|
|
Post by Wendy on Dec 17, 2003 2:07:43 GMT -5
I've noticed that I write the word "definitely" and "(un)fotunately" here, alot. I don't know if I spell them correctly or not. Commas! Commas drive me crazy, I stare at my posts sometimes, trying to figure out where to put them. Sometimes, I just don't put any in and have a great big run-on sentence  Look at me, remembering to watch Angel. I'll be back in an hour. Me too with the commas. I just know there are cringe-worthy posts out there with my name on them that are full of comma mistakes. |
|
|
|
Post by DaveCrenshaw on Dec 17, 2003 5:06:23 GMT -5
I come bearing glad tidings from the Kingdom of Gondor, and their new king, Aragorn. And from their brothers, the Riders of Rohan.
After three-and-a-half hours in a crampt theater seat watching The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, I'm exhausted and my butt aches. I don't think I moved once during the entire movie, nor did pretty much anyone else in the theater. The movie is long. But it's completely and totally awesome. Everything that was good about The Fellowship of the Ring or The Two Towers is in this movie. If you thought the battle of Helms Deep was impressive, wait until you see the seige of Gondor. Also the Nazgul (ringwraiths, aka black riders) are back and nastier than ever. Eowyn has some fantastic moments. Gollum has some fantastic moments. Heck everybody has some fantastic moments. The critics who have said "Best Picture" in regards to this movie weren't kidding; it was completely awesome.
The bad parts of this movie? Uh.....well, there was the part where there wasn't any intermission, and the seat I was in was really hard and crampt. Also, the theater didn't have surround sound, just basic stereo. That pretty much covers the bad stuff.
The movie is long but it moves really well. Actually, the film was over before I realized three-and-a-half hours of my life had passed by, it's that engrosing. Then, of course, my brain registered the complaints from my butt and my bladder, and only then was I willing to believe that the movie was indeed three-and-a-half hours long.
Even still, I want to see it again, and again and again. Only 11 months until the release of the extended DVD.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Reetta on Dec 17, 2003 6:07:09 GMT -5
On Part 83, Dave wrote:
>>Reeta, for the record, I've been very impressed by your English, to the point I wondered at times if you were a native Skandinavian, or a transplant from an English-speaking country. But then my experience in Iceland and Norway was that the people there often spoke better English then I did; a very, very intelligent people, indeed, those Skandinavians.
So if every so often you stumble and remind us that you aren't writing from Boise, Idaho, well, we most certainly forgive you. Because I'm certain you don't want to see me attempt your language, it wouldn't be pretty. <<
Why, thank you. I'm glad that at least my apology was understandable enough. When I was trying to write it, it was like flogging a dead horse. I was practically banging my head against the keyboard but still could not think of the right words. There comes a time when one has stuffed too much English into one's brain and should rest for a while. I can only do so much before I get a total mental block.
Seriously, I know you are forgiving and sympathetic people but still I feel that I had to say what I said.
You are right. I've fooled you the whole time. I'm a crazy old auntie from Idaho. No. Really, I only posted this so that I can rant on few of my other favourite topics. I believe it is true that Scandinavians have a fairly good knowledge of English. I believe the reason is that we have a good educational system, many people have a personal interest in the language and the fact that the television shows are not dubbed here like they are in, for example, Central Europe. It really has a big impact. I could go on and on about the virtues of subtitles and of keeping the original audio track but let's not go there now. I will say this though: if you cannot hear the actor's real voice, what is the point? It's like taking away part of his or her personality.
Rant over.
|
|
|
|
Post by DaveCrenshaw on Dec 17, 2003 6:43:42 GMT -5
On Part 83, Dave wrote: >>Reeta, for the record, I've been very impressed by your English, to the point I wondered at times if you were a native Skandinavian, or a transplant from an English-speaking country. But then my experience in Iceland and Norway was that the people there often spoke better English then I did; a very, very intelligent people, indeed, those Skandinavians. So if every so often you stumble and remind us that you aren't writing from Boise, Idaho, well, we most certainly forgive you. Because I'm certain you don't want to see me attempt your language, it wouldn't be pretty. << Why, thank you. I'm glad that at least my apology was understandable enough. When I was trying to write it, it was like flogging a dead horse. I was practically banging my head against the keyboard. There comes a time when one has stuffed too much English into one's brain and should rest for a while. I can only do so much before I get a total mental block. Seriously, I know you are forgiving and sympathetic people but still I feel that I had to say what I said. You are right. I've fooled you the whole time. I'm a crazy old auntie from Idaho. No. Really, I only posted this so that I can rant on few of my other favourite topics. I believe it is true that Scandinavians have a fairly good knowledge of English. I believe the reason is that we have a good educational system, many people have a personal interest in the language and the fact that the television shows are not dubbed here like they are in, for example, Central Europe. It really has a big impact. I could go on and on about the virtues of subtitles and of keeping the original audio track but let's not go there now. I will say this though: if you cannot hear the actor's real voice, what is the point? It's like taking away part of his or her personality. Rant over. I agree with you about dubbing. I don't generally watch foreign-language movies, not because there isn't good foreign-language programming out there (there most certainly is), but because if we don't speak the language, we have two choices -- (1) subtitles, which mean you get to pick between reading the dialogue or watching the action, and (2) dubbing, which always sounds so unnatural (the least they could do is find an voice actor who at least sounds remotely like the original actor, and record that voice actor in an environment as close to the original situation as possible, so the voice quality matches; never mind the fact that most dubbing actors seem to have no gift whatsoever for proper inflection). Guess I should count my blessings that I speak (ok, comprehend) fluent English, which is the predominant language for most recorded entertainment in the world. |
|
|
|
Post by S'ewing S'cubie on Dec 17, 2003 6:50:42 GMT -5
[shadow=black,left,300]SEX![/shadow] Just wanted to be the one to jump-start Wicked Wednesday. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Dec 17, 2003 6:51:59 GMT -5
I agree with you about dubbing. I don't generally watch foreign-language movies, not because there isn't good foreign-language programming out there (there most certainly is), but because if we don't speak the language, we have two choices -- (1) subtitles, which mean you get to pick between reading the dialogue or watching the action, and (2) dubbing, which always sounds so unnatural (the least they could do is find an voice actor who at least sounds remotely like the original actor, and record that voice actor in an environment as close to the original situation as possible, so the voice quality matches; never mind the fact that most dubbing actors seem to have no gift whatsoever for proper inflection). Guess I should count my blessings that I speak (ok, comprehend) fluent English, which is the predominant language for most recorded entertainment in the world. Reeta, that's really interesting about how your television doesn't dub their programs. Has it always been like that? I wonder how and why that policy began in the first place. Was it because it was too difficult to translate into your language? I saw the re-released version of Mad Max with it's original Australian dialogue and was really blown away by how much better it was. (Edit - for Wicked Wednesday - Mel Gibson, of course, would be HOT in any language.) Can't wait to see LOTR, ROTK - Academy Award worthy? |
|
|
|
Post by S'ewing S'cubie on Dec 17, 2003 6:56:50 GMT -5
I was looking at my nice Willow-inna-hat avatar. Am I the only one who sees a resemblence between Willow and our Patti? Like (I can say this 'cause Patti & I are about the same age) Patti could be Willow's mom or Auntie or something. Except I don 't think she'd be as neglectful as Willow's mother was--and she certainly wouldn't try to set her on fire!* *unless Willow got between her and Spike.  |
|
|
|
Post by S'ewing S'cubie on Dec 17, 2003 7:01:38 GMT -5
I come bearing glad tidings from the Kingdom of Gondor, and their new king, Aragorn. And from their brothers, the Riders of Rohan. After three-and-a-half hours in a crampt theater seat watching The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, I'm exhausted and my butt aches. I don't think I moved once during the entire movie, nor did pretty much anyone else in the theater. The movie is long. But it's completely and totally awesome. Everything that was good about The Fellowship of the Ring or The Two Towers is in this movie. If you thought the battle of Helms Deep was impressive, wait until you see the seige of Gondor. Also the Nazgul (ringwraiths, aka black riders) are back and nastier than ever. Eowyn has some fantastic moments. Gollum has some fantastic moments. Heck everybody has some fantastic moments. The critics who have said "Best Picture" in regards to this movie weren't kidding; it was completely awesome. The bad parts of this movie? Uh.....well, there was the part where there wasn't any intermission, and the seat I was in was really hard and crampt. Also, the theater didn't have surround sound, just basic stereo. That pretty much covers the bad stuff. The movie is long but it moves really well. Actually, the film was over before I realized three-and-a-half hours of my life had passed by, it's that engrosing. Then, of course, my brain registered the complaints from my butt and my bladder, and only then was I willing to believe that the movie was indeed three-and-a-half hours long. Even still, I want to see it again, and again and again. Only 11 months until the release of the extended DVD..... Thanks for the mini-review. I'm planning to go this weekend and am glad it's worth the time. I must remember to Potty-ize before the show and minimize the Coca-cola intake. I got my extended DVD of The Two Towers last week, but haven't had the time to sit and really watch it. I want to see it before I go to ROTK. Hey, Patti! Want a movie-buddy? |
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Dec 17, 2003 7:04:50 GMT -5
[shadow=black,left,300]SEX![/shadow] Just wanted to be the one to jump-start Wicked Wednesday. ;D *COMING, DEAR!* Oh, it's just you, Diane. Barking up the wrong tree, here. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Dec 17, 2003 7:06:01 GMT -5
I was looking at my nice Willow-inna-hat avatar. Am I the only one who sees a resemblence between Willow and our Patti? Like (I can say this 'cause Patti & I are about the same age) Patti could be Willow's mom or Auntie or something. Except I don 't think she'd be as neglectful as Willow's mother was--and she certainly wouldn't try to set her on fire!* *unless Willow got between her and Spike. My son saw her avatar and said - who's that? Willow? She's got some wicked dark eyes. |
|
|
|
Post by Josey on Dec 17, 2003 7:07:07 GMT -5
I could never spell 'necessary' until I came up with a neat little mnemonic to help. 'One collar, two sleeves and an arse.' (1 c, 2s's and an a)
Now the ones that really foil me are conscious, license, and guarantee. (sp?)
Josey - who gives daily thanks for her spell checker.
Plus, does this count towarsd Wicked Wednesday? I did say arse ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Reetta on Dec 17, 2003 7:21:29 GMT -5
Reeta, that's really interesting about how your television doesn't dub their programs. Has it always been like that? I wonder how and why that policy began in the first place. Was it because it was too difficult to translate into your language? I saw the re-released version of Mad Max with it's original Australian dialogue and was really blown away by how much better it was. (Edit - for Wicked Wednesday - Mel Gibson, of course, would be HOT in any language.) Can't wait to see LOTR, ROTK - Academy Award worthy? Yes, it has always been like that. I don't think they ever even considered dubbing the programs. Of course, during the first decades of television, there probably were not that many foreign programs on TV. I don't think it's the difficulty of the translation (after all, there are subtitles). I believe that from the beginning the government had some sort of educational aspect in mind. They also thought people would learn foreign languages that way (of course, combined with school education). I understand that dubbing is necessary in underdeveloped countries where there are people who can't read but in countries with 100% literacy, I don't really see the point. I don't feel bad about the subtitles. I manage to follow the action onscreen and read the dialogue. Of course, it could be because I've always had to do it. I'm used to it. And there was a time when I really needed the subtitles. I guess I could have a slightly different take on the subtitles if I did not understand the dialogue at all. But I mostly watch English language entertainment so that's not a problem for me. Well, I'd better log out now and take the dog out. I'll come back in the evening. Because it is Wednesday. |
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Dec 17, 2003 7:30:25 GMT -5
Just a big S'cubie hello - can't be around much today, and am not caught up from yesterday afternoon -
But just wanted to get a post in for wacky Wednesday!
I hope to do my Restless analysis this weekend, I started on it, but am constantly interrupted! Not good since my biggest challenge with this one is just choosing how to approach it.
Love everyone's Christmassy avatars.
|
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Dec 17, 2003 7:42:50 GMT -5
Just a big S'cubie hello - can't be around much today, and am not caught up from yesterday afternoon - But just wanted to get a post in for wacky Wednesday! I hope to do my Restless analysis this weekend, I started on it, but am constantly interrupted! Not good since my biggest challenge with this one is just choosing how to approach it. Love everyone's Christmassy avatars. You could put a few ornaments and some snow on your Springy avatar? I just wanted to say how much I've enjoyed your last 2 reviews. And everyone's comments. It sure adds to my enjoyment when I rewatch the episodes. Thanks so much! |
|
|
|
Post by DaveCrenshaw on Dec 17, 2003 7:57:15 GMT -5
Reeta, that's really interesting about how your television doesn't dub their programs. Has it always been like that? I wonder how and why that policy began in the first place. Was it because it was too difficult to translate into your language? I saw the re-released version of Mad Max with it's original Australian dialogue and was really blown away by how much better it was. (Edit - for Wicked Wednesday - Mel Gibson, of course, would be HOT in any language.) Can't wait to see LOTR, ROTK - Academy Award worthy? The initial critical response for Return of the King says that the smart money will be on Peter Jackson for best director and ROTK for best picture. And Gollum deserves an award for best whatever-the-heck-he-qualifies-as in a supporting role. The acting is also top drawer, so don't be surprised if some of the actors get seriously considered for best actor/actress, lead or supporting. Most of the Ocar buzz is because it's simply a great movie, although there have been plenty of great genre films that went completely ignored by the Academy in the major categories (apparently the Oscars are no more enlightened in this area than the Emmys are). But there are factors -- ROTK is the last chapter of an outstanding trilogy, which earns it bonus points. Also, one critic was saying that the Academy also likes to reward filmakers/studios/etc for gutsy moves in making better than average films, and so New Line Cinemas willingness to risk their own future existence had LOTR gone over like a lead balloon should also earn ROTK some extra votes at award time. |
|
