> I agree with the last part, but I still think it was a damn good movie
> (good as in 'entertaining'). I skipped the movie when it run here in
> the cinema, I didn;t rent it on video, I just thought it would be
> another boring action movie. Untill a friend of mine showed it to me
> on dvd with dolby surround.. I sat on the edge of my seat for two
> hours.. especially the camerawork was absolutely fantastic.
> Just out of curiosity, and to get even more off-topic, what's your top
> 10 of 2000?
Ridley, on top of his questionable framing. It was just a lousy job for his
caliber, that doesn't mean it's a bad thing. Kinda like Spielberg doing
lousy directing on the Lost World. There was some nice moments, but I
expected much more from a director who can do perfect framing jobs (Blade
Runner!). It's a nice escapist movie, lots of fun if you forget about the
anachronisms :) I did not agree with the Academy, but it's has always been
a popularity contest. In over 20 years I've agreed with their best picture
choice 3times only (84, 92, 93)
Top 10 of 2000?
1-Dancer in the Dark
2-Memento
3-Maelstr?m
4-Amores Perros
5-Wo hu Zang Long (CT,HD)
6-Traffic
7-Wonder Boys
8-15 fvrier 1839
9-American Psycho
10-Shadow of the Vampire
Some of them are international movies, you probably never seen them (3 and 8
especially as they are from Qubec)
--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
-- http://www.racesimcentral.net/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...