know about the interview with Rall.
I, too, have had folks drop me a line because of something they found searching the internet -- and it's always been something I've discussed here on HHW. The most recent was the request for the lyrics to "The Little Prince" from a guy in Mexico who shared my love of the film -- something I expressed right here on this messageboard some time ago when we were listing our favorite Lerner-Loewe songs, IIRC (that's "If I Recall Correctly" in internet lingo -- oh! A Bruce Kimmel reference!!!).
HHW appears to be a very searchable site -- even from Google and other search engines.
Heaven knows we don't shy away from expressing opinions about everything!
I have the original widescreen DVD issue of "West Side Story" and it is the finest transfer of the film I've ever seen, including the Criterion and MGM LD releases. I was heartened to read that there is virtually no difference between it and the new 2-DVD...except for those blighted extras! PLEASE someone tell me if it's really worth $40 to buy for JUST those extras!
Ooh! Ooh! I found an internet site on DTS and it offered up a lot of informationa about DVD titles released with DTS capability. And THEN it told me about DTS Neo:6 -- a format that allows you to listen to anything recorded in stereo -- CD or DVD -- in surround (assuming you have surround speakers). I can do this already with my receiver, but it's not true surround, and it makes me wonder if the Neo:6 is different and offers better sound.
Posted by Ron Pulliam @ 03/19/2003 09:19 AM PST
I find the discussion of this critic, and criticism in general, fascinating. I think that the growth of the internet, and the proliferation of "review" sites such as this one, illustrate the inherent problems with art criticism in general.
As BK rightly points out, anybody with the money can start a site like this and call him/herself a 'critic'. But likewise, anybody with money can start a magazine, or even a newspaper, and begin posting his/her views as informed criticism. Somehow, we are willing to accept those opinions as more valid, because they are lent credence by their publication in print.
When one watches the critics on network television, one is struck by the notion that just about anybody can offer their opinion, even if they are just a shill for the media outlets releasing the product, and somebody will tune in to listen.
So, which is worse? A culture where only those with money are entitled to dictate to the great unwashed what they should and shouldn't like? Or a more democratic culture where any idiot with a home PC and some time on his hands gets to call him/herself an 'expert' and pontificate on the merits of art?
I don't have an answer to this question; I merely offer it for discussion...
Of course, we could all just ignore the critics outright, and just form our opinions for ourselves....but that's probably asking too much, isn't it? ;-)
Posted by Dave @ 03/19/2003 09:22 AM PST
All I know is that I'd like to have a resource where I can read an accurate, informed review of a DVD (the transfer, the sound, the extras, whether it comes in a snapper case or a keep case, etc.) without having to wade through the puerile rantings of a wanna-be "film critic" who is wholly ignorant and derisive of all films pre-1996.
As someone once wrote in a letter to Photoplay years ago in response to Clark Gable's performance as "the uncrowned king of Ireland" in the biopic "Parnell": "Gable is good in roles where he gets tough with women. That's what I like, and that's what I'll pay to see."
What I like is accurate and useful information about newly-released DVDs without any accompanying blather, and that's what I'll pay to see.
Posted by Lulu @ 03/19/2003 09:34 AM PST
BK-
Does it annoy you,as it most certainly does me,that MGM especially does not have an insert or booklet in a large percentage of their DVDs?What goes on here?
Posted by Arnold M. Brockman @ 03/19/2003 09:47 AM PST
Re: The stage 7B47B - they could have done the barn raising onnstage (look at PLAIN AND FANCY). The problem was that so many movie songs were cut and replaced with inferior new songs. A stage7B47B with the film score would probably been a lot better received.
Re: The new release of WSS. What people are tending to forget in discussing the price is that in addition to 2 DVDs you also get a deluxe book with the complete screenplay among other things. This is what has made the price a little higher than book-less DVDs and if the book is well done than it makes the whole package worth the extra price.
Posted by William E. Lurie @ 03/19/2003 09:52 AM PST
So, getting back to Ask BK day....
Speaking of Tommy Rall, what performers do YOU, bk, think are underappreciated and/or should have had more prominent careers (Dear Reader Susan excepted, of course)?
Posted by Pam @ 03/19/2003 09:57 AM PST
I don't think these kids have ANY money to start these sites. All they have is savvy computer knowledge and the ability to spend ten bucks for a domain name. And, of course, the ability to pontificate about things they have no knowledge of. That's where the canker gnaws.
Ron - wait for MY report on the WSS transfer - this guy is notorious for not having a clue, especially if he's talking about "shimmering" which means to me that he is most likely not watching it on a widescreen television. The original DVD is excellent, no doubt, but I'm quite certain they've gone back and even if the element is the same, the technology has improved in the last three years.
Posted by bk @ 03/19/2003 10:28 AM PST
I recently sent a letter to the Film Score Monthly mailbox (it was printed in a Friday column a couple of weeks ago) taking to task a writer who had suggested that a now-deceased film music critic named Page Cook ought to be ignored now because (1) he's dead, (2) because he was terribly biased and critical of now-vaunted talents, and (3) because "critics" who have never composed a film score have no credibility in criticizing a film score.
My letter chastised the ingorance of that last comment -- critics do not have to be able to write, sing, or act, or dance, or compose music. What they must be able to do is to bring an informed mind with both a schooled and aesthetic understanding and love of the art form they are critiquing to the table every time they open their mouths or pick up their pens.
I suggested to the original writer that his own thoughts and opinions were more than likely heavily formed by several such persons throughout his life.
This does not mean critics have to have studied in school, but they have to have acquired their knowledge/love through reading, watching, and listening to music, books, plays, poetry, etc., and communicating with those who actually CREATE the art and with those who acknowledge and pay homage to the art (i.e. proponents of the art form).
A "music critic" who loves rap and hip-hop can probably do rap and perform hip-hop as well as the so-called "professionals" (based on what "professional" product I've heard, at any rate), but I can guarantee you they know nothing of 19th century or 18th century music, nothing of opera, and quite possibly little of popular music, jazz, rhythm and blues, AND rock'n'roll, not to mention disco (oh, no! We must NEVER mention disco). Imagine, then, that such a critic finds himself with a fistful of remastered Broadway musicals to review -- or a dramatic score from a film such as "Far From Heaven" or "The Hours" -- or, shudder, the soundtrack to a movie musical like "West Side Story" or "Chicago."
What, THEN, can one expect?
ZERO! SQUAT! NADA! -- In all respects -- including informed opinion, knowledge of music, any taste whatsoever, and reading level above 7th grade.
I'm being generous with the grade level because today's 7th grade reading levels, on average, are on a par with 4th grade levels from the 1960s.
Yes, internet sites manned by would-be critics proliferate -- and all for a certain amount of "notice" and not a few for the "freebies" they hope they'll get for reviewing/mentioning product -- and because they rely on the freebies to have something to write about, liking everything they hear.
One of my favorite guffaws in recent years was a posting to the filmus-l (film music) discussion list by a dude who announced that his website had just posted the year's best achievements in film music/film music production and congratulated one of the filmus-l regulars for having been named CD producer of the year
In truth, that site had a fair number of contributing writers, but equally in truth was the fact that only the one person whose the year's "BEST" -- the same one who "announced" the winners on our list. A one-man band and trumpet line! What a freaking farce that was!
Posted by Ron Pulliam @ 03/19/2003 10:40 AM PST
So, it turns out that Dick Smothers, Jr. (son of Dick, Sr., nephew of Tommy) is now a porno actor. Can this be seen as definitive proof that what name you give your child ultimately determines the direction his or her life will take?
Discuss.
Posted by Lulu @ 03/19/2003 10:44 AM PST
Point of clarificaton -- a few words got lost above -- the year's best were chosen by only ONE person -- the same person who posted the "winners" to the discussion list (the contributors to the site had no part in it).
Posted by Ron Pulliam @ 03/19/2003 10:44 AM PST
Bill - this is true. I saw 7B47B on tour with Howard and Jane and kept wondering...where did THAT song come from?
Posted by Jrand52 @ 03/19/2003 10:46 AM PST
What's your point, Lulu?
Posted by Pussy Galore @ 03/19/2003 10:47 AM PST
Yeah, Lulu. Just what are you trying to say?
Posted by Isaac Phineas Freely @ 03/19/2003 10:58 AM PST
tilt
Posted by Steve @ 03/19/2003 10:59 AM PST
Personally, I think the theory that children's names influence their adult lives is a lot of hooey.
Posted by Seymour Buttz @ 03/19/2003 11:00 AM PST
Amen!
Posted by Brother Ben @ 03/19/2003 11:10 AM PST
Now, let's not get TOO randy, or I shall have to tell the story of The Randy Vicar and the Toaster Oven.
Posted by bk @ 03/19/2003 11:19 AM PST
What is everyone wearing to watch the Oscars on Sunday evening?
Posted by Joan Rivers @ 03/19/2003 11:20 AM PST
...Oh, I believe that's Terrance Mann playing a lawyer on As The World Turns...
Great discussions! Although after checking up on yesterday's posts, I was disappointed that we didn't get to 100 posts - although, Jrand's "progressive" posts were quite interesting. Ah, the trials and tribulations of the internet!
Questions for Ask BK Day:
Which Broadway house/theatre is/was your favorite?
Which non-West Coast movie theatre is/was your favorite?
Since Jason and I supped at Joe Allen last week... Have you been to Angus' new place?
Do you think an "old fashioned" TV variety show could work in today's market?
Posted by Jose C. Simbulan @ 03/19/2003 11:25 AM PST
BK: I'm certain it could never get TOO randy here -- especially as we all know you check up on us constantly to see who's posting what where, and under which name! ;)
Joan: I think I'll wear my Vera Wang topped off with my Fendi (as becomes a legend most). For my shoes, I'll take a page from Cybill's book: Nikes.
Posted by Lulu @ 03/19/2003 11:33 AM PST
Note to self: Must have member of entourage call Harry Winston's and scam some sparklers.
Posted by Lulu @ 03/19/2003 11:35 AM PST
I wouldn't go so far as to call them interesting, Jose. LOL
And - Jose - did you see the Dinah Shore PBS compilation last week? Great stuff...and it certainly made me start thinking about all the variety shows I used to watch. They certainly used color to GREAT advantage!
Posted by Jrand52 @ 03/19/2003 11:35 AM PST
'nother note to self: Cleavage is in again. Have member of entourage scam several free Wonderbras (one in each color).
Posted by Lulu @ 03/19/2003 11:37 AM PST
OMG...remember Marilyn in GENTLEMEN PREFER BLONDES when she was handed a tiara. She held it in front of her breasts trying to figure out what it was. Then Norma Varden said...it's a tiara, you wear it on your head. Marilyn looked at her like she was crazy...then tried it. "Oh...I just adore finding new places to wear diamonds!"
Posted by Jrand52 @ 03/19/2003 11:49 AM PST
My favorite Marilyn/Lorelei moment was when she was escorted into her quarters on the ship. She took one look at it and exclaimed: "My! It's just like a room, isn't it!"
Posted by Ron Pulliam @ 03/19/2003 12:29 PM PST
As one of those *critics* who does write about dvds on the internet, I abhor having to place myself in the same category as that guy over there at dvdmovieguide.com. I have yet to read an intelligent, educated remark come out of his mind onto the computer screen.
When reviewing a dvd, I think that the most important elements of the review are:
Does it look like the theatrical print?
Has the sound been modified for better or for worse?
Has a careful restoration dutifully restored the film to film-like quality?
Does the dvd has extra features worth checking out?
Will the dvd be a welcome addition to one's home library, or is it one that will sit there upon the shelf?
Secondarily are the opinions on the film itself of the reviewer; AND NEVER should a critic write along the lines of "I hate *insert genre here* but I still have to review this. . .holy merde!
Rather, we (as writers) should find original ways of recapsulating the film's plot and its highlights: be they acting, set pieces, songs and dance, or what-have-you. This provokes an interest of some kind on the part of the reader, it's making a positive statement about the writer as well as the reader. Personally, I really don't care whether that particular reviewer LIKED or HATED WEST SIDE STORY, I hated the fact that he had nothing stylish, enlightening or fascinating to say.
Well, I am enlighened to the fact that he is not a FILM LOVER, his lack of historical film knowledge has knocked my off my chair on more than one occasion.
If you're not a lover of FILM, how can you possibly be in a position to write about films?
I really didn't mean to get onto a soapbox here, forgive me, but it is a worthwhile topic of discussion.
And since I brought it up, any Hainesies and Kimlets who would like to peruse my own reviews online can look me up at www.dvdlaunch.com, or can read me in print in Scarlet Street magazine - where hopefully, I'm not guilty of that other reviewers sins. . .
Posted by td @ 03/19/2003 12:46 PM PST
With all the posts today on internet "critics", I want to clarify my Ask BK Day question. I am referring to professional critics, not these so-called "critics" that post on the internet.
Posted by William E. Lurie @ 03/19/2003 12:50 PM PST
Speaking of the Oscars, what follows is a list of New Academy Award Categories, shamelessly stolen from a Usenet newsgroup:
*Best Performance By A Closeted Male/Female In A Crumbling Sham Marriage
*Best Shameless PR Leak That Backfired And Caused People To Ask Who In Hell Needs 60 Suitcases For A 3 Day Visit To London
*Most Convincing Attempt At Rehab
*Most Likely To Grant An Interview With Barbara Walters In 2003 In A Vain Attempt To Keep Their Career From Imploding
*Most Likely To Have Their Dirty Laundry Aired On thesmokinggun.com
*Best Backstabbingly Ill-gotten Role
*Most Glaringly Miscast Comedian Trying To Look Serious
*Most Glaringly Miscast Thespian Trying To Look Fun
Posted by Lulu @ 03/19/2003 12:56 PM PST
I just read the late posts from yesterday. . . hey, I started the topic on that reviewer's lack of writing skills. Why should arrows and slings be shot at BK, accusing him of manipulating behavior?
If you felt that you were *manipulated* into reading that review, well, what can I say?
Posted by td @ 03/19/2003 12:57 PM PST
td: I feel it's only right to point out that it was I who wrote that I thought Dave's post seemed to imply that BK was manipulative, a charge which Dave steadfastly denied. In looking back, I was probably responding more (as BK noted) to what I perceived to be the tone of Dave's letter than to any specific allegations (which were, in fact, not explicitly made).
Posted by Lulu @ 03/19/2003 01:01 PM PST
No offense taken, hopefully non given. . .
There just was something a little bit off-kilter in the tones of those early morning posts.
And Lulu, I'd rather discuss Eric over Julia Roberts any given day, any given time. . .
Now, about those Hemingways. . .
Posted by td @ 03/19/2003 01:20 PM PST
LOL...Marilyn-Lorelei moments... So funny.
I adore this film. The scene at the outdoor bistro when Marilyn and Jane Russell sing "When Love Goes Wrong" is so wonderfully staged and sung. I know that we have praised Russell here for her work in GPB - so this is just deja vu - but Bravo, Jane.
BK - I have only seen FEAR STRIKES OUT a couple of times, but I liked it. It was a harrowing account of a true life story and one of the few times that I really liked Karl Malden in a role - hated his character as he wanted me to. Wait, I take that back, I really liked Malden in GYPSY as well.
I also do movie reviews on the internet at www.epinions.com. But that site asks specifically for the writers opinion about a product or film.
Posted by Jrand52 @ 03/19/2003 01:21 PM PST
Okay I need to vent. I just read RATM, which I have been doing less and less lately. How can it be that one person has seen fit to totally dominate the group??? Can anyone answer that? Besides that fact, almost every message (that person writes) has so little content. Either that or I can't read the format to understand what is being said. And now half the messages are attacks at regulars. Or private emails being posted without permission.
It is so frustrating. I would hope that this person is a good decent person underneath. But I wish someone would tell them to leave the group, because they have ruined it for everyone else.
Okay venting done.
Btw, I'm sure most of you won't know what this is. But I have a huge craving for a poutine. It's actually really good. It's french fries with gravy and cheese! (I know it might not sound that great, but it is very good).
Jennifer
Posted by Jennifer @ 03/19/2003 01:40 PM PST
Jennifer---
That's Freedom fries.
Posted by William E. Lurie @ 03/19/2003 01:43 PM PST
Jennifer! Ah, poutine! Know you've got me craving them. I remember hearing about them from friends who would get them at Montreal Expos' games, and then I worked with a woman who's family would overnight her the cheese curds every once and a while. And when I was at the Mall of America, there was a fast food stand that sold them. YUMMY!!!!!
-Hmm.. maybe that will be my next "splurge" after my current stint with Chet and Eileen. -I took a planned break from them when I headed up to NYC last week - I had to have my friend Twinkie! Now as where to find poutine in Richmond, VA... Road trip?
Posted by Jose C. Simbulan @ 03/19/2003 02:02 PM PST
"my friend Twinkie" - Hmmm... would that be a Freudian or Jungian slip?
Posted by Jose C. Simbulan @ 03/19/2003 02:03 PM PST
Hey! Some of my best friends are twinkies.
Posted by Jay @ 03/19/2003 02:14 PM PST
I mis-read the above as "Some of my best friends are twinks." Oops.
Jennifer: The "person" to whom you refer is one Stephen Newport, who has indeed taken over ratm and declared it his own. He is certainly one of the most obnoxious ego-ridden cretins I've ever run into on Usenet. Our very own td has been taking him on recently, and several others are as well. I really grew to hate him when he saw fit to put my name in a thread header - as if that was some big revelation as to my usenet identity. He's a vicious, spiteful, loser in my opinion, and he inserts himself into every thread whether he has something to say or not. He also has a habit of starting a thread and then responding several times to himself - because no one else cares to play.
Posted by bk @ 03/19/2003 02:28 PM PST
I second bk's opinion on Natalie Wood and Richard Beymer in WEST SIDE STORY. Wood especially is charming and gets to the core of the tragedy at the end. Beymer does well enough. Not so sure he's convincing as someone who was once the toughest fighter in the Jets, but other than that, I like his performance, and Jimmy Bryant's singing voice matches Beymer's speaking voice just fine.
Put me down as another HUGE fan of Tommy Rall. I think he stole KISS ME KATE from the other more familiar actors, and he's great in SEVEN BRIDES and MY SISTER EILEEN. I wish he could have had more of a film career because he had looks, talent, and ease on the screen. He's in a bit of PENNIES FROM HEAVEN, too, but I guess everyone already knew that.
My question for bk: What are your opinions on Andrew Lloyd Webber's music? As a non-fan myself (liking only bits and pieces of some of his scores), I was curious what you thought of his work. Thanks.
Posted by Matt H. @ 03/19/2003 02:58 PM PST
Game...Set...Match to Jennifer!
Steve? Any pertinent observations?
Posted by Ron Pulliam @ 03/19/2003 03:03 PM PST
Jose wrote:
Jennifer! Ah, poutine! Know you've got me craving them. I remember hearing about them from friends who would get them at Montreal Expos' games, and then I worked with a woman who's family would overnight her the cheese curds every once and a while. And when I was at the Mall of America, there was a fast food stand that sold them. YUMMY!!!!!
-Hmm.. maybe that will be my next "splurge" after my current stint with Chet and Eileen. -I took a planned break from them when I headed up to NYC last week - I had to have my friend Twinkie! Now as where to find poutine in Richmond, VA... Road trip?
I didn't think anybody would know what a poutine was. Yah I guess you could buy the cheese curds and the gravy and make them yourself. I'm not sure what cities sell them. You can get them everywhere in Montreal. Although I have a feeling that they are probably much rarer elsewhere in Canada.
Jennifer
Posted by Jennifer @ 03/19/2003 03:17 PM PST
Note to Jennifer:
Hopefully you read the thread that I began "The Lorenz Hart Prolificacy Award;" for it lists (courtesy of a google search) 13,700 posts by the dynamic duo named "Steve & Rhonda."
This search did not even take into account the myriad of other names Stephen has used over his short cretinous stay at RATM: Stephen Ross, Stephen Newport, RandyGal69 et al. .
He is a sad, pathetic man, and at one time (before recieving private emails encouraging me to join in a massive ratm attack on a great friend) I, too, was convinced that there was something innately human about him.
This, of course, is the man who only recently attempted to post my home telephone number onto ratm.
Posted by td @ 03/19/2003 03:44 PM PST
Jennifer -- my cousins go nuts over poutine. Now if I could only find a great smoked meat sandwich in California!
Posted by Angela @ 03/19/2003 03:44 PM PST
Well, now I'm hungry for a poutine. Can you Fed Ex me?
Posted by bk @ 03/19/2003 03:47 PM PST
FYI -- I'm not Stephen Newport.
Posted by Steve @ 03/19/2003 03:48 PM PST
Dear Reader Angela:
I know they smoke a lot of interesting things here in California, but I had no idea they smoked meat!
Posted by Jay @ 03/19/2003 03:55 PM PST
Note to Steve:
I never doubted you for one minute! You're a nice person.
Posted by td @ 03/19/2003 03:59 PM PST
Dear BK (Since this is the last Ask BK day before the Oscars): What films have won the Oscar for Best Picture that you wish had been won by another nominated film, and why?
And have you ever heard the story about the Randy Vicar and the Victrola?
Posted by S. Woody White @ 03/19/2003 04:49 PM PST
No, "Steve" I know you are not Steve Newport, because you post from aol and Mr. Newport posts from WebTV.
Posted by bk @ 03/19/2003 05:23 PM PST
Is the Steve you are discussing above the same Steve who gets mentioned almost every week in chat? Granted he sounds obnoxious but why is knocking him a major topic on this here site, first in chat and now in posts? Shouldn't that be done on the website he dominates where most people know who he is?
Posted by William E. Lurie @ 03/19/2003 05:23 PM PST
I'm under the impression, from remarks made in the chat room, that Stephen "Steve" Newport is known to lurk here from time to time.
Have I misinterpreted?
Posted by Ron Pulliam @ 03/19/2003 05:27 PM PST
Ron, BK, and all the Hainsies and Kimlets in general:
I have to chime in on whether the new WSS 2-DVD set is worth paying $40.
It may be. It may not be. I haven't seen it. However, I HAVE just ordered it for the price of $26.10, POSTAGE PAID.
Before you EVER buy a DVD, new or used, make sure you FIRST check its price at my favorite internet shopping site (drumroll, please):
www.deepdiscountdvd.com
Guys, if there's a better-priced DVD store anywhere on the web, I want to know about it!
(I'm not a stockholder, or anything. Just wanted to share.)
Posted by Sigerson Holmes @ 03/19/2003 05:38 PM PST
As a follow-up to Jose's excellent question, IF there were an old-fashioned variety show today, whose show would it be? Would you have an ensemble with no star (although someone is always singled out), or would you have a star host/perform? And if so, who?
Posted by Kerry @ 03/19/2003 06:12 PM PST
I, too, love Tommy Rall. I thought he was great in "Kiss Me Kate" and wish he'd had bigger roles in more movies.
Posted by Kerry @ 03/19/2003 06:15 PM PST
Wow, who knew anybody else would crave poutine. Bruce, I seriously doubt you'd like it. For some reason I don't see you as a "gimme some cheese and gravy with my fries" type of guy. But there must be some places in the US that sell this! It is good. Although everybody here who I know (who could have it anytime) ... well they all hate it.
William said:
Is the Steve you are discussing above the same Steve who gets mentioned almost every week in chat? Granted he sounds obnoxious but why is knocking him a major topic on this here site, first in chat and now in posts? Shouldn't that be done on the website he dominates where most people know who he is?
William, I only posted about him because I needed to vent. Yes, ideally one could complain on the actual website. But if you saw the way this guy operates, you really can't win by doing that. All I'd probably get for my effort is a new thread with my name as the heading. Or maybe I'd get some mean comments printed on various other website. Or maybe I'd get my address or phone number plastered on the internet.
I didn't mention his name, because I really don't want to be mean, or cause any trouble. I was just so frustrated because RATM used to be a great place. And now it is basically ruined.
Jennifer
Posted by Jennifer @ 03/19/2003 06:35 PM PST
My questions for BK:
1) Do you remember the first fan letter you ever received? Was it from a fan of your movies or your tv appearances?
2) Do you remember the first time someone asked you for your autograph? Where did that happen?
Posted by Laura @ 03/19/2003 06:38 PM PST
"A window of opportunity" arose, and we have taken military action against Iraq.
Posted by td @ 03/19/2003 07:32 PM PST
I have just received a copy of "Lawrence Of Arabia" from a friend in Paris. (Guess who?) I just had a quick peek. O'Toole is so wonderful in the role. I think I may have mentioned that I watched "Lawrence AFTER Arabia a couple of weeks back. Ralph Fiens does a creditable job but I missed the O'Toole blue eyes.
For some reason "Lawrence Of Arabia" has not been released here in OZ on DVD. Yet another positive story from the HHW connection and circle of friends.
With all the posts about WSS I now understand why it is now a cheap DVD here. It is a superceded model. The "NEW" DVD has not been released here as yet.
I am still waiting for "Passion" adn "Sweeney Todd" on DVD. Any news out there?
Question for BK: Do you like the David Lean epics? If so, which were your favourites?
Posted by Tom from Oz @ 03/19/2003 07:33 PM PST
I wish someone would close the windows.
Posted by Tom from Oz @ 03/19/2003 07:34 PM PST
Dear BK,
Have you ever been to the circus? Do you like clowns? I think clowns are scary. Can you juggle? Can you ride a unicycle?
Posted by Sandra @ 03/19/2003 08:34 PM PST
Hey, I thought of some "ask BKs":
Once, I ran across this site while doing a Google search for I-can't-remember-what, and found an early "bk's notes" entry. In it, you noted that someone had visited here and searched haineshisway for all mentions of the words "cole slaw."
Not only has it made me self-conscious about which words I search for at haineshisway, but it's made me wonder -- is that still the strangest search you've noticed, or have visitors searched for even stranger things here?
Also, what's the cheapest site YOU'VE ever seen to buy DVDs online?
Posted by Sigerson Holmes @ 03/19/2003 08:48 PM PST
Just caught up reading
yesterday's and today's posts,
and thought I'd check back for
my first HHW post. I found the
site just a week or so after it
started, lurked for a couple
weeks, and first posted on
December 4, 2001, in notes
#26. Now we're some 477
days later and I have diligently
read every single one of them,
as well as every dear reader
post, and the archives tell me
that this is the 211th set of
notes to which I have posted.
Posted by Jed @ 03/19/2003 10:16 PM PST
"Bruce"
Why do you put my names in quotations marks when you address me?
Posted by Steve @ 03/19/2003 10:32 PM PST
"Guy"
The same question I just asked "Bruce".
Posted by Steve @ 03/19/2003 10:33 PM PST
Because you showed up out of the blue, made little comments which made little or no sense, very much like some other folks under other names, so until we know a little bit more about you, "Steve", I'm afraid the quotes will stay. You see, when a newbie like MattH joins our merry troupe, he posts just like everyone else, gets into the swing of things, doesn't do one word epigrams and off-kilter remarks which no one understands. No big deal really, but I'm ever so certain you know exactly what I'm talking about, oh, yes, I'm ever so certain you do.
Posted by bk @ 03/19/2003 10:45 PM PST
Well old stick, you may have answered your own question with that dippy little slip of the tongue.
Posted by "Guy Haines" @ 03/19/2003 10:51 PM PST
Jennifer -- have you ever tried poutine Italian style? It's with a fabulous red sauce instead of gravy. Yummy!
Posted by Angela @ 03/19/2003 10:53 PM PST
Nothing like eating poutine while watching Monday Night Curling. :)
Posted by Lulu @ 03/20/2003 02:11 AM PST
Do you mean Belle Poutine?
Posted by Gerold Frank @ 03/20/2003 02:14 AM PST
What's all this about no red carpet at the Oscars? Listen, for those $30,000 gift bags each of those people are getting, we deserve some spectacle, and we should get it. They're being nicely compensated to take some risks and provide us with a dog and pony show, so I want that red carpet reinstated, stat.
Posted by Lulu @ 03/20/2003 04:01 AM PST
Lulu, I would like to see the arrivals as well, but I don't know if I could take listening to all they have to say.
Remember when Sascheen accepted Marlon's Oscar? Does anyone else remember that the award following it was for Best Actress. One of the presenters was Miss Raquel Welch. And after the nominees were named and the winner was about to be announced, Miss Welch in her inimitable way declared: "I hope she doesn't have a cause."
Posted by Jrand52 @ 03/20/2003 04:18 AM PST
Jrand: That's the beauty of the Red Carpet System. With Joan and Melissa yammering away at them, not a one of the celebs would be able to get a word in edgewise.
As it is, America will have to make do with a lot of black-pantsuited actors and actresses striving to look "earnest" and "concerned." Oy vey. I wish they'd learn their place in our lives and stick to it.
Posted by Lulu @ 03/20/2003 05:05 AM PST
They can't even learn their lines.
Posted by Jrand52 @ 03/20/2003 05:48 AM PST
When BK says that Steve "made little comments which made little or no sense", I'm not sure who should take greater offense - Steve or the rest of the dear readers. I, for one, had no trouble understanding any of Steve's posts. I may not always have agreed with them (e.g. re: Bernard Herrmann), but they always made perfect sense. If he chooses to be brief in his comments, well... brevity is the soul of wit, is it not?
Steve, I should let you in on a little secret. Although BK may feign objection to contrary posts, and pretend to be paranoid about spies and interlopers, you should recognize that this is only to spur "merry discussion", which will contribute to the number of posts on this site. He appreciates people like you and me more than he is willing to admit... ;-)
So, welcome! Post, and post often!
Posted by Dave @ 03/20/2003 06:41 AM PST
Lulu - bite your tongue.
Posted by Jrand52 @ 03/20/2003 07:08 AM PST
Jrand: Huh? Wha?
In the words of the inimitable John Banner: "I know nussink!"
Posted by Lulu @ 03/20/2003 07:12 AM PST
You will go far, my little bubchik.
Posted by Jrand52 @ 03/20/2003 07:16 AM PST
Tone is EVERYthing.
Tone! Tone! Tone!
Posted by Ron Pulliam @ 03/20/2003 08:11 AM PST
Note to Gil Cates: I will watch the Oscars this year IF:
*The Red Carpet is reinstated.
*You get the truly BIG stars to be presenters. I'm talking about Legends of Entertainment: ALF, Brooke Shields, Charo. Celebrities of that caliber. Ben Affleck? Who the heck is he? I've never seen him featured on even ONE episode of The Love Boat.
*You talk Rob Lowe into doing a reprise of his duet with Snow White. They did Ike 'n' Tina last time, so let's try for Peaches 'n' Herb this time, with Rob and Snow singing -- what else? -- "Reunited."
If these simple demands are met, I might just deign to tune in on Sunday, Mr. Cates.
Posted by Lulu @ 03/20/2003 08:20 AM PST
Ron: Yes?
Posted by Franchot Tone @ 03/20/2003 08:20 AM PST
To Anne Welles: Mr Bellamy will like that, he thinks it gives the office tone.
Posted by Miss Steinberg @ 03/20/2003 08:46 AM PST
I'm sorry...should that not have been "Taupe is EVERYthing!"?
"Taupe!" "Taupe!" "Taupe!"
Posted by Did I read him correctly? @ 03/20/2003 09:39 AM PST
I'm sorry...should that not have been "Taupe is EVERYthing!"?
"Taupe!" "Taupe!" "Taupe!"
Posted by Did I read him correctly? @ 03/20/2003 09:39 AM PST
