Xixax Film Forum

An idea similiar to the Content Area, this may be more feasible to happen now. It is Panel Discussion and the general rules would go like this:

A general topic is agreed upon.

5 delegates volunteer to discuss the topic, are given a week or so in which to research the topic.

Each delegate would be forced to write at least once a day at an extended length of discussion and insight, whether it be an original idea to the topic or a reply to what someone else has said.

Wildcards exists in anyone who wants to add comments in the discussion. Delegates could respond to this as well, but the delegates have to write something every day, contributing everything they studied.

The reason I think this would work over the Content Area for now is that no one would be forced to committ to anything for an extended period of time, but just to the specific topic in the limited time frame it will be discussed. No person holds rank as being able to be delegate before anyone else so anyone can participate and everyone is encouraged to do so at least once. Also, everyone should be recommended to suggest topics and make sure it is general enough to last a week between 5 people.

I think this can work because it forces nothing upon administrators in creating any new or special areas. It can easily be held within any thread. I'm just hoping administrative approval will make this more official and get people to want to contribute.

sounds good, but I think a week of research then a week of insights would be stressful for most people here since most of the posters have jobs family school and drug habits and such.  So...longer research time and shorter posting time?  five people for five days for example.

Quote from: petesounds good, but I think a week of research then a week of insights would be stressful for most people here since most of the posters have jobs family school and drug habits and such.  So...longer research time and shorter posting time?  five people for five days for example.

Sounds fine. Lets hope some excitement comes for this project to actually see it get off the ground. In theory, to just start it, we'd need only five people to sign up for the first one. I'd be willing, no doubt. Also, people should recommend topics in this thread too.

Ugh, research?! Can't I just argue with ignorant enthusiasm?


But I'm interested. Definitely. At least to give it a trial run.

How would the wild cards work?

name an example please,  i'm not following  you very well.

Quote from: SoNowThenHow would the wild cards work?

Well, the panel discussion wouldn't be that different from any other thread. Its just discussion would be guranteed with the 5 delegates who would have to write and anyone else who replied on this discussion would be a wildcard. That's all.

I'm in...

Quote from: cronopioname an example please,  i'm not following  you very well.

OK,  lets say the topic of "Is Paul Thomas Anderson overrated?" is introduced. The delegates who volunteered to research this would reply in length, at least once a day, to this topic. It would be in a thread and everyone else would be willing to reply as well. Its just the 5 delegates would be forced to really go into detail and argue amongst each other and the wild cards involved in the discussion. Its like any other thread, but with more detail and analysis applied.

thanks,    sounds very good. what do the admins. think about this?

I think forced, planned debates will fizzle out and die very quickly.  The better ones just happen.

Quote from: OnomatopoeiaI think forced, planned debates will fizzle out and die very quickly.  The better ones just happen.

Well, it only has to last 5 days between 5 people really and everyone supplying opinions can only help it. This also doesn't have to happen all the time. Just when a topic comes across and people want to debate it. Also, much of the value in this will come from how good the topic is and not any topic will be allowed. It will have to a be a topic that will make people want to take specific sides and defend it ardently. I'm not saying these discussions will prove longer or better than other ones, but I think a lot of discussions going on right now are kinda superficial. If this succeeds in any point, it will be that the people were forced to delve into the subjects.

Quote from: cronopiothanks,    sounds very good. what do the admins. think about this?

i think it really doesn't matter what admins think. anyone can pretty much do anything they want. (save disruptive and/or spammish behavior)

i myself am swamped w/ research work for school, but encourage others to rock on w/ this if they have the time/means/energy.

go for it!

Quote from: OnomatopoeiaI think forced, planned debates will fizzle out and die very quickly.  The better ones just happen.

I beg to differ... I will respond with more in a week

I think the best debates are spontaneous and develop naturally. But if we can find some really specific troubling and complex topic, it could work.

will the DEBATE itself will be spontaneous, because how do you know what the other person is going to say and how are you going to respond in advance?  So the idea, if I read correctly, is that five people would be well-researched enough, passionate enough, and prepared enough for something to come out of the debate, since it's between at least five people who supposedly know what they're talking about.  I see no wrong in assigning a topic, I don't think that's forcing any kind of tension (though a question like "is PTA overrated", especially on this board, is probably not a good idea) or contriving any kind of argument.

will the DEBATE itself will be spontaneous, because how do you know what the other person is going to say and how are you going to respond in advance?  So the idea, if I read correctly, is that five people would be well-researched enough, passionate enough, and prepared enough for something to come out of the debate, since it's between at least five people who supposedly know what they're talking about.  I see no wrong in assigning a topic, I don't think that's forcing any kind of tension (though a question like "is PTA overrated", especially on this board, is probably not a good idea) or contriving any kind of argument.

i just don't see the point of limiting it to five people.

Quote from: petewill the DEBATE itself will be spontaneous, because how do you know what the other person is going to say and how are you going to respond in advance?

What will happen is that someone will bring up a topic, people will get excited about it and say they want to do it. Then I (considering no admin is needed to run this) will lay out a schedule of when it will happen and the official question and let those involved run rampant with ideas and research. On the first day of the actual discussion, people will post their original analysis on the subject. The days after that will be everyone responding to each other and trying to disprove theories while validying their own. The point will be to find people with opposite views of each other to get into this. More than one person can hold a similiar view, but there should be a healthy division of where 2 people may feel this way and 3 people feel the other way. Of course, they won't feel exactly the same way and the ones that agree generally will also get to argue on finer points.

Quote from: cbradi just don't see the point of limiting it to five people.

That's why the wildcard system exists. Also, its hard enough to get 5 people to agree to thoroughly research a subject and then be on call for 5 days to respond to other people writing.

Basically, it's a bit like the Slate "Movie Club", no?
I'm up for that. Nice work, there, GT.

sounds like homework to me.

go for it. i'd like to see intelligent researched discussion for once.

i might join if the topic interests me, please make it sumthing that will be interesting to read and to write about.

and please, no topics about pta movies or politics. if i wanted to go to sleep i'd have sex w/ god damn's sister.

Sounds like some constructive discussions, which is always a good thing.  

If it's kept under control, I'm sure it'll be great.

I'm up for it.  I have an idea already for a topic.

I so want to be, like, always in the five.

Quote from: ©bradand please, no topics about pta movies or politics. if i wanted to go to sleep i'd have sex w/ god damn's sister.

Yeah, I agree, let's pick stuff that's specific and bizarre, that only us movie geeks would truly care about.

Specific like "Do the dance moves in the beginning of Do The Right Thing have any significance to the film?"  or specific like "What decade was best for movies?"

Are you going to use yes or no questions, or abstract answers, or what?

I'm really digging the concept, though.

whatever the question, it must be prefaced by " Without being pretentious, or glib.."

....i like the limit to five people idea...that way.......the select five can PM each other and (since the panel discussion would be in an open thread) teach  each other a new secret language....that way only the five people know what is going on..........for example.......



NEON:.....dfhfgfghfdhg   hdfhhfd  iierofhfhruf...fifr.........fkjgirgfhjfguihg.....???

SLORG: ....ahahaha.......yeuieuyuhfggfgffhfh.......sdufiysffgfsdf...sdfj!!!!!!!!!

NEON......:idea: ..ghfeghfdhgudfggurgyfdy......fgreygfe..........fhyhffh

SLORG:......gdyetdttytewytr47777.......he......uu......ewyruyeyr.......jjry

NEON:  :kiss:

"Kubrick : Best Film director ever?"

"The seventies: Easy Riders, Raging Bulls"     :wink:

"Matrix: Filosophy or Fraud?"

"World History IN Cinema" : Here we could debate the aspects of  history that sometimes get changed just for the sake of the movie.

Those are my choices,  throw yours.

• The Positive and Negative Impacts of the Modern "Epic"
  
• Homage [And Other Funny Names for Stealing][/list:u]

*7 Wonders of Cinema?

*What exactly is cinema?
-the point where mechanical reproduction leaves off?
or
-the representation of reality?

*Top Directors Under 30?

To reiterate: I so want to be, like, always in the five.

Quote from: SHAFTR*7 Wonders of Cinema?

*What exactly is cinema?
-the point where mechanical reproduction leaves off?
or
-the representation of reality?

ok these two here are amazing.

the first allows for a sense of humor, which i think would be the biggest challenge for any writer be him geek or freak. so i'd definitely wanna do that one.

and the second could be rewritten as some sort of play on Kubrick's assertion that he wanted to photograph the photograph of reality. so the question becomes "what kind of reality is best suited to cinema, and which does it most faithfully represent, if any". THAT's a real question. no boring textbook plagiarism possible there. haha i'd love to see ppl misinterpret that one.

so there u hav it, two fun topics, or u could go for sumthing u prolly hav already written about before.

"Matrix: Filosophy or Fraud?"

"History IN Cinema" : Here we can debate the views of each period/decade and the historical accuracy of the argument.

"Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: The Seventies"   :wink:

Quote from: SHAFTR
*What exactly is cinema?

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages-eu.amazon.com%2Fimages%2FP%2F0520000927.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg&hash=4889a09a54d80b6c0dac765b9901e0dc440ea205)

I'm just thinking, it might be an idea to have the five members write their first piece on, say, the Sunday before the week begins, and then posting it on the Monday. They can each then write their next piece in reply, and so on and so forth.

Doing it that way would also keep them one step ahead of the general masses. Otherwise, it's just a normal [albeit more interesting] thread.

Yeah, let's not get into anything too broad. Things like "what is cinema" is something we spend our whole lives trying but never answering.

I like the one about what reality is best displayed, that would be a good one.

We could continue the old Bazin debate of montage vs mise en scene, and how they will continue to evolve in the future.

Maybe one on editing style, and how non-linear has changed it (and those who were doing crazy stuff before non-linear came, like Mutinyco talked about with Fosse in an old thread).

Oh, and when we say "no pretension", does that mean we can't use words like 'mise en scene' or 'dialectics' and 'semiotics' ? Cos, um, I know some people hate those words, but they're kinda the language of discussing cinema...

I propose an all-encompassing rule, that we should call the Marian Keane Factor -- as in, don't shove your own CRAZY BULLSHIT OUT-OF-THE-BLUE spin on the movie, finding phallic symbols in every frame, etc etc.

Quote from: SoNowThen
I propose an all-encompassing rule, that we should call the Marian Keane Factor -- as in, don't shove your own CRAZY BULLSHIT OUT-OF-THE-BLUE spin on the movie, finding phallic symbols in every frame, etc etc.

Hahahaha, you couldn't have said it better.  Realize ,though, that there are some movies that demand that kind of meticulous examination.

Totally. My eyes really need to be opened to the complexiities of Kangaroo Jack.

Quote from: cronopio


(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages-eu.amazon.com%2Fimages%2FP%2F0520000927.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg&hash=4889a09a54d80b6c0dac765b9901e0dc440ea205)

I'm reading that right now.  You caught me.

Im not sure I'd be capable of doing this kind of thing but it sounds like a very interesting idea. I would like to submit a discussion title though, hopefully I wont have to elaborate and make a fool of myself. Hopefully you'll get my meaning.

"The Happy Ending"

I suppose it kind of ties in with what P said about "what kind of reality is best suited to cinema".

Quote from: SHAFTR*7 Wonders of Cinema?

*What exactly is cinema?
-the point where mechanical reproduction leaves off?
or
-the representation of reality?

I like those, but I'm not sure how well they'd work in a panel discussion under the current restrictions. There doesn't seem room for people to really debate and take specific sides. Like SoNowThen, it could last forever and is am ambiguous as defining love. I still think we should try to approach discussion on them though, just under different guidelines. 1.) Instead of people writing to argue amongst each other, just have everyone write one large essay stating their belief and the reasons why. 2.) Open up it to more people, like 10 or so. Discussion can come, but allow it in the form of everyone just replying to each theory. The people selected just won't be on call to reply in length to what the others said. I think this may be the better approach.

P said he's interested, Silver Bullet wants to be in all of them. More people start saying they want to do it and if people commit, we'll go forward with one of these topics.

The more I think about panel discussions really working, the more I think about how the subject should be specific, but grandoise. It should also be between people taking specific sides. My new idea is this: If the subject can only have 2 sides to it on an opinion, have two people representing each side and both sides arguing against each other. The kind of topic this would best work in is the discussion on the credentials of a filmmaker. 2 people would argue why he is good, 2 people would argue why he isn't. This would work because the discussion would be varied: from success of his individual films, his development of style, importance of influence and his future potential; but yet, the discussion would be still be specific and directed at a cause. Paul Thomas Anderson arguments do carry near religious fanaticism, but what about any other filmmaker? These arguments be can be spirited and objective without everyone killing each other.

I think the perfect argument for a 5 person panel discussion on everyone representing a different opinion would be judgement of the decades and which one was the actual "golden years" of film. A person defending a decade and arguing against the others. It would be very wide spanding, but also still specific in goals for everyone. This one just may be the Super Bowl of panel discussions.

Let's just start with What is art?

i'm starting to think this PD's wouldn't work.

Quote from: SoNowThenYeah, let's not get into anything too broad. Things like "what is cinema" is something we spend our whole lives trying but never answering.

I like the one about what reality is best displayed, that would be a good one.

We could continue the old Bazin debate of montage vs mise en scene, and how they will continue to evolve in the future.

Maybe one on editing style, and how non-linear has changed it (and those who were doing crazy stuff before non-linear came, like Mutinyco talked about with Fosse in an old thread).

Oh, and when we say "no pretension", does that mean we can't use words like 'mise en scene' or 'dialectics' and 'semiotics' ? Cos, um, I know some people hate those words, but they're kinda the language of discussing cinema...

I propose an all-encompassing rule, that we should call the Marian Keane Factor -- as in, don't shove your own CRAZY BULLSHIT OUT-OF-THE-BLUE spin on the movie, finding phallic symbols in every frame, etc etc.

I agree with neo-chuckhimselfo that some films do beg for this kind of interpretation, Hitchock's definitely being among them. My problem with Keane, and what I see as her main failing, is her lack of real seriousness or contextualization- her rollercoaster-random approach to analysis that yes, does come up short, though on a strictly informational basis there is still some value there. Contrast with Mulvey's commentary on Peeping Tom, which is solid, consistent, thorough, serious, extremely well-informed and utterly engaged. All things that should describe these panel discussions if we're to have them.

I think a generalized anti-pretension rule is too nebulous. Pretension is merely the discrepancy between an attempt at intellect/depth/profundity and the skill required to bring it off; I don't think anyone should be barred from jabbing at those things just because it might come off "pretentious" to some.

Keane claimed that a coat hook (among MANY other things) was an obvious phallic symbol in the 39 Steps. That alone should be reason to never let her speak or write about film again.

Quote from: SoNowThenKeane claimed that a coat hook (among MANY other things) was an obvious phallic symbol in the 39 Steps. That alone should be reason to never let her speak or write about film again.

That's more of a belief on her part... my guess is that she's saying Hitchcock unconsciously/unintentionally created these phallic symbols. I think it's a valid interpretation unless she's saying he intentionally did that.

I think it's the sub-retard blather of a charlatan posing as a film intellectual, and if we're gonna allow that kind of junk into this panel, then count me out.

You can't keep Freud out of anything.

:yabbse-undecided:

Quote from: SoNowThenKeane claimed that a coat hook (among MANY other things) was an obvious phallic symbol in the 39 Steps. That alone should be reason to never let her speak or write about film again.

It depends on what place an object has in the overall scheme of the film and the manner in which the object is being used. I'll have to look into it again. I don't remember caring her for commentary, though.

Obviously, we're not talking about "letting" anyone speak or write, but whether what they have to say is valid or worthy of publication/broadcast (you can tell I'm American by my insistence that anyone should be able to say anything, though I do also recognize the distinction between censure and censorship). Someone in a decision-making position decided her opinion was worth broadcasting through media. Perhaps that person is equally to blame if we have to call people to task?

The reason you can't keep Freud out of anything is that he was so damn right about our mental mechanisms... not always pretty, of course.  :?

The only thing that the Discussions would REQUIRE is Mr. Sarcasm out of them. Seriously. I'm willing to try.

i like the Reality topic but not the panel restrictions. the sort of thing that interested me about it was the opportunity for extreme subjectivity AND research to back it up.

that's what i meant by pretention. don't tell me "this is the most life-affirming treatise on the human condition" without explaining why u think that. if i'm gonna talk about reality, everyone's gonna hav their own approach, i would talk about the restrictions of cinema and what films hav advanced it. it's an open-ended discussion that could go forever, but even in a single-post/rebuttal scale it could be extremely rewarding.

i guess u can't hav a panel on that topic cos it's too personal. in fact i can't think of anything that would work as a panel discussion among two opposing groups. if ur thinking about debate style, sumone should propose a statement and groups would affirm it or disagree.

for example: "movies are really not that important".

guys, just do it....


first topic for the Panel


"Are Panel Discussions Necessary?"

"money - would you kill your own mother for it?"

I'll organise the first one and get it off the ground in the next day or two, if GT is willing to let me try. It's his idea, after all.

I'm trying to think of good discussion stuff...

How about something on the journeyman directors, past and present. Are there guys working today, directors-for-hire, that genre jump and really bear no personal mark, but consistently churn out decent Hollywood pictures?

Or how about an analysis of studio output, like how people used to say in the golden days that each studio had its stamp on the movies it made, like MGM's were kinda more fantasy (Wizard Of Oz), and Paramount's were a bit different, and Warners and so on. Are there any trends like that now?

These might be interesting, researchable, decent two-sided discussion topics...

The second one sounds great, SNT.

Quote from: The Silver BulletI'll organise the first one and get it off the ground in the next day or two, if GT is willing to let me try. It's his idea, after all.

All you gotta do is get an idea and get 5 people to agree to participate. Its one thing to do that and another getting people to agree they like your idea. If you can get it done, do it. I think people here are willing to try panel discussions, but they want the right topic. Maybe go back to the ones Shaftr said or search for a new one.

you can count on me as a wildcard, i don't think i'm qualified for more.
Also, i don't think you should build discussions on PRO and AGAINST, because most things are somewhere in between, and we are trying to have here detailed opinions, and they are never 100% yes or no.
I think that in most essays people focus on something, and they aren't always aware that something isn't clear enough, or the readers don't have enough information, or somebody misunderstood sth, so i think sub-questions should be involved in some way.

also, time limitation isn't good always, so if somebody gets some idea 10 days after discussion, he should contact an admin or sth like that.

I think we should avoid the following topics, not because they arent important but because they have been discussed to death.


1. Abortion
2. The Death Penalty
3. Stem Cell Research
4. Gay Marriage
5. File Sharing
6. General Terrorism


I know xixax can come up with better and more interesting topics than these. If we run out, then dig into the boring box.

Quote from: Duck SauceI think we should avoid the following topics, not because they arent important but because they have been discussed to death.


1. Abortion
2. The Death Penalty
3. Stem Cell Research
4. Gay Marriage
5. File Sharing
6. General Terrorism

*sings* "One of these is not like the other"

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanI think the best debates are spontaneous and develop naturally. But if we can find some really specific troubling and complex topic, it could work.

right, i mean it seems like there are a wealth of topics on here with differing opinions from boardmembers, all people need to do is actually get involved in one side or the other.  recently i've been in several debates, but it seems like only 1 or 2 people are interested in discussing on either side.

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetAlso, its hard enough to get 5 people to agree to thoroughly research a subject and then be on call for 5 days to respond to other people writing.

also, 5 seems arbitrary, and the idea the only the five involveds opinions matter and the wildcards can interject is sort of inclusive.  plus, what good does researching do?  if its not a subject those involved are already passionate about, why are they arguing on one side or the other?

how about: What Makes A Film Great?

how about something non-film related:  What type of Medevil Prince do you envision yourself when you take a bubble bath?

By far the best topic suggested yet.

ELIZABETH BARTLEY
::HISTORY REFERENCE:: 8)

USELESS MOVIE QUESTIONAIRE
sure to spark debates if needed...

1. List at least five of your most loved movies.
2. List at least five movies you absolutely hate.
3. List some of your favorite directors.
4. List some directors you can't stand.
5. List some actors/actresses you love.
6. List some actors/actresses that annoy the crap out of you.
7. What films/directors/actors do you think are overrated?
8. Which ones do you think are underappreciated?
9. What's the most influential movie ever made?
10. How do you feel about multi-million dollar movie star salaries?  Does anyone deserve the big bucks?  Who and Why or why not?
11. How do you feel about the use of computer graphics (CGI) in cinema today?
12. How do you feel about traditional as opposed to computer animation?
13. Who has the most important role in filmmaking? The writer, director or producer, or actor? Why?
14. Does a director ever deserve the "A Film By" credit?  Why or why not?
15. Is digital video an acceptable medium for a movie?  Why or why not?
16. What's the best way to watch a movie at home? VHS, DVD, Laserdisc or other?
17. How much do the following things matter to you in your decision to see a movie at a particular theater: Price; Picture/sound quality; Stadium seating; Age of the theater; Make-up of audience; Quality of popcorn/snacks; reserved seating?
18. Do movie reviews have any merit?  Who are the good and bad film critics?
19. Name something about your film tastes that you are constantly defending.
20. Are movies an art form or just entertainment? Why?
21. How much do the Oscar awards matter to you?  Why?
22. Who do you feel is long overdue for an Oscar?  Why?
23. In that same vain, who should have their Oscar taken away?  Why?
24. How do you feel about the use of popular songs as a film score?
25. How do you feel about the Sundance film festival?
26. Weekend box office report: fascinating or utterly useless?
27. What's one thing about cinema you wish could change today?
28. How do the movies today compare to the ones from 30 years ago?
29. Foreign movies: dubbed or subtitled?  Why?
30. How do you feel about the MPAA's movie rating system?
31. Are some movies better to watch at home than in the theater?  Which ones?  Why?
32. How do you feel about movie techniques like IMAX, Cinerama, Sensurround or 3D?
33. How do you feel about director's cuts?
34. Can changing a film based on a test screening ever make it better?  Why or why not?
35. Do you think independent movies are more important than studio movies?  Why or why not?
also, i didnt make this up

I really like this idea--to have an in-depth, well thought discussion between only 5 or so people. That way it stays readable and interesting, and doesnt meander and become chaotic. There can be a different thread dedicated to just comments. Sounds almost like a magazine feature or something. Very cool idea.

Quote from: themodernage02USELESS MOVIE QUESTIONAIRE
sure to spark debates if needed...

1. List at least five of your most loved movies.
-requiem for a dream, mulholland dr., the thin red line,  jackie brown, godfather II, the shining, talk to her

2. List at least five movies you absolutely hate.
-mouline rouge!, gummo, kids, hudson hawk, conspiriacy theory

3. List some of your favorite directors.
-lynch, aronofsky, kubrick, malick

4. List some directors you can?t stand.
-larry clark, baz, mcG

5. List some actors/actresses you love.
-penn, del  toro, watts, crudup,  mary mcdonnel, famkee jenseen, norton, ruffalo, dafoe,  jude law, depp

6. List some actors/actresses that annoy the crap out of you.
-KRISTEN DUNST!!!!!!!!!!!, julia stiles, reese whitherspoon, woody harelson, john cusack, deluxe 347, renee zell.

7. What films/directors/actors do you think are overrated?
-renee, 8 1/2, fincher,  spacy, jack black

8. Which ones do you think are underappreciated?
-crudup,  at close range, gangs of new york, curtis hanson, brian singer, amanda peet    

9. What?s the most influential movie ever made?
-you:citizen kane.........-myself:eraserhead

10. How do you feel about multi-million dollar movie star salaries?  Does anyone deserve the big bucks?  Who and Why or why not?
-i hav eno problem at all about what actor(ess) makes whow much..they could make 700 million  a film and i don'y give a sh*t..good for them.....BUT what i don't like is the people who sign on a project and back out (i.e. brad pitt/ the fountain....

11. How do you feel about the use of computer graphics (CGI) in cinema today?
-i'm cool with it....never had a problem to begin with

12. How do you feel about traditional as opposed to computer animation?
-see above

13. Who has the most important role in filmmaking? The writer, director or producer, or actor? Why?
-depends.......if you want the picture made..the most important person would be he who supplies the money........but if you need an "idea" for a film to begin with also..so thats important too....

14. Does a director ever deserve the ?A Film By? credit?  Why or why not?
-yeah...its their film..right??......

15. Is digital video an acceptable medium for a movie?  Why or why not?
-yes..whatever works to  capture your vision......

16. What?s the best way to watch a movie at home? VHS, DVD, Laserdisc or other?
-for me :.......DVD

17. How much do the following things matter to you in your decision to see a movie at a particular theater: Price; Picture/sound quality; Stadium seating; Age of the theater; Make-up of audience; Quality of popcorn/snacks; reserved seating?
-make-up of audience...

18. Do movie reviews have any merit?  Who are the good and bad film critics?
-yes they do..IMO....good:new york times, ebert, travers, gold trumpet......bad: anyone who dissed lynch.....

19. Name something about your film tastes that you are constantly defending.
-i tend to like surreal,disturbing,  abstract, avant-garde films.....so, i'm constantly on the offensive...

20. Are movies an art form or just entertainment? Why?
-art..b/c it can inspire oneself...and make you run the gamut of emotions...

21. How much do the Oscar awards matter to you?  Why?
-sometimes it does..sometimes it don't..i do believe its cool to get nominated...it says something

22. Who do you feel is long overdue for an Oscar?  Why?
-lynch-....b/c he was robbed for mulholland dr...and b/c hes a genius ....and he talks w/ a certian nasaly  swagger.....

23. In that same vain, who should have their Oscar taken away?  Why?
-take back julia roberts oscar for erin brock.....and give it to ellen burnstein for requiem........and take howrds' back and give it to lynch

24. How do you feel about the use of popular songs as a film score?
-great...i love it.......

25. How do you feel about the Sundance film festival?
-fine...

26. Weekend box office report: fascinating or utterly useless?
-cool.....

27. What?s one thing about cinema you wish could change today?
-they should make a rule as to regarding your first film as a director ..its free....so do what you wish...CREATE ART>>>>>>

28. How do the movies today compare to the ones from 30 years ago?
-they are much better.......

29. Foreign movies: dubbed or subtitled?  Why?
-subtitled.......it looke stupiod when characters move thier mouths and the words don't line up w/ what they are saying........

30. How do you feel about the MPAA?s movie rating system?
-its  too harsh on sex......other wise its cool......

31. Are some movies better to watch at home than in the theater?  Which ones?  Why?
-yes......all.......exept for large scale epic productions....

32. How do you feel about movie techniques like IMAX, Cinerama, Sensurround or 3D?
-fine..

33. How do you feel about director?s cuts?
-love them....wish more were put on the definative medium of film viewing,  which is DVD....
34. Can changing a film based on a test screening ever make it better?  Why or why not?
-yes.....if your all about the money..do what audiences say...so that way they will buy tickets....to your film......

35. Do you think independent movies are more important than studio movies?  Why or why not?
-about the same.....but the more frequent quality of good indy films opens doors.....

bored much?

Quote from: NEON MERCURYhow about something non-film related:  What type of Medevil Prince do you envision yourself when you take a bubble bath?

this question is neglected, and is a good one.