Just in case... Spoiler space...



























































That'll do.

I may (or may not) have got hold of a good copy of this from Mininova,
and (might have) watched it while commuting today.

Not bad. Not great, but not bad. Even if you didn't know it going in,
you'd soon realise it's a Michael Bay movie. Long, slow shots of
aircraft (usually helecopters, but in this case not always) for no
apparent reason, a pounding rock backing track, slomo shots at
otherwise inappropriate times, and saccharin sentimentality at any
given opportunity...

.... having said that, though, I quite enjoyed it in a "turn your brain
off" kind of way. The sense of humour was good, and at times had me
giggling out loud on the train - unusual for a Bay movie.

And the effects and set-pieces were (predictably) superb.

All in all, a solid 7 out of 10. Let down by the aforementioned
predictability and gung-ho Americanisms, but better than usual in the
humour department. Might just scrape an 8.

Anyone else (allegedly) seen it?

Paul.
-- 
.. Bill Maher: "Tulips aren't flowers, they're gay onions"
.. A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
.. Is there a moron carrot above?  Have you replied to it?  Are you sure?
.. EMail: Unless invited to, don't; it's likely to be automatically deleted.

Paul Harper wrote:
> Just in case... Spoiler space...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> That'll do.
>
> I may (or may not) have got hold of a good copy of this from Mininova,
> and (might have) watched it while commuting today.
>
Is this non-existant copy a DVD-Rip or just a telesync?

-- 
Alex

"I laugh in the face of danger. Then I hide until it goes away"

www.drzoidberg.co.uk www.ebayfaq.co.uk

On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:14:14 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"
<alexNOOOOOO!!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:

>Paul Harper wrote:
>> Just in case... Spoiler space...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> That'll do.
>>
>> I may (or may not) have got hold of a good copy of this from Mininova,
>> and (might have) watched it while commuting today.
>>
>Is this non-existant copy a DVD-Rip or just a telesync?

Telesync.

Paul.

Paul Harper wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:14:14 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"
> <alexNOOOOOO!!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Paul Harper wrote:
>>> Just in case... Spoiler space...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That'll do.
>>>
>>> I may (or may not) have got hold of a good copy of this from
>>> Mininova, and (might have) watched it while commuting today.
>>>
>> Is this non-existant copy a DVD-Rip or just a telesync?
>
> Telesync.

Thought so.
I'll be waiting till it's out at the cinema
-- 
Alex

"I laugh in the face of danger. Then I hide until it goes away"

www.drzoidberg.co.uk www.ebayfaq.co.uk

if I had seem it, I think I would like it, and the effects and the robots 
would be very cool
def a DVD buy

"Paul Harper"  wrote in message 
news:953g93tsaqinu7emieulg9v50nkgqkr7n1@4ax.com...
> Just in case... Spoiler space...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> That'll do.
>
> I may (or may not) have got hold of a good copy of this from Mininova,
> and (might have) watched it while commuting today.
>
> Not bad. Not great, but not bad. Even if you didn't know it going in,
> you'd soon realise it's a Michael Bay movie. Long, slow shots of
> aircraft (usually helecopters, but in this case not always) for no
> apparent reason, a pounding rock backing track, slomo shots at
> otherwise inappropriate times, and saccharin sentimentality at any
> given opportunity...
>
> ... having said that, though, I quite enjoyed it in a "turn your brain
> off" kind of way. The sense of humour was good, and at times had me
> giggling out loud on the train - unusual for a Bay movie.
>
> And the effects and set-pieces were (predictably) superb.
>
> All in all, a solid 7 out of 10. Let down by the aforementioned
> predictability and gung-ho Americanisms, but better than usual in the
> humour department. Might just scrape an 8.
>
> Anyone else (allegedly) seen it?
>
> Paul.
> -- 
> . Bill Maher: "Tulips aren't flowers, they're gay onions"
> . A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
> . Is there a moron carrot above?  Have you replied to it?  Are you sure?
> . EMail: Unless invited to, don't; it's likely to be automatically 
> deleted.

On 2007-07-13, Paul Harper  wrote:
> Just in case... Spoiler space...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> All in all, a solid 7 out of 10. Let down by the aforementioned
> predictability and gung-ho Americanisms, but better than usual in the
> humour department. Might just scrape an 8.

I've lived in the US for almost 6 years now, and I didn't notice any
"gung-ho Americanisms". This could of course just be me not seeing the
woods from the trees :)

Can you describe what you mean?

On 2007-07-14, Dr Zoidberg <alexNOOOOOO!!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That'll do.
>>>>
>>>> I may (or may not) have got hold of a good copy of this from
>>>> Mininova, and (might have) watched it while commuting today.
>>>>
>>> Is this non-existant copy a DVD-Rip or just a telesync?
>>
>> Telesync.
>
> Thought so.
> I'll be waiting till it's out at the cinema

It's more than worth the wait, I think. As Paul said, just turn off and
have a good time.

On 17 Jul 2007 00:30:00 GMT, Av 
wrote:

>On 2007-07-13, Paul Harper  wrote:
>> Just in case... Spoiler space...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> All in all, a solid 7 out of 10. Let down by the aforementioned
>> predictability and gung-ho Americanisms, but better than usual in the
>> humour department. Might just scrape an 8.
>
>I've lived in the US for almost 6 years now, and I didn't notice any
>"gung-ho Americanisms". This could of course just be me not seeing the
>woods from the trees :)
>
>Can you describe what you mean?

The whole attitude of the military, mostly, but also the presumption
when exposed only to Americans, for the robots to be talking about
"humans" and "humanity". We are NOT all Americans, and do not all
share their values or attitudes, and they certainly do not speak for
the rest of us. Thanks goodness!

It's kinda what the Russians are getting pissy about lately and for
once, rarely, they have a point.

Paul.
-- 
.. Bill Maher: "Tulips aren't flowers, they're gay onions"
.. A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
.. Is there a moron carrot above?  Have you replied to it?  Are you sure?
.. EMail: Unless invited to, don't; it's likely to be automatically deleted.

On 2007-07-17, Paul Harper  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
> The whole attitude of the military, mostly, but also the presumption
> when exposed only to Americans, for the robots to be talking about
> "humans" and "humanity". We are NOT all Americans, and do not all
> share their values or attitudes, and they certainly do not speak for
> the rest of us. Thanks goodness!
>
> It's kinda what the Russians are getting pissy about lately and for
> once, rarely, they have a point.

I'm not exactly sure what you want then, from a movie made in America.
In every movie made, do you want one person from every country shown?

On 17 Jul 2007 17:27:41 GMT, Av 
wrote:

>On 2007-07-17, Paul Harper  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> The whole attitude of the military, mostly, but also the presumption
>> when exposed only to Americans, for the robots to be talking about
>> "humans" and "humanity". We are NOT all Americans, and do not all
>> share their values or attitudes, and they certainly do not speak for
>> the rest of us. Thanks goodness!
>>
>> It's kinda what the Russians are getting pissy about lately and for
>> once, rarely, they have a point.
>
>I'm not exactly sure what you want then, from a movie made in America.
>In every movie made, do you want one person from every country shown?

The point, soundly being missed!

It's difficult to answer that without merely repeating what I wrote
earlier. Why is it necessary to portray America as speaking for, or
representing, the world when it clearly does not by some considerable,
even massive, margin? What is it in the weak and insecure American
psyche that demands that? 

I know Transformers is a Michael Bay movie, and therefore bound to be
simplistic, loud, jingoistic and overly proud of itself (anyone would
have thought Pearl Harbour was a close-run thing by the end of that
piece of trash) but surely the whole padded-groin-forward "Mission
Accomplished" in a tight flightsuit and a corset attitude has been
shown to be unconvincing and false by now? Even to the densest of
red-state inbreds like George W. Gump?

Unless they really *do* think they're winning hearts and minds in
Iraq?!

As to what I want from a movie made in America (or anywhere else for
that matter) - no propaganda, please.

The rest of the world knows they have lots of nice shiny toys - a fair
few of them have been killing British troops in the Middle East, so we
know what they look like. Orgiastic military love-fests in back-lit
slowmo merely serve to illustrate that the toys and the groin rule the
brain and the conscience far too often.

Apart from that, you're spot on :-)

Paul.
-- 
.. Bill Maher: "Tulips aren't flowers, they're gay onions"
.. A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
.. Is there a moron carrot above?  Have you replied to it?  Are you sure?
.. EMail: Unless invited to, don't; it's likely to be automatically deleted.

On 2007-07-17, Paul Harper  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> The whole attitude of the military, mostly, but also the presumption
>>> when exposed only to Americans, for the robots to be talking about
>>> "humans" and "humanity". We are NOT all Americans, and do not all
>>> share their values or attitudes, and they certainly do not speak for
>>> the rest of us. Thanks goodness!
>>>
>>> It's kinda what the Russians are getting pissy about lately and for
>>> once, rarely, they have a point.
>>
>>I'm not exactly sure what you want then, from a movie made in America.
>>In every movie made, do you want one person from every country shown?
>
> The point, soundly being missed!
>
> It's difficult to answer that without merely repeating what I wrote
> earlier. Why is it necessary to portray America as speaking for, or
> representing, the world when it clearly does not by some considerable,
> even massive, margin? What is it in the weak and insecure American
> psyche that demands that? 

I guess what I'm specifically looking for is an example.
I don't think the Star Spangled Banner flying in one or two scenes
qualifies, though.

Are you upset because all of the movies are based and shot in the US,
which makes it seem like that is the only view of the world as portrayed
by movies? If so, my answer is quite simple: other countries need to
start making movies that people want to watch internationally.

> As to what I want from a movie made in America (or anywhere else for
> that matter) - no propaganda, please.

So none of the "America is a pretty great place! Really, it is!" stuff?

> The rest of the world knows they have lots of nice shiny toys - a fair
> few of them have been killing British troops in the Middle East, so we
> know what they look like. Orgiastic military love-fests in back-lit
> slowmo merely serve to illustrate that the toys and the groin rule the
> brain and the conscience far too often.

Oh I get it. You don't want them to be accurate or show off the
well-known technological power of the US military.

On 17 Jul 2007 20:31:43 GMT, Av 
wrote:

>Oh I get it.

No, Av, you don't. Ah well...

Paul.
-- 
.. Bill Maher: "Tulips aren't flowers, they're gay onions"
.. A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
.. Is there a moron carrot above?  Have you replied to it?  Are you sure?
.. EMail: Unless invited to, don't; it's likely to be automatically deleted.

On 2007-07-18, Paul Harper  wrote:
>>Oh I get it.
>
> No, Av, you don't. Ah well...

No I do, and my reply was entirely sarcastic :-)
My point was simply that if you want to change things, change them!
the UK makes really, really good movies when people there give a shit.
They just don't do it enough, or invest enough money in.

It's illogical to expect anything different than the status quo from
Hollywood. For them, things are going swimmingly and there's no reason
to rock the boat.
More people like what they see, than not. It's just that, as usual,
people complain when they're unhappy but you rarely hear from people
when they're happy. Go to a number of third-world type countries like
India, and you'll hear people talk about the US like it's some awesome
mystical magical place. It's all about culture and perception IMO.

And let's not talk about Russia, they'll get pissed off at the US for
any reason they can find, and it's chiefly the result of jealously and
ambition.

I'm not saying that there aren't quite a lot of people in the US (like,
the current administration) who think they're above the rest of the
world and better than everyone else. Of course there are. But I think
it's unfair to paint an entire country (any country) with the same
brush.

On 18 Jul 2007 04:22:32 GMT, Av 
wrote:

>On 2007-07-18, Paul Harper  wrote:
>>>Oh I get it.
>>
>> No, Av, you don't. Ah well...
>
>No I do, and my reply was entirely sarcastic :-)

Ah. Okay - missed that one :-)

>My point was simply that if you want to change things, change them!
>the UK makes really, really good movies when people there give a shit.
>They just don't do it enough, or invest enough money in.

It's partially a cultural difference thing, I think. We've not had the
deep seated movie-culture environment that seems to be so important
over there in the US. Sure, we've got our share (more than our share,
from my perspective) of celebrity-watching morons, but it's unlikely
that anything Paris Hilton will ever lead a serious news broadcast in
this country!

(Caveat: I suspect Sky News has done exactly that, but what would you
expect from the UK's version of Fox News?!) Mind you, the BBC is
dumbing down its coverage too. I suspect it won't be long before I
have to rely upon Al Jazeera International for my impartial(ish) news.

Having said that, I did enjoy immensely the YouTube clip of the US
newsreader refusing to read the Paris Hilton story on air, and the
amused response from Joe Scarborough who was (presumably) guesting on
the show. Excellent!

>It's illogical to expect anything different than the status quo from
>Hollywood. For them, things are going swimmingly and there's no reason
>to rock the boat.

Fair point. They are making a mint from feeding the lowest common
denominator, why change? Much like the TV. And newspapers. And
magazines. And radio. And.....

>More people like what they see, than not. It's just that, as usual,
>people complain when they're unhappy but you rarely hear from people
>when they're happy. Go to a number of third-world type countries like
>India, and you'll hear people talk about the US like it's some awesome
>mystical magical place. It's all about culture and perception IMO.

For most of India *electricity* is mystical and magical. In that sort
of environment it takes little to impress people - which is why
religion does so well, sadly. But that's a topic for a completely
different rant :-)

>And let's not talk about Russia, they'll get pissed off at the US for
>any reason they can find, and it's chiefly the result of jealously and
>ambition.

Not too sure about that. While it's true that Russia is a borderline
"rogue state", based upon its military and commercial activities (and
corruption) globally, so is the US.

I suspect that Russia just wants to be taken more seriously, and since
in the not-too-distant future it stands to be a more important oil and
gas supplier than the Middle East there's no reason why they shouldn't
be, in my view.

>I'm not saying that there aren't quite a lot of people in the US (like,
>the current administration) who think they're above the rest of the
>world and better than everyone else. Of course there are. But I think
>it's unfair to paint an entire country (any country) with the same
>brush.

Which brings us back to the original point. That's exactly the image
and attitude that the US is exporting - through its media, through its
military, through its politics and through its commerce.

It should come as no surprise when people take that attutude as
reflecting the country as a whole.

I know you live there, Av, but I've been there too. In my experience,
it's not all that inaccurate. I have no desire to return.

Paul.
-- 
.. Bill Maher: "Tulips aren't flowers, they're gay onions"
.. A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
.. Is there a moron carrot above?  Have you replied to it?  Are you sure?
.. EMail: Unless invited to, don't; it's likely to be automatically deleted.