It's so odd.. either you guys have released a snippet from this, or I accidentally tuned in during the recording. Coz I totally recognized a large chunk, thought "Bah, I heard this before" and turned it off. Luckily, I asked Teague, and no, this was not a re-re-release or anything like that, so I listened again - and clearly, I had only heart "that chunk".

A couple of random comments:

Dunno what Trey (who obviously is both smart and had been in Berlin) was thinking when he said "German text in an English movie". Of course, Germans dub all movies with new German actors. Which is why Germans (and Italian, French, and other large european countries) totally suck at speaking English - they never hear the language. Unlike us smaller European nations which cannot afford this "luxury", we subtitle everything, and hence give the population free English training.

About the "spatial discontinuity guy", I was facepalming throughout that entire guys presentation.

See, what I see in the Shining is obvious: To my eyes, pretty much every shot looks like how a storyboard artist would draw it. When you draw a storyboard of a hotel corridoor meant to lead the eyes to two creepy girls, you draw a certain way, certain shapes fit in certain places. It looks great on the paper... and it looks awesome when turned into reality. Now, does that thing necessarily make sense as a "hotel corridor"? NO.

Look at how beautifully composed all those hall shots are, including the visual rythm the doors give, etc.

And yes, it was a set, a set built in an area intended to optimize the usage of the studio space. So it obviously made no *actual* physical sense at all (there were, in fact, no rooms behind those doors people! And the one or two that actually were, often didn't match where the "doors" on the outside walls were).

This would never have been noticed by the internet-douchebag-crowd if it hadn't been for Kubrick getting the idea of the tracking shot, telling the kid "bike around a bit as you want to, and then turn that corner, and see CreepyChick^2".... well... kid biked around, and sometimes the shot contains "cheat areas".

SO WHAT.

*facepalm* *palmtree*

It's not "Kubrick is a Genious therefore he made the Hotel 'illogical'", it's "Kubrick is Genious-ish for realizing 'I know we saw that faked corner in that one shot, but I don't give a shit because when creepy-chick^2 shows up, people will be peeing their pants anyway'"

*sigh*

Minutieabags (or however they spell it)

And Trey rocks, as usual. Y'all rock. I'm so proud having met y'all

/Z

Havn't listened yet. Did you catch the "Right here! Right now!" bit?

/Z

What, you had something snarky and you deleted it - or - you thought what I said was snarky and unconstructive?

If the former, I'd love to read your snarky version >

/Z

But you yourself agree it's not really a sequel. Your mistake is thinking of it as one. Stop! 'tis an awesome hi-budget movie preceeded by an okay-ish small budget fair... which you can think of as a test-movie, or something that just happens to use the same actors and character names. FORGET ABOUT IT, Pitch Black isn't what's important, CHRONICLES is what's important!!!!

/Z

I can't believe you didn't touch on the fact that the crash sequence is nearly identical to the crash sequence in Revenge of the Sith.... down to angles and parts of the ship falling off.

/Z

never mind, my error

/Z

About "why save the Baby", isn't it the same way you need to "save the baby" in Willow? I.e. the baby *itself* doesn't do crap. It is the *act* of saving the baby that "does crap".

That was my interpretation anyway.

Insomuch this mess of a movie is even possible to "interpret"

/Z

What is so difficult with.... wait for it.... FIVE friends in your head?

As for being "invested in the regulars", thats illogical, since, yes, I am primarily investedin Trey, Dorkman, Teague, Ryan-or-Brian, but notsomuch the others (sorry, others). So for me, the "regulars" are already diluted with "guests", so I see zero problem.

Honestly, I am pissed for every commentary that is missing Trey's gnarly tech insights, and Dorkmans razorsharp analysisisis.

/Z