OT -- Kill Bill

I'm almost certain I would have seen you... I think I know the Tastykakes
and Miller Lite banners. I don't recall the Sands Casino banner. Frankly, I
spent more time watching the planes than the banners!

Were you flying the little white and red low wing? Or the plane that looked
like a cross between a piper cub and a C152?

Come to think of it, what are those planes? There's a third one that I
can't think of at the moment - but he wasn't always around...



"Mike" wrote in
:

snip
Nah, we had our own strip just north of WWD, and yeah, I even got paid
for it (better have, the shore is a nice place to visit, but an
expensive place to live!)

You probibly saw me, some of the more memorable ones I towed were
Tastykakes, Sands Casino or the Miller Lite billboards. Those were
just the more prominant ones.

It IS a fun place though.

--
Mike O'Malley

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:dypjb.780228$YN5.771263@sccrnsc01...
Not to nitpick you or anything Jay, but me thinks you might have
missed the point of this movie. Now, that being said, no, I have not
yet seen this one. BUT, reading interviews with Tarantino, that was
his intention. This was a pure action movie; the plot was supposed
to be secondary to the action scenes.

Hmm. So saying "I meant that" makes a bad film okay? Sounds like the
classic refuge of an incompetent director, to me.

A *good* director successfully combines plot AND action.

The carnage was SUPPOSED to be unrealistic. The gore and violence are
supposed to be over the top, it's an homage to the Asian Kung-Fu
movies of the 60's and 70's. One of the reasons that it got an R
rating instead of NC-17 for the violence was because the violence is
done so unrealisticly.

So, let me see if I've got this straight. We have a movie that has a weak
plot -- ON PURPOSE -- and unrealistic violence -- ON PURPOSE -- with the aim
of being some sort of an homage to the Kung-fu movies of the 60s and 70s?
While your premise may be true, I'd say the audience has been duped on more
than one level here...


that's like complaining that the tail fins on 50s classic cars are
unrealistic, serves no technical purpose and therefore owners of those
cars have been duped. similarily, certain fans of super-resolution,
hi-fidelity photographic pictures may theoretically decry the
unrealistic, formless faces of impressionism and reason the lack of
realism detracts from beauty, and in fact is a source of ugliness --
but these are more an aesthetic calls than anything else.

what tarantino understands methinks, and that i quite agree with, is
that movies are inherently unrealistic. now, that doesn't give
license to making incoherent dialog or fanciful scenes of sugared
kaleidoscopes and but it certainly doesn't preclude a vast middle
ground where entertainment and reality freely mix. (the bush admin is
a case in point, but that's another post.)

the bottom line for most people is that they want movies to *feel*
real up to a point, but in the end, they just want to be entertained
for chrissakes. afterall, the market for amnesty international-type
realism or the harvard business review-type documentaries is only so
big.






Tarantino must be laughing himself silly.

Oh well -- I'll always remember Uma Thurman, in tight leather, neatly
slicing off Lucy Liu's cranium -- and then watching her die.

Yeah -- a real "classic" movie, this one.

What would have been wrong with reissuing "What's New, Tiger Lily,"
and leaving it at that?

Don

"Judah" wrote in message
...
I'm almost certain I would have seen you... I think I know the Tastykakes
and Miller Lite banners. I don't recall the Sands Casino banner. Frankly,
I
spent more time watching the planes than the banners!


Hey, it works! People DO remember us! The Sands Casino flew only July 4th
weekend. It was a shame, it was one of our best looking ones (and lightest
towing).

Were you flying the little white and red low wing? Or the plane that
looked
like a cross between a piper cub and a C152?


The red and white low wing was a Pawnee from Ocean City. We flew the ugly
duct-tape colored ones with no cowlings. Cubs, Super Cubs, and Super
Cruisers. You're probibly thinking of the one that "looks like a cross
between a Cub and a C152" I flew the PA12 with the red tail.

Come to think of it, what are those planes? There's a third one that I
can't think of at the moment - but he wasn't always around...


The ones that I remember were our Cubs and PA12's, a handfull of Pawnees and
Super Cubs, a couple of Skyhawks and 3 Citabrias. I think thats just about
all of 'em between Cape May and Asbury Park.

--
Mike O'Malley

Kung Pow. Great Movie! I loved it. Wife hated it. Son (TKD Black Belt) was
having trouble breathing, he was laughing so hard.

Just watch out for those Gopher Chucks.

Craig R. Bowers
Rosamond, Ca http://craignet.com


"Montblack" wrote in message
...
("Jay Honeck" wrote)
snip
So, let me see if I've got this straight. We have a movie that has a
weak
plot -- ON PURPOSE -- and unrealistic violence -- ON PURPOSE -- with the
aim
of being some sort of an homage to the Kung-fu movies of the 60s and
70s?
While your premise may be true, I'd say the audience has been duped on
more
than one level here...

Kung Pow: Enter The Fist (2002)
http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/kung_pow/

This movie is so stupid, it's funny. It's an actual 70's Kung-fu movie
(1976) called "Tiger and Crane Fist" that's been .... um, modified.

It made many people's "worst film of all time" list.

I, however, laughed and enjoyed the effort.

"Wewewewewewe..."
"Wewewewewe..."

--
Montblack
"I like to watch"

the bottom line for most people is that they want movies to *feel*
real up to a point, but in the end, they just want to be entertained
for chrissakes. afterall, the market for amnesty international-type
realism or the harvard business review-type documentaries is only so
big.

Had we been "entertained", we would not have felt ripped off.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"