Chalkhills Digest Volume 5, Issue 342
Date: Saturday, 18 December 1999
Chalkhills Digest, Volume 5, Number 342
Saturday, 18 December 1999
Today's Topics:
Re: The Big Express
RE: More off-topic crap: drugs
More drugs . . .
good. clever, but good
help for the less fortunate
TMBG
stuff, more stuff, and, hey---is that stuff?
Andy and Colin's living.
we're on a mission from Gahd.
how I was introduced\ fav xtc moment
all my mind and body need
Sightings
A Few Thoughts and replys...
guaraldi
I'm really the socially impaired one...
Braziiiiiiiiil!
Administrivia:
To UNSUBSCRIBE from the Chalkhills mailing list, send a message to
<chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org> with the following command:
unsubscribe
For all other administrative issues, send a message to:
<chalkhills-request@chalkhills.org>
Please remember to send your Chalkhills postings to:
<chalkhills@chalkhills.org>
World Wide Web: <http://chalkhills.org/>
The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors.
Chalkhills is compiled with Digest 3.7 (John Relph <relph@sgi.com>).
We'd like to wish you / Just the merriest Christmas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-Id: <199912151426.XAA18109@ums503.nifty.ne.jp> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:26:20 +0900 From: Shigemasa Fujimoto <GBA03003@nifty.ne.jp> Subject: Re: The Big Express Regarding Mr David Oh's question, what I can say for sure is that there have been at least two versions of THE BIG EXPRESS on CD. Version 1) Contains 11 tracks despite the fact that the back cover, the booklet, and the disc label list 14 tracks. My copy of this version says "MADE IN U.K. BY PDO" and "CDV2325 19801011 06 %" around the centre hole of the disc (I wish I knew how to decipher matrix numbers) and the disc label states "Made in U.K." under "STEREO" on the right. The bar code on the back cover is "5 012981 232328". I suspect that this is one of the earliest pressings of "The Big Express," possibly manufactured not long before or after "Skylarking" came out on CD. Incidentally, around the outer ridge of my CD the printed surface is eroding in a few places, revealing the silver layer underneath. Version 2) Contains 14 tracks, including the three single B-side tracks, which are sandwiched between the A- and B-side tracks of the original vinyl album. The back cover and the booklet are identical to those of version 1. Around the centre hole of the disc my copy of version 2 says "CDV 2325 2893 993 02 *" (the actual asterisk is bigger than you see on the screen). The disc label is the same as version 1 except that this one does not say "Made in U.K." anywhere, suggesting the possibility of it having been pressed somewhere else, say, in Germany (but I wouldn't necessarily call it a German edition just because the manufacturing plant might have been located in Germany). In around 1987 Virgin Records reissued their older titles with reduced prices as the "Virgin Value" series. The circular "Virgin Value" sticker is on the front cover of my "version 2" copy of THE BIG EXPRESS and I think it's a second or later pressing. By the way, a friend of mine has a 14-track copy whose matrix number is "CDV 232510101101%" with a "610 241-217" sticker on the back cover! After Virgin were bought up by Thorn EMI in 1992, it seems that they added a new catalogue number to each title of their entire catalogue, which is also used in the bar codes. The added code for THE BIG EXPRESS was "0777 7 86689 2 3," which matches the bar code that Mr Oh describes (see my discography for other titles' numbers). Mr Oh mentions "the bar code sticker on the back" and I wonder what the original number covered by the sticker is. I thought that Virgin had stopped shopping the 11-track copies by the time of the Virgin/EMI merger, but apparently not. In any case, I believe that Virgin pressed those 11-track discs simply by mistake and I don't think it's very difficult to find them. An NME reader claimed in 1990 that he purchased THE BIG EXPRESS on CD three times at three different record stores, and had to ask for his money back each time as he noticed that every copy he bought featured only 11 tracks and omitted the three bonus cuts. Whether the "freak disc" is valuable or not is subjective. I have heard that there is a third version -- the one with "Made in Germany" printed on the disc label. Since I don't own it, I cannot tell you any more than that. In any case, THE BIG EXPRESS on CD seems less complicated than DRUMS AND WIRES on CD. I'm not sure if I've answered Mr David Oh's question! ********************* I would like to pose a question myself. If you look at the inside of EXPLODE TOGETHER's insert, you will notice a back catalogue list for XTC. Many of the albums have additional numbers in brackets; for example, "258 288" for WHITE MUSIC. I suspect that these are the catalogue numbers referred to in Germany, but does anyone know what they really are? It may be of some interest to you that my German friend has told me that CDs with a catalogue number with the suffix 217 (as on EXPLODE TOGETHER and RAG & BONE BUFFET) are "Nice Price" in Germany and that "LC 3098" (as on NONSUCH's back cover) is Virgin's company code in Germany. Meanwhile PM numbers, as you told me and I printed it in Wonderland Extra #2, are associated with French distributors and prices. With regards, Shigemasa Fujimoto
------------------------------
Message-Id: <C1D2BBBA6310D2118B5500805FA7AF3F01DFDCD0@xch-mes-04.msc.az.boeing.com>
From: "Johnson, Tom" <tom.johnson@boeing.com>
Subject: RE: More off-topic crap: drugs
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 06:36:26 -0700
> From: Michael De Bernardi[SMTP:debernardi@cybermesa.com]
>
> Both research and user testimonials support quite the opposite, that the
> smoked variety is more effective at controlling pain, nausea, and
> appetite.
> This may be due to one or more of the dozens of active cannabinoids that
> are found in marijuana, but not in synthetic THC. Marinol is better than
nothing, but the smoke is best.
Please take a look at the links below, you will find that the truth is
actually quite the opposite:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/UK/Health/PApot161199.shtml
He said patients did not need to "get high" to gain a therapeutic
benefit. In fact psychoactive effects appeared to indicate an overdose.
http://www.salon.com/health/log/1999/10/15/cannabis/index.html?YAH&DN=110
The research confirms this year's massive NIH study, which proved
marijuana had therapeutic uses. Like that study, it also leans
toward a pharmacological replacement for the green and leafy
weed. What's different is the reasoning: The NIH study opposed
smoking marijuana because of its detrimental effect on the lungs;
the Brown study shows that an effective marijuana pill would be
not just healthier, but better.
"Whereas smoking marijuana bombards all the brain's receptors,
then fades, a modulated pill could extend the natural actions of the
brain's own cannabinoids or marijuana-like substances, and be
more selective in its pain-killing actions," Walker said.
Mike said further still:
> Tom, I sympathized with your position up to this point, but your lack of
> experience with any drug at all, particularly LSD, disqualifies you from
> commenting on the mind-expanding effects of some drugs. There are drugs,
> primarily of the hallucinogen class, that can profoundly affect the
> psychological, existential, and spiritual foundations of those who take
> them. Hallucinogens have been used as part of religious rituals for
> thousands of years and have had a deep impact on our culture. There are
> certainly many "excuses" offered by drug abusers, but this does not negate
> the fact that many people have made deeper connections to themselves and
the universe with the help of external substances.
What you speak of may be your "experience," but this argument is, frankly,
lacking in any kind of substantiality. No one needs drugs to "profoundly
affect their psychological, existential, and spiritual foundations" - that
is all in the mind. You are the one in control of how you view your place
in the world. Once again, I say that if you use drugs in order to make some
deeper "spiritual" connection then you need to take a look at WHY you need
to use drugs to do that. There is no physical basis or need for these drugs
when it comes to religion. I am well aware that American Indians use and
have used peyote for their rituals, and they are legally allowed to do this
because it is their culture. However, this is a tiny fraction of the
population, and it is not an abused privelege. *I* do not need drugs in
order to reach my spiritual side - and neither does anyone. Drugs are, once
again, the easy way out.
The argument you make is that it should be legalized because of the
"spiritual potential" it *may* have - ignoring the fact that it is a drug
that is currently being widely abused. The drive to legalize marijuana is
coming from those who need it, but it is self-servingly and selfishly backed
by those who use it recreationally and from those who abuse it. They stand
behind the shield of "helping those in need," all the while knowing that
they are hoping to decriminalize it for their own abuse. As I have shown
above and as I stated previously, studies have shown that smoking the drug
will not increase it's effectiveness. In fact, the article above states the
opposite.
When the medical marijuana backers start telling the truth, I will support
them. Currently, they are using illicit tactics on an unaware public for
their own good.
Tom
Electronic Work Instructions
Web-owner, Manufacturing Engineering Homepage
<http://nt-mes-08.msc.az.boeing.com/engineer/me/home.html>
------------------------------ Message-Id: <C1D2BBBA6310D2118B5500805FA7AF3F01DFDCD5@xch-mes-04.msc.az.boeing.com> From: "Johnson, Tom" <tom.johnson@boeing.com> Subject: More drugs . . . Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 12:11:25 -0700 From: Tyler Hewitt <tahewitt@yahoo.com> __________________________________________ >And how does this relate to drugs? Are you suggesting >that relaxed attitudes about recreational drug use has >led to the downfall of society? No, just that since the '60s the attitude has been that anyone can do anything short of murder (and sometimes that, too) without too many repercussions because people are supposed to be free to do whatever makes them happy. People used to have an obligation to do what's right for SOCIETY. Now you can justify nearly anything if it's to satisfy your own needs. It's not right. For society to remain upstanding, there has to be some kind of supporting framework. If you give everyone the right to be sedated all the time, NO ONE is going to care about anything. Society will fall apart without a rigid backbone, and that is composed of the laws that so many rail against. Laws are a necessity for a progressing society. You cannot teach morals if there is no punishment for not being moral. Laws may not teach a moral, but they prevent most people from straying, thereby teaching them that something is at least wrong. You suggest that education will prevent people from abusing drugs - how so? By giving free access to drugs, you take away the necessary weight behind the argument to not use them. Many people listen when you say, "Don't do drugs because they're illegal." How many of them will listen to you if you say, "Don't do drugs because they're dumb and dangerous?" We've been trying that for over 3 decades with cigarettes, haven't we? Has it worked? >Prove to me that leagalizing drugs WILL harm the >future potential of our children. You can't. And you are willing to risk the future so that some dumb drug can be legalized? At least NOT legalizing them will definitely not harm the future. Your argument is completely unsound and is a very apparent indicator of what is wrong with society today. Hey, it's easy enough for those who REALLY want to do drugs to get them, and they so rarely get prosecuted. Why make it easier on these people, huh? Once you legalize drugs, there is NO going back. You cannot re-criminalize them after that - it would turn out just like prohibition. So you mean to tell me that you are willing to risk it all - to risk the future - just because a minority of people are tired of their favorite habit being illegal? This is a very dangerous mindset. And it is this kind of thinking that has resulted in the way society is today. Let the researchers make their marijuana-based pills. That *should* end the debate from the pro-pot people. If it doesn't, then it just shows that they only want their habit legalized for their own sake, not for the sake and well-being of the cancer, AIDS, etc. patients they hold up as their reasoning for legalization. Tom Electronic Work Instructions Web-owner, Manufacturing Engineering Homepage <http://nt-mes-08.msc.az.boeing.com/engineer/me/home.html>
------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 12:41:33 -0800 Subject: good. clever, but good From: Daniel Duncan <dan@creditland.com> Message-ID: <B47E8E7D.1F2%dan@creditland.com> > i still had the book and skimmed through > it again, reading about xtc. the author described them as good, but "too > clever". this description left me mystified. too clever? when i was a kid (teenager), my buddies and i loved xtc. except for this one guy, jim, who said he didn't like them because they were "too clever". i wonder if he saw the same book as you or came up with that on his own? anyway, he had like 12 judy garland records, so what does he know about music? perhaps xtc should "dumb it down" for these people. sheesh. -dan
------------------------------ Message-ID: <19991216215341.9580.qmail@web2905.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:53:41 -0800 (PST) From: nross <PhoenixYellowRose@rocketmail.com> Subject: help for the less fortunate I remember someone telling me that Prince of Orange was previously released. If so, does anyone have the cd or single? If so... :-)... would anyone be willing to sell it to me? Holiday greetings to all, Nicole ===== Nicole's internet music station: http://www.imagineradio.com/mymusiclisten.asp?name=phoenixyellowrose
------------------------------
Message-Id: <199912162224.RAA00130@nantucket.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:22:06 -0800
Subject: TMBG
From: "Diamond" <arnos@nantucket.net>
>And from Derek:
>> I went back to count my tickets and discovered that in the last eight
>> years, I saw They Might Be Giants *eight* times. Who else has seen one
>> band/artist in concert four or more times in the last decade?
>
>I also saw TMBG multiple times this decade...at least seven times, but I've
>lost exact count. Oddly, their free shows have been among their best, I
>think.
2/3 of all the concerts I've ever seen are TMBG concerts.
Kevin "I've only seen three concerts, though" Diamond
P.S. One of those two TMBG concerts was the free one this summer at the
Central Stage in NYC, and I thought it was awsome. IS that the free concert
you're talking about?
____________________________________________________________________________
"To emphasize the afterlife is to deny life. To concentrate on heaven is to
create hell."
-Tom Robbins
------------------------------
From: pann@gate.net
Message-ID: <38596CD0.1EBFA5FA@gate.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:50:56 -0500
Organization: Cybergate
Subject: stuff, more stuff, and, hey---is that stuff?
He-yo hillers,
A couple digests back the drummer on AV2, Chuck Szabo was
mentioned. Does anyone in the know have any information on him, like
is he from another band, is he strictly a session musician, any past
work we may have heard from him, etc...I'm
just curious.....
As for what I will be doing on this supposedly most momentous of New
Years, that one's easy: I'll be at home watching "Dick Clarks' Rocking
New Years", and drinking week old eggnog..........all kidding aside, I
still don't really know yet--plans seem to keep changing and
mutating. I'll either do something, or nothing...
and, time to trot out my obligatory list of favorites for 1999. If
anything, I've found this year to be extremely satisfying for music
purchases. I've been re-charged by them, and feel more hopeful about
musics direction than I've felt in several years....in no order or
rank:
Beta Band-Three Eps and The Beta Band
Mogwai-Come on, die young and EP2
Xtc-AV1, Homespun
(all the above get full points for releasing 2 albums-gasp!- in the
same year! You mean they still do that? even if it all isn't new,
either....)
The Ladybug Transistor-The Albemarle Sound
Sloan- Between the Bridges
Beulah- When your heartstrings break
Gomez- Liquid Skin
To Rococo Rot- The Amateur View
Tarwater-Silur
High Llamas-Snowbug
Olivia Tremor Control-Black Foliage
Add N to X-Avant Hard
Plone- For Beginner Piano
Macha- See it another way
Gorky's Zygotic Mynci-Spanish Dance Troupe
Archer Prewitt-White Sky
Lilys- Zero Population Growth
Stereolab-Cobra and Phases....
Flaming Lips- The Soft Bulletin
Super Furry Animals-Guerilla
Autechre- EP7
Pavement-Terror Twilight
Wilco-Summerteeth
Jim O'Rourke-Eureka
Trans Am-Futureworld
Grandaddy-Signal to snow ratio Ep
Blur-13
old stuff:
Eric Dolphy-Out to Lunch, and Out There
Bobby Hutcherson-Dialogue (all of these 3 are top free jazz from late
50s, early 60s...)
Kinks-Something Else (Andy is correct about Autumn Almanac--incredible
tune)
Cabaret Voltaire-BBC Sessions
Thanks to everyone for posting their lists, as I always find something
that will make me want to give it a try. Radio is dead, so reviews and
word of mouth are crucial, plus I just roll the dice and try things,
which is working for me.
Bestest,
Perry (a lump of coal...)
------------------------------ From: "Damian Wise (Foulger)" <damian@imclaser.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:33:47 -0600 Subject: Andy and Colin's living. Message-Id: <19991216172924.25f3c208.in@ceo.ceolasers.com> > CD 32244 > Vinyl 4505 > Cassette 2317 > > So, Apple Venus has shipped 39066 units in total. What sort of living does > that give to Andy and Dave, eh? I don't know, what kind of living does that give Andy and Colin? Good or bad? What do they make off one album? Dames tWd -- Waiting for AV2
------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 10:42:02 +1100 From: Sebastien Maury 02 9950 3315 <maury.sebastien@a2.abc.net.au> Subject: we're on a mission from Gahd. Message-id: <E1754IFX2BRIK*/R=A1/R=ABCNET/U=MAURYS6G/@MHS> Religious nuts, anti-drug freaks, gun-slingin psychos. Nice to know we're such a stable bunch. If someone's going to tell me to stop sleeping with boys then I'm *really* gonna get mad. Obviously we're close to pre-faux-millennium meltdown. Seb.
------------------------------ From: CapnEndo@aol.com Message-ID: <0.49c592fe.258adbf8@aol.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 19:21:12 EST Subject: how I was introduced\ fav xtc moment It started for me about 12 years ago when a musician friend of mine suggested I give it a listen. At first I was intrigued then interested then down right fanatical. I owned most of their music within a year. Since then, like the most of you I've introduced hundreds to xtc (only a dozen successful fanatics have emerged from my efforts). Haven't you all noticed that when you ask someone whether thay've heard of xtc most say no, but if you ask a musician most say yes. XTC are musician's musicians. As for my fav xtc moment.........Ohhh there are so many and it changes from week to week and sometimes day to day. The lirics and music embrace all emotions and so many different philosophical avenues that it depends where your head is at during that day, week, or month. All that said today it is probably... "I thought I had the whole world in my mouth I thought I could say what I wanted to say for a second that thought became a sword in my hand I could slay any problem that would stand in my way I felt just like a crusader lionheart a holy land invader but nobody can really say what they mean to say and the impotency of speech came up and hit me that day and I would have made this instrumental but the words got in the way." Well maybe that's it today...tomorrow who knows Tom
------------------------------ Message-ID: <38597E99.CC71890@zoo.co.uk> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 00:07:01 +0000 From: John Peacock <johndrewp@zoo.co.uk> Organization: The Nice Organization Subject: all my mind and body need I just wanted to say that, although I occasionally find Mr Lawson's posts a little in one's face (my personal opinion, mea culpa, mea culpa mea maxima culpa), may I thank him for his reply on the drug issue thing, which was more to the point, more brutal and more articulate than I could hope to be. The only thing I can add is the observation (perhaps a reiteration) that people already use narcotics of various kinds. Decriminalisation would merely allow societies to deal with this fact and its social ramifications in a sensible and mature way. I'm off nicotine (for six years), alcohol (two years), occasionally smoke cannabis (whenever anyone gives me a toke on their joint - I really can't be bothered to buy it, and would not be too upset if anyone refused to share with me on the grounds that I was a tight-fisted bastard who didn't contribute his share, or indeed anything). I would go for serious, well-made hallucinogenics like a shot given the opportunity. I eat far too much chocolate. If the government were really interested in preventing people from putting substances into their bodies that cause them real harm and have a drastic effect on the length and quality of their lives, it would ban lard. Off-topic is one of my favourite places. It's just a question of finding the right topic to be off. j
------------------------------
From: "Mark Strijbos" <mmello@knoware.nl>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 21:28:59 +0100
Subject: Sightings
Message-Id: <19991216202701.CC8C3A6D24@mail.knoware.nl>
Dear Chalkers,
This afternoon I was quietly reading my morning paper when
suddenly my ears picked up some familiar sounds from the TV.
The BBC was using bits from Love On A Farmboy's Wages to back a
promo trailer for their forthcoming Gardener of the Year show.
They cleverly linked the guitar intro and "outtro" from said song to
produce a perfectly timed soundtrack.
BTW: A couple of years ago our local VPRO broadcasting company
used to play "Bushman President" (and others o.c.) between
programs.
Another (near) sighting:
The latest catalog from Helter Skelter (the folk behind Song Stories)
lists a new book by Ed Jones called "This Is Pop - the life & times of
a failed pop star". The accompanying blurb doesn't mention XTC at
all but it does say that this book "will prove to be a worthy rival to
Giles Smith' Lost In Music".
You'll find Helter Skelter at http://www.skelter.demon.co.uk
yours in xtc,
Mark Strijbos at The Little Lighthouse
http://www.knoware.nl/users/mmello/
or http://come.to/xtc
------------------------------ Message-ID: <19991217012511.29704.qmail@web114.yahoomail.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:25:11 -0800 (PST) From: Jon Rosenberger <wile1coyote@yahoo.com> Subject: A Few Thoughts and replys... Greeting Chalks and Chalkettes, Firstly, Been listening to Nonsuch a lot lately and pardon my french here but Dear Madam Barnum has to be one of the best all time "Fuck You Bitch I am out of here" songs. It is amazing how Andy can take such a simple sentiment and twist the words around till they sound almost poetic. Bloody genius that is. John in Chicago wanted to know about peoples reaction to Redneck Wonderland by Midnight Oil. I have been an Oil fan for along time and I reccomend all of their LPs to anyone who likes their tunes to have meaning behind the guitar solo's. Redneck is no different more of the same from this incredible band. I don't think it is quite as good as Blue Sky Mining but it is close. Definitly overlooked by the Radio this year. Just so no one thinks it is Racist either "Redneck" refers to a type of Australian Kangaroo. Oil are very Aussie and it shows on every Lp. Bit like the boys from Swindon that way I guess. Never thought of that before. I think it comes down to Musical Integrity. Can anyone else think of any bands that are so clearly identified with where they come from. Billy Bragg maybe? and finally I will weigh in on the great debate. I am FOR the LEGALIZATION of all drugs! I am living proof that drugs taken in moderation will not screw up your life. I didn't stop with Grass either I took Coke, Speed, Uppers, Downers, Peyote and Mescaline. I choose to pass on H. But it was readily avialble at my college. I haven't touched a thing in nearly ten years now and don't really want to. But that is my choice and I should have the right to make it. If you want to piss off your whole life and shoot smack be my guest. ANd if he tries to steal something from me to feed his habit I will SHOOT HIS ASS! Cause the US Government says I can and frankly the guy is asking for it anyway. If my children want to follow that path than I will love them the best I can and hope that they decide to change. It is impossible to force any individual to not do something they want to do, whether that is Drugs, Suicide, Murder, Rape, or whatever the only way to forcibly change their behaviour is to kill them. You can try to cahnge their mind but THEIR mind decides what they do, not your mind. So in essence what I am saying is that thine own destiny is yours and yours alone. Make your decisions for you and raise your children to reflect the values you have. If they don't end up with your values then it is your fault not TV's or the teachers or the police or the courts, YOURS! As a result of this I guess I would be amazed if my kids don't experiment with drugs. The statistics show it is more likely they will try them than that they won't. By the way the only point that I have not seen made about this on either side that I will add is that sending someone to prison for taking drugs is like sending a swimmer to the pool. They are going to get just as wet as they will on the outside. Peace Y'all and if your toking then have a toke on me! The Mole
------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 17:52:48 -0800 Subject: guaraldi From: Daniel Duncan <dan@creditland.com> Message-ID: <B47ED765.1F8%dan@creditland.com> > Vince Guaraldi of the Vince Guaraldi Trio a formidable Jazz combo who > also produced a number of Jazz albums in the Sixties before penning the > tunes for the Charlie Brown TV Specials of which the Christmas one is > the most probably the most famous. I read something about Vince Guaraldi once saying that he didn't want to be "successful," he didn't want to write "hit songs", he wanted to write standards. He wanted his music imprinted on every human mind and performed again and again by generations of musicians. Nothing like setting obtainable goals, eh?. On a semi-related note; The comic strip Peanuts will run its final strip in February 2000. Charles Schulz is retiring and being treated for colon cancer. Thanks for all the laughs, Sparky. ---------------------- I didn't hear 'Thanks for Christmas' once while shopping for xmas presents, so I played it when I got home. Curse you Red Barrel, dan
------------------------------ Message-Id: <l03130301b47f5cdd0c0c@[63.23.190.49]> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:31:58 -0500 From: MinerWerks <dminer@gte.net> Subject: I'm really the socially impaired one... Harry (JStrole@aol.com) wrote in Digest #5-340: >Subject: One Socially Impaired Student Here > >Normally, I keep out of the film talk, but, why do I have to be socially >impaired to like "Potempkin?" Ah, but you're forgetting the qualifier - socially impaired *film student*... a subspecies I have unfortunately had a lot of contact with. Double unfortunately that I can't seem to latch onto the ones that go on to make hit films like "The Blair Witch Project." Although I guess this is because I value my personal taste more than the chance to kiss ass... >This is one of the great silent films ever >made. Truly emotional and well done. Look, rising up against oppression >isn't a bad thing. Though being Stalin was. Point made, and accepted. It is a great film - why else would we have tons of visual homages in films made today? But are you trying to say you think it's the best film *ever made*?? = Derek "missed the boat" Miner = Oh yeah... <xtc content> "Fossil Fuel" is an essential purchase for anyone's collection of the best rock n roll of all time!! </xtc content>
------------------------------
Message-Id: <199912170406.XAA03863@nantucket.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 22:36:07 -0800
Subject: Braziiiiiiiiil!
From: "Diamond" <arnos@nantucket.net>
Erik:
>Terry
>Gilliam's "Brazil." When first I saw this movie, all those
>years ago, it blew me completely away. Very funny, and very
>dark.
How could I have forgotten this movie... Brilliant!
Kevin Diamond
____________________________________________________________________________
"To emphasize the afterlife is to deny life. To concentrate on heaven is to
create hell."
-Tom Robbins
------------------------------ End of Chalkhills Digest #5-342 *******************************
Go back to Volume 5.
18 December 1999 / Feedback