Anyone seen "Flight 93" yet?

On 28 Apr 2006 06:02:26 -0700, "Flyingmonk"
wrote:

You mean unlike "Titanic"?

Oh gosh, I really liked Titanic!

- all the best, Dan Ford

Wikipedia: the belief that 10,000 monkeys playing at
10,000 keyboards can create a reference work

"Cub Driver" wrote:

You know, it might have been the old vet weeping by the graveside that
did in SPR for me. That was a flag. Whoops! What's this all about! The
horror of war, one more time?

I found the scene moving. It seemed to be about a man mourning the friends
he'd lost and perhaps his own lost youth. I never got the idea it was an
anti-war movie: Spielburg and Hanks are both known to be great admirers of
WWII veterans. Hanks' character reminded me of the combat vet's I have
known; ordinary guys who did the job they were asked to do without a lot of
fuss.

The whole film seemed to me to be about sacrifice--how terrible and noble it
is to give one's life for a cause. The reading of Lincoln's letter
absolutely broke me up.

--
Dan

"The opposite of science is not religion; the opposite of science is wishful
thinking."
-John Derbyshire

You know, it might have been the old vet weeping by the graveside that
did in SPR for me. That was a flag. Whoops! What's this all about! The
horror of war, one more time?

I found the scene moving. It seemed to be about a man mourning the friends
he'd lost and perhaps his own lost youth. I never got the idea it was an
anti-war movie: Spielburg and Hanks are both known to be great admirers of
WWII veterans. Hanks' character reminded me of the combat vet's I have
known; ordinary guys who did the job they were asked to do without a lot of
fuss.

The whole film seemed to me to be about sacrifice--how terrible and noble it
is to give one's life for a cause. The reading of Lincoln's letter
absolutely broke me up.

I guess we're just hopeless, Dan, because I saw it the same way.

To razz "Saving Private Ryan" because of a couple of minor nits, while
missing the depth and breadth of the effort, seems silly to me. I
found it moving and, in many ways, deeply disturbing to watch -- and it
truly made me appreciate my father's generation.

Of course, I love "Top Gun", too -- so there's just no hope for me...

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

It got a rave review in The New Yorker. I will certainly see it.

I thought that was the "Kiss of Death"?

Why did you think that?

Traditionally any movie that gets a bad review in the New Yorker
usually does extremely well at the box office, and vice versa.

Of course, this is true of many critics, not just The New Yorker...

Critics are, by definition, critical. When you're a hammer, everything
looks like a nail.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

No, Jay, "Threads" was just plain terrifying. I was depressed for weeks
afterwards. "The Day After" was hoky by comparison. The only other movie
that's left me that depressed was "The Pawnbroker".

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
I was a young teenager at the time, and it was a film about nuclear war
(which in 1984, seemed only too likely). I didn't sleep properly for 3
weeks afterwards, and every flash of summer lightning had me bolt awake
in bed thinking it was a nuclear detonation - I had nightmares about
milk bottles melting in the heat. I have since watched it all
the way through - unlike "The Day After", it WAS NOT toned down. It is
the most depressing movie I have ever seen.

Wow. And I thought "The Day After" was scary!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote:

It got a rave review in The New Yorker. I will certainly see it.

I thought that was the "Kiss of Death"?

My acid test is whether *both* The New Yorker and The Wall Street
Journal* rave about the film. Here's Joe Morgenstern in the WSJ today:

NPRs movie critic, Bob Mondello, gave it a rave review yesterday. He's
usually pretty "on the mark", in my experience -- so I guess we'll be
checking it out.

I was impressed by the fact that even Mondello, a hard-bitten critic,
admitted he was emotionally drained by the experience in spite of the tricks
he uses to stay objective about films he reviews.

If anything, that makes me more doubtful that I'll go see it. I just don't
know if I could take it; I'm upset enough about 9/11 as it is.

--
Dan

'Gut feeling'

Intestinologists concur that the human gut does not contain any rational
thoughts.

What the human gut *is* full of is moderately well known.

"cjcampbell" wrote in message
oups.com...

Richard Riley wrote:
It's not the case with United 93. A lot of the film takes place
outside the airplane, in the TRACON for example. Most of the people in
those scenes are playing themselves.

Way up thread I wrote that it's an extraordinary film. I was careful
not to call it a "movie". It's a different animal. I'm surprised they
were able to make it this way.

I don't have any hope for Oliver Stone's 9/11 movie, the families of
the dead men depicted are already protesting.

Tragic. Olive Stone has to be one of the lowest of the low.


Not Michael Fatass?

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Jeff" wrote

And they say the public schools system isn't in trouble

Yeah, the trouble is, that is the type of person they are tasked with
trying to teach! g

That WAS a TEACHER. ;~(

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Cub Driver" wrote:

You know, it might have been the old vet weeping by the graveside that
did in SPR for me. That was a flag. Whoops! What's this all about! The
horror of war, one more time?

I found the scene moving. It seemed to be about a man mourning the
friends he'd lost and perhaps his own lost youth. I never got the idea it
was an anti-war movie: Spielburg and Hanks are both known to be great
admirers of WWII veterans. Hanks' character reminded me of the combat
vet's I have known; ordinary guys who did the job they were asked to do
without a lot of fuss.

The whole film seemed to me to be about sacrifice--how terrible and noble
it is to give one's life for a cause.

Hmmm...many rabid Nazis gave up their lives for a "cause". I doubt that
would qualify as "noble".

"The opposite of science is not religion; the opposite of science is
wishful thinking." -John Derbyshire

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
You know, it might have been the old vet weeping by the graveside that
did in SPR for me. That was a flag. Whoops! What's this all about! The
horror of war, one more time?

I found the scene moving. It seemed to be about a man mourning the
friends
he'd lost and perhaps his own lost youth. I never got the idea it was an
anti-war movie: Spielburg and Hanks are both known to be great admirers
of
WWII veterans. Hanks' character reminded me of the combat vet's I have
known; ordinary guys who did the job they were asked to do without a lot
of
fuss.

The whole film seemed to me to be about sacrifice--how terrible and noble
it
is to give one's life for a cause. The reading of Lincoln's letter
absolutely broke me up.

I guess we're just hopeless, Dan, because I saw it the same way.

To razz "Saving Private Ryan" because of a couple of minor nits, while
missing the depth and breadth of the effort, seems silly to me. I
found it moving and, in many ways, deeply disturbing to watch -- and it
truly made me appreciate my father's generation.

Of course, I love "Top Gun", too -- so there's just no hope for me...

Hopefully, you recognize movies for the fantasies they are. Some contain a
subtle message (SPG - the horrors of war and the costs to preserve liberty),
but the overwhelming majority are fantasies and nothing more. Many people
miss that and can't differentiate the differences.

Now, being you're a Piper driver, I'd say that that more notably
demonstrates your hopelessness :~)


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO