| Re: Season of the Severed Head, resumed |
http://groups.google.com .. |
| Parry (parry@perfectmail.com) |
2003/09/08 04:25 |
Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: parry@perfectmail.com (Parry)
Newsgroups: alt.surrealism
Subject: Re: Season of the Severed Head, resumed
Date: 8 Sep 2003 03:25:47 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 133
Message-ID: <36a623f.0309080225.353af5fc@posting.google.com>
References: <36a623f.0306160114.37c13164@posting.google.com> <3F1F7B7C.3C04CCD4@cloud9.net> <36a623f.0307290239.680547a3@posting.google.com> <3F2747D1.222463BD@cloud9.net> <36a623f.0308081607.3fd62a66@posting.google.com> <3F37328E.354CC11@cloud9.net> <36a623f.0308131723.54de3c22@posting.google.com> <3F444F10.4937B5DB@cloud9.net> <36a623f.0308220834.142722ce@posting.google.com> <3F4705BD.42C6263E@cloud9.net> <36a623f.0308270907.1f746c3a@posting.google.com> <3F5578AD.4DEC92BC@cloud9.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.91.182.245
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1063016748 13918 127.0.0.1 (8 Sep 2003 10:25:48 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Sep 2003 10:25:48 GMT
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.surrealism:552
elag <elag@cloud9.net> wrote in message news:<3F5578AD.4DEC92BC@cloud9.net>...
[snip for length]
> Hmm... I feel a Godard festival coming on.
Must be nice. My movie options are more like: maybe I'll tape After
the Thin Man tonight. (It was pretty good.)
> I just recently saw "Pierrot
> Le Fou". Somewhere I read that this is the film where "Godard tries to
> do everything and almost succeeds" and I'd agree w/ that. It is a very
> interesting film, but I guess it's another one that would frustrate the
> "average movie goer". What the hell is it about, anyway?!
I have the script lying around somewhere. I'll have to fish it out.
[snip]
> > > But I'm not bitter...
> >
> > It's the same up here. In fact, the chains only run Hollywood product.
> > In Toronto, the "reperatory" theatres which used to run foreign films
> > now play second run action features. I think even the theatre that
> > used to run films from the 40's and earlier is gone. Elsewhere,
> > university film societies seem to be largely a thing of the past. And
> > most of the independent and foreign films we do get to see don't veer
> > far from the beaten track. Hollywood: it's your only choice.
>
> I'm a sad cat. I guess it's lucky I ended up in one of the few places
> where I can see a Gloria Swanson film, "M", a silent Felix the cat
> cartoon and a Carl Dreyer retrospective in the same week.
>
> One day I hope the Inet will serve the needs of fans of old, obscure,
> experimental and underground films as well as the mainstream.
Given our luck trying to move 500 kb of gif loops over usenet, I'm not
holding my breath.
[snip]
> It's been said that some of the best animation in "Snow White" used the
> live actors merely as references and that the rotoscoped sections were a
> bit stiff. Philosophically I'd be inclined to say that being enslaved
> by the rotoscope process is an unacceptable limitation, though it can be
> useful. I think all animators have recourse to models of some kind even
> if the goal is high style non naturalistic animation.
>
> Personally, at this time I'm more interested is denying physics and
> Muybridge, but I'm open to using whatever technique which might improve
> the cartoon. I actually think that eventually, if I gain enough skill,
> I might try to realize some of my shelved live action ideas in the realm
> of animation. That would be far in the future...
Just curious: have you seen any of Walerian Borowczyk's animations? I
haven't, but the stills from them are intriguing and I enjoyed his
(live action) features.
[snip]
> > > I must say that the new Ren & Stimpy hasn't impressed me so far, even
> > > though I liked most of the original ones... the new one w/ Bakshi was
> > > just terrible and unfunny. In fact the whole Spike TV block seems
> > > pretty horrid. I'd rather use the time rereading my old copies of ZAP
> > > underground comics... at least when they're vulgar they have the
> > > advantage of being totally uncensored.
> >
> > Spike leads the vanguard of irrelevance. It began as The Nashville
> > Network and mostly ran line-dancing programs. Now it's evolved into
> > the First Network for Men, if one forgets Playboy, the sports
> > channels, the car stations, and pretty much all the networks really.
>
> I'm a bit put off by the idea of a testosterone network... is this
> really what men are about? <woof woof> I guess in the majority they may
> be right. I'm equally disturbed by "women's networks" such as Lifetime
> and WE... save me from these empty, shoe buying, harlequin romance
> reading, sob sisters.
entertainment industry (cum lifestyle industry), politics, news, etc.
That sitcom Bottom had a fair assessment of men, though: one was
crazy, vain and obsessed with sex, the other just wanted to get drunk
and watch tv.
> Next:
>
> The Dimwit Network
> The Illiterate Network
> The Gilded Turd Network
Except in Canada we'll rename them the Knucklehead Network and the No
Books Network, and run last year's programming interspersed with Just
For Laughs out-takes.
[snip]
> > > > > Those are classics of "getting around the code". It's amazing that even
> > > > > a navel couldn't be shown (on tv until the '70s). Now there are navels
> > > > > everywhere, even on oranges!
> > > >
> > > > Yes, we're up to our belly buttons in navels. I find it comical that
> > > > American network television now censors the word "god," as in
> > > > "*-damn."
> > >
> > > I even wrote a complaint email to Cartoon network when they cut "Sweet
> > > Zombie Jesus" out of Futurama... I mean this was at 11pm.
> > >
> > > Back to navels... I think there was a syndicated comic strip artist in
> > > the 60's who got tired of the navels in his strip being erased by the
> > > censors, so he included a crate of navel oranges in one strip and the
> > > censor gave up. I wish I could remember what strip that was...
> >
> > "Li'l Abner"?
>
> I finally realized that it was Beetle Bailey. The censor reputedly kept
> a box on his desk labeled "Bettle Bailey's Belly Button Box" full of
> navels snipped from (mainly) Miss Buxley's midriff.
What did he use those excised images for? Well, I don't have any
guesses I would want to publish on a family newsgroup. I wonder if the
censor would peruse S. Clay Wilson or Tom of Finland and get upset
whenever he saw a navel.
[snip]
> > I concur wholeheartedly with your "Agh!" point. Still no go. I've been
> > checking a.b.c. since you posted the message and no posts have
> > appeared. Of course, now I'm even more eager to see the stuff. Should
> > we make a last attempt and post it to a pre-agreed server such as
> > "news.so-net.com.hk" or should I just ask you to e-mail me the loops
> > (I'd give to an alternate e-mail address)?
>
> OK, send me a valid address, but beware that the files are relatively
> large (164k & 246k on disk - about 1/3 of a floppy). I doubt that my
> little sketches can live up to the anticipation, though.
Will do. Those file sizes aren't all that big. I'll soak my eyeballs
in detergent tonight to get them ready.
-- Parry
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 |
|
|