What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Oscars Do-Over: 90-94/ Master Thread (2 Viewers)

Best Picture of 1993

  • Jurassic Park

    Votes: 14 11.4%
  • Schindler's List

    Votes: 71 57.7%
  • Philadelphia

    Votes: 13 10.6%
  • The Remains of the Day

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The Fugitive

    Votes: 9 7.3%
  • Groundhog Day

    Votes: 16 13.0%

  • Total voters
    123
1993 nominations a bit suspect.  Some of the best movies ignored imo:  Carlitos Way, Dazed and Confused, Bronx Tale and Menace II Society 

 
1993 nominations a bit suspect.  Some of the best movies ignored imo:  Carlitos Way, Dazed and Confused, Bronx Tale and Menace II Society 
I was wondering when someone would object! Tombstone Dazed and Confused were my last 2 cuts. Bronx Tale was just ok imo. Coming off the heels of Goodfellas, it always felt like a lesser version. I haven’t seen Menace in a long time but that was one of my favorite movies in middle school for sure. 

Which nominations don’t you think belonged?

 
I was wondering when someone would object! Tombstone Dazed and Confused were my last 2 cuts. Bronx Tale was just ok imo. Coming off the heels of Goodfellas, it always felt like a lesser version. I haven’t seen Menace in a long time but that was one of my favorite movies in middle school for sure. 

Which nominations don’t you think belonged?
Fugitive. Darn good flick, but a popcorn procedural. Jurassic Park had scale & newness at least. The other side of it is that Tombstone didn't gain classic status til the people who loved it in their youth grew up. It wasn't seen as all that remarkable til Gen Y(?) starting referencing it.

 
A 1993 one that I probably would have put as a nomination is "In the Name of the Father" (probably taking out The Fugitive).

But I'd have put three or four of the nominated ones ahead of it; so, not one worth pounding the fists over.

 
Fugitive. Darn good flick, but a popcorn procedural. Jurassic Park had scale & newness at least. The other side of it is that Tombstone didn't gain classic status til the people who loved it in their youth grew up. It wasn't seen as all that remarkable til Gen Y(?) starting referencing it.
Dazed and Confused falls into the same group as Tombstone there. My thoughts on The Fugitive were: huge hit, critical success, still holds up just as well, got 7 Oscar nominations at the time. It’s only flaw is that it wasn’t innovative. Jurassic Park certainly isn’t high art but it’s the Star Wars or Wizard of Oz of a generation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dazed and Confused falls into the same group as Tombstone there. My thoughts on The Fugitive were: huge hit, critical success, still holds up just as well, got 7 Oscar nominations at the time. It’s only flaw is that it wasn’t innovative. Jurassic Park certainly isn’t high art but it’s the Star Wars or Wizard of Oz of a generation.
D&C did nothing for me, but i was already old

 
It came out when I was in middle school and in a classic rock phase so the smoking weed, fashion and music spoke to me. I like the teen movie where it’s a snapshot of a day or 2. I’d rank American Graffiti and Superbad over D&C. 
Yeah. I'm a big D&C fan.

It was about the big kids that I wanted to be.

Set in '76, I was 1st & 2nd grade. Most all of my cousins were in that age group, so I got a whole lotta influence from them.

Great flick.

I'm watching R Dogs right now. I had forgotten how philosophical it is. Still don't know my vote - a few more to watch.

 
I was wondering when someone would object! Tombstone Dazed and Confused were my last 2 cuts. Bronx Tale was just ok imo. Coming off the heels of Goodfellas, it always felt like a lesser version. I haven’t seen Menace in a long time but that was one of my favorite movies in middle school for sure. 

Which nominations don’t you think belonged?
Looking back on it, 1993 was a great year for film.  Just difference of opinion.  Carlitos Way is a more stylized Scarface with a lot more substance.  Probably my favorite mafia movie and often overlooked.   Worth watching again for Sean Penn's brilliant acting along with a great cast of supporting characters.  

I wouldn't have nominated The Fugitive, Jurassic Park or Remains of Day.  Granted I have no clue what Remains of Day is or what its about.  

 
I'm watching R Dogs right now. I had forgotten how philosophical it is. Still don't know my vote - a few more to watch.
Finally finished - been watching in a few spurts.

Thought - did Mr. Orange (Tim Roth) live? I can't believe that I missed this before. Well, I saw the scene, but I never asked that question...I don't think.  EDIT: My hunch is that the 1st gunshot heard was to Orange's head - thus dead - but there is no confirmation.

Mr. White (Harvey Keitel) - WHOA. I had forgotten how powerful he was in that final scene.

Well worth the rental fee: $2.99

Thanks again to all who helped me find this.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Finally finished - been watching in a few spurts.

Thought - did Mr. Orange (Tim Roth) live? I can't believe that I missed this before. Well, I saw the scene, but I never asked that question...I don't think.  EDIT: My hunch is that the 1st gunshot heard was to Orange's head - thus dead - but there is no confirmation.

Mr. White (Harvey Keitel) - WHOA. I had forgotten how powerful he was in that final scene.

Well worth the rental fee: $2.99

Thanks again to all who helped me find this.
I especially like Lawrence Tierney as the old guy that puts it all together. He was in some great noirs in the 40s. He destroyed his career as he was a drunk with a penchant for getting into fights. Between 44 and 51, the peak of his career, he was arrested 12 times for drunken fights.

 
I especially like Lawrence Tierney as the old guy that puts it all together. He was in some great noirs in the 40s. He destroyed his career as he was a drunk with a penchant for getting into fights. Between 44 and 51, the peak of his career, he was arrested 12 times for drunken fights.
The Thing? (According to Mr. Orange)

Ha! Yeah - he's good. I never knew about his pugilistic career. 😄

I'm just now starting Malcolm X. 3h 21m left. It is my final movie re-watch for this round.

Don't know when I'll finish, as I am multi-tasking. (Edit: and posting here.)

Tomorrow at the latest - before noon eastern.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure how I would rank these, but here are some movies that stood out to me for 1993 that would have make my list of tops for the year that weren't up for the award:

In the Name of the Father

Searching for Bobby Fischer

Menace II Society

Three Colors : Blue

Kalifornia

Overrated awards would go to Tombstone and The Sandlot.  

 
Not sure how I would rank these, but here are some movies that stood out to me for 1993 that would have make my list of tops for the year that weren't up for the award:

In the Name of the Father

Searching for Bobby Fischer

Three Colors : Blue
Holy ####.  I hadn't gotten to 1993 yet, but Searching For Bobby Fischer is one of my all-time faves.  I'll put it above anything.

These other two are among my favorites as well.  The acting in In The Name Of The Father is incredible all around, and while Blue is not my favorite of the trilogy, it's amazing.

 
The Thing? (According to Mr. Orange)

Ha! Yeah - he's good. I never knew about his pugilistic career. 😄

I'm just now starting Malcolm X. 3h 21m left. It is my final movie re-watch for this round.

Don't know when I'll finish, as I am multi-tasking. (Edit: and posting here.)

Tomorrow at the latest - before noon eastern.
Malcolm isn't polling super well here but I think it is neck and neck with 2 other movies- 1 of which I don't really care for. 

92-

Actor- Denzel for Malcolm X (real tough passing over Jack Lemmon),

Actress- Marisa Tomei for My Cousin Vinny (ridiculous she was labeled as supporting)

Supporting Actor- Gene Hackman for Unforgiven

Supporting actress- Vanessa Redgrave for Howard's End

Screenplay- David Mamet for Glengarry Glen Ross,

Director- Clint Eastwood for Unforgiven

93- 

Actor- Anthony Hopkins for The Remains of the Day, Actress- Emma Thompson for The Remains of the Day

Supporting Actor- Ralph Fiennes for Schindler's List, Supporting actress- Holly Hunter for The Firm

Screenplay- Ruth Prawer Jhabvala based on the novel by Kazuo Ishiguro for The Remains of the Day,

Director- Steven Spielberg- Schindler's List

also, this year had 2 of the best literary adaptations in recent memory: Remains of the Day and Age of Innocence. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wonder why this poll got 100 less votes and way less discussion? The crop of movies? Lack of interest in the topic? Keeping the same thread confused people?

 
I wonder why this poll got 100 less votes and way less discussion? The crop of movies? Lack of interest in the topic? Keeping the same thread confused people?
Might get more with a new thread.  It could be the year though -- I'll guess 1994 gets more discussion than any of them.

 
you gotta start a new thread each time if you want max yield, but FFAppers generally have both the morals & attention spans of sand fleas. KP'll tellya.
I agree with this (except I don’t know the morals of sand fleas).  Some people will see a multi-page thread and not want to jump in “late”; others won’t realize it’s new polling despite its being in the title.  If someone wasn’t interested in discussing the first group but wants to wade into the fifth one, they’d have to make their way through a bunch of pages that are now hard to follow because the lists of movies are no longer there.

What wikkid said.  Except still unsure about the sand fleas.

 
Might get more with a new thread.  It could be the year though -- I'll guess 1994 gets more discussion than any of them.
Yeah 94 will definitely be a more interesting year since there are probably 3 movies that could evenly split the vote. 

you gotta start a new thread each time if you want max yield, but FFAppers generally have both the morals & attention spans of sand fleas. KP'll tellya.
Ok, will do. I also know sometimes people complain when there are too many threads about the same thing. Also maybe it would be easier to find if people were coming back. Probably not though. 

 
still unsure about the sand fleas.
That's when they gotcha
It's a circus I tell ya! 

1992

For me, it came down to Reservoir Dogs and Malcom X. It was so close, I had to re-watch both. 

While so similar in their worthiness, from my perspective, they're on opposite ends of the movie spectrum.  

Malcom X is a long and winding arc that takes us on the journey of growth with one of the most important people of the 20th century. It explores details, angles and insights into the broad life lived by Malcolm. I watched this last, as it was the favorite - and my most likely vote recipient. 

However, in the end, my 1992 vote went to:

Reservoir Dogs is a tightly written and executed affair covering primarily just one day - one event., but from multiple angles. Every single scene, sentence - word even - is dripping in meaning & import. The conversions, while not complex, are deep, if one is willing to dip their head below the surface.

The unfolding of the narrative is perhaps the most obvious sign that this ain't the typical crime heist film. Out of sequential time, the viewer is fed portions in an appealing order - turning this into quite a thrilling puzzle.

All the while, the dialog remains sharp, biting - subtle in certain ways - and absorbing. As I stated earlier, RD is more philosophical than I remembered - touching on a wide range of ethical, moral, social and existential issues.

It's hard to skip even a moment - not because the viewer will get lost in  the plot, but because the viewer will miss out on some wonderfully, subtlety crafted detours that provoke quality thought. 

Sorry Malcolm, while you are great, RD is ground breaking - imo. 

1993

I don't have a lot to say on this vote. 

It came down to Schindler's List and Groundhog Day. 

If I had to spend the rest of my life re-watching one of these movie over and over and over again - Groundhog Day would prevail. 

As Wikkid would say - nuff'ced! 

Loving the process 80's! 👍

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Groundhog Day is one of those movies that I think I'm way lower on than the general public.  I see it often get mentioned among the top comedies of all-time, but I don't really see that. Sure, it has some amusing moments (Ned Ryerson!),  but, at the end of it, I mostly feel kind of bad for Andie MacDowell's character ending up with a guy who needed 1,000 days to figure out how not to be a pompous jerk for 24 hours.  Am I supposed to be happy for him/them?  Again, I don't hate the movie; I just don't get some of the infatuation with it.

 
Groundhog Day is one of those movies that I think I'm way lower on than the general public.  I see it often get mentioned among the top comedies of all-time, but I don't really see that. Sure, it has some amusing moments (Ned Ryerson!),  but, at the end of it, I mostly feel kind of bad for Andie MacDowell's character ending up with a guy who needed 1,000 days to figure out how not to be a pompous jerk for 24 hours.  Am I supposed to be happy for him/them?  Again, I don't hate the movie; I just don't get some of the infatuation with it.
That’s pretty funny. If we look at most romantic comedies I wonder if they pass this test? Is the woman really better off with the guy who probably spent 2/3 of the movie antagonizing or stalking or trying to make the woman over.

I see Groundhogs Day as a variation on Its a Wonderful Life/Christmas Carol. It just avoids much of the cliche sappiness by focusing around a ridiculous holiday instead of Christmas.

 
krista4 said:
Wow, that 1992 list is killer.  Other than A Few Good Men, I could vote for any of them.  My first impulse was Unforgiven, but I’m going to think on it a bit.

1993 is Schindler’s List, though Remains Of The Day features one of my all-time favorite performances (Hopkins) and is one of the few instances where a movie is as good as the book on which it was based.
wat?!  :hot:

 
That’s pretty funny. If we look at most romantic comedies I wonder if they pass this test? Is the woman really better off with the guy who probably spent 2/3 of the movie antagonizing or stalking or trying to make the woman over.

I see Groundhogs Day as a variation on Its a Wonderful Life/Christmas Carol. It just avoids much of the cliche sappiness by focusing around a ridiculous holiday instead of Christmas.
I think stalker-ish type stuff are themes that runs through a lot of romantic comedies that I don’t like.  I have the same feeling about stuff like There’s Something About Mary; I’ve never watched Say Anything because the whole boom-box thing just seems creepy stupid.  And I suppose I even hate that 10-year old running through the airport at the end of Love, Actually, and want to kick his father’s ### for encouraging that.  

So, maybe it is just me, and I’m the only one that was rooting for her and Chris Elliott as a couple.  

ETA: Found this link on Groundhog Day from her perspective, which is pretty spot on.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think stalker-ish type stuff are themes that runs through a lot of romantic comedies that I don’t like.  I have the same feeling about stuff like There’s Something About Mary; I’ve never watched Say Anything because the whole boom-box thing just seems creepy stupid.  And I suppose I even hate that 10-year old running through the airport at the end of Love, Actually, and want to kick his father’s ### for encouraging that.  

So, maybe it is just me, and I’m the only one that was rooting for her and Chris Elliott as a couple.  
Yeah when I was 20 or so and had some relationship experience I realized how absurd Say Anything is. The media/audiences find so many big gestures romantic that in real life are weird and creepy. I give a bit more of a pass to Theres Something About Mary because it’s such an over the top comedy that none of it ever comes off as a serious look at a relationship. 

 
I wonder why this poll got 100 less votes and way less discussion? The crop of movies? Lack of interest in the topic? Keeping the same thread confused people?
Lots a good answers already, but I wonder if the time of week makes a difference?

Perhaps, late week & week-ends just afford more free time to people - while the new work week occupies more potential posting time.

:shrug:

Could be a combination of multi-factors.

 
I'm all in with TO THE HOSPITAL (2:40 of the clip), cuz it really happened.
OOOhhhh.

Having just finished watchin this less than 10 hours ago, I gotta say Powerful - in real life - and on screen.

I'm still debating the Best Actor awards, but D. Wash is toppin the list at the moment.

Also, more in regards to real life - Malcolm X has been severely misunderstood in  my opinion - by most - even now. I had once severely misunderstood him. Now, though this scene is truth, whenever I watch biography type movies, I am always curious about where the line is drawn between good art and good history.

In this movie's case, I cannot claim to know, but I believe it is a fair portrayal.

Does anyone have better insight into this than I?  I'd love to hear more.

 
I’m no expert but Lee got most of the big things right in the movie from as far as I know. Malcom X did go through lots of changes in his life and the falling out with the Nation was real. Lee didn’t shy away from any of the controversial  points in Malcolm’s life.

 
And I agree he has been poorly handled by history. Most all anyone who can even begin to explain who Malcolm X was will think MLK= non violence and Malcolm X = violence. It is accurate to a point but it reduces a really complicated and thoughtful person down to a word or 2 which sucks.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OOOhhhh.

Having just finished watchin this less than 10 hours ago, I gotta say Powerful - in real life - and on screen.

I'm still debating the Best Actor awards, but D. Wash is toppin the list at the moment.

Also, more in regards to real life - Malcolm X has been severely misunderstood in  my opinion - by most - even now. I had once severely misunderstood him. Now, though this scene is truth, whenever I watch biography type movies, I am always curious about where the line is drawn between good art and good history.

In this movie's case, I cannot claim to know, but I believe it is a fair portrayal.

Does anyone have better insight into this than I?  I'd love to hear more.
The Autobiography changed my life more than any other book. Malcolm X, abolitionist Angelina Grimke and Voltaire are my three great historical heroes, mostly because their ultimate self-belief changed the world. Denzel Washington is also verrrrry happy with who he is in a way quite similar to Brother Malcolm, so was the perfect choice to portray him. The rest is movie-making and movie-making puts narrative truth over actual truth, but the spirit of the life is right.

 
And I agree he has been poorly handled by history. Most all anyone who can even begin to explain who Malcolm X was will think MLK= non violence and Malcolm X = violence. It is accurate to a point but it reduces a really complicated and thoughtful person down to a word or 2 which sucks.
Thanks. 

You teach history? I know Tanner does - and I think you do - but I could be wrong - toasty factors takin into consideration.

Anyways, during my takin-history-classes years (70 - 80's), Malcolm was either overlooked, added as a footnote or portrayed as you describe above.

How's formal history doin now in regards to this? (mostly interested in high school level, because that is really the foundation, imo - grade schooler's are not yet ready for the depth, and college is a mixed bag depending on major - or even if ya go.)

 
The Autobiography changed my life more than any other book. Malcolm X, abolitionist Angelina Grimke and Voltaire are my three great historical heroes, mostly because their ultimate self-belief changed the world. Denzel Washington is also verrrrry happy with who he is in a way quite similar to Brother Malcolm, so was the perfect choice to portray him. The rest is movie-making and movie-making puts narrative truth over actual truth, but the spirit of the life is right.
Thanks.

Well explained.  

Self-belief - I see it. Understand why you place them as you do. Goes great with what I understand, so far, of your manual work.

 
Man of Constant Sorrow said:
Reservoir Dogs is a tightly written and executed affair covering primarily just one day - one event., but from multiple angles. Every single scene, sentence - word even - is dripping in meaning & import. The conversions, while not complex, are deep, if one is willing to dip their head below the surface.

The unfolding of the narrative is perhaps the most obvious sign that this ain't the typical crime heist film. Out of sequential time, the viewer is fed portions in an appealing order - turning this into quite a thrilling puzzle.

All the while, the dialog remains sharp, biting - subtle in certain ways - and absorbing. As I stated earlier, RD is more philosophical than I remembered - touching on a wide range of ethical, moral, social and existential issues.

It's hard to skip even a moment - not because the viewer will get lost in  the plot, but because the viewer will miss out on some wonderfully, subtlety crafted detours that provoke quality thought. 
@Man of Constant Sorrow - if you haven't seen it, I will yet again pimp Kubrick's The Killing.   I am sure he wasn't the first either, but seeing him do a similar non-sequential heist film in the same vein 36 years before Reservoir Dogs really got me thinking about how much of a mimic Tarantino is and made me look at his films a lot differently.   Don't get me wrong, I love RD (my 2nd favorite of QT's after Jackie Brown), but that started me on my like - not love opinion of QT.  He writes really great dialogue and can get some damn good performances out of actors that we had forgotten about, but I think overall his films feel like a regurgitation of stuff he nerded out on without incorporating it into a fresh unique vision that genuinely feels like his own voice.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Man of Constant Sorrow - if you haven't seen it, I will yet again pimp Kubrick's The Killing.   I am sure he wasn't the first either, but seeing him do a similar non-sequential heist film in the same vein 36 years before Reservoir Dogs really got me thinking about how much of a mimic Tarantino is and made me look at his films a lot differently.   Don't get me wrong, I love RD (my 2nd favorite of QT's after Jackie Brown), but that started me on my like - not love opinion of QT.  He writes really great dialogue and can get some damn good performances out of actors that we had forgotten about, but I think overall his films feel like a regurgitation of stuff he nerded out on without incorporating it into a fresh unique vision that genuinely felt like his own voice.  
Kubrick! Oh yeah, I'm a big fan, but obviously not big enough. I will watch The Killing soon. Thanks!

Now, I am glad that you brought up Tarantino. Since I was writing to support my vote, I omitted any mention of my opinion of QT. I tried to focus only on the work itself. I love this work - RD.  

I do not love QT. This movie, Jackie Brown & Pulp Fiction are the only movies of his that I claim to like.

I turned off Kill Bill before the ending. Never ever tried to watch Kill Bill 2

I don't mean to say he's bad - I dunno enuff to pass that judgement - but, typically, his work does not appeal to me.

Oh, I may need to rethink the "ground -breaking" aspect of my review, in light or your info. However, I would still give it the award - grudgingly - cause I prefer not to think about QT. 

 
@Man of Constant Sorrow - if you haven't seen it, I will yet again pimp Kubrick's The Killing.   I am sure he wasn't the first either, but seeing him do a similar non-sequential heist film in the same vein 36 years before Reservoir Dogs really got me thinking about how much of a mimic Tarantino is and made me look at his films a lot differently.   Don't get me wrong, I love RD (my 2nd favorite of QT's after Jackie Brown), but that started me on my like - not love opinion of QT.  He writes really great dialogue and can get some damn good performances out of actors that we had forgotten about, but I think overall his films feel like a regurgitation of stuff he nerded out on without incorporating it into a fresh unique vision that genuinely felt like his own voice.  
Did you listen to the Cine-files this week? They nailed QT

 
Thanks. 

You teach history? I know Tanner does - and I think you do - but I could be wrong - toasty factors takin into consideration.

Anyways, during my takin-history-classes years (70 - 80's), Malcolm was either overlooked, added as a footnote or portrayed as you describe above.

How's formal history doin now in regards to this? (mostly interested in high school level, because that is really the foundation, imo - grade schooler's are not yet ready for the depth, and college is a mixed bag depending on major - or even if ya go.)
I have taught history and have a history minor. And no Malcolm X isn’t treated any different than he was in the 80s. When I taught US History I included him but it wasn’t anything deep. I typically did group presentations on the Civil Rights Movement so he would be one of the many topics a group might get. They were high school freshman so they were just scratching the surface with their research. I’m sure other history teachers might not even include him. I have a crazy idea that at a school that’s 40% black we should teach more history of black Americans. 

 
I have taught history and have a history minor. And no Malcolm X isn’t treated any different than he was in the 80s. When I taught US History I included him but it wasn’t anything deep. I typically did group presentations on the Civil Rights Movement so he would be one of the many topics a group might get. They were high school freshman so they were just scratching the surface with their research. I’m sure other history teachers might not even include him. I have a crazy idea that at a school that’s 40% black we should teach more history of black Americans. 
I gave ya a Thinkin Guy reaction to this, cause -

I'm SAD that things have not changed enough -

Happy that I was kinda close in my memories of your background -

Thankful for the answer you provided and thankful that you included M in your syllabus when you could - 

Love your point about 40% of the students should have their history properly and fairly included -

And Laughing at myself for forgetting that you help special needs students (I hope I am using the proper term - I am not exposed to this language much anymore, and I may be using outdated lingo.) - Oh, I love that you do this as well.

Carry on. 🙂

 
Don Quixote said:
Groundhog Day is one of those movies that I think I'm way lower on than the general public.  I see it often get mentioned among the top comedies of all-time, but I don't really see that. Sure, it has some amusing moments (Ned Ryerson!),  but, at the end of it, I mostly feel kind of bad for Andie MacDowell's character ending up with a guy who needed 1,000 days to figure out how not to be a pompous jerk for 24 hours.  Am I supposed to be happy for him/them?  Again, I don't hate the movie; I just don't get some of the infatuation with it.
I feel the same way regarding Groundhog Day.

I voted for Malcolm X for 92. My second pick is a tie between Glengarry Glen Ross or Unforgiven.

I voted for Schindler's List for 93. I thought it was so well done, and it was emotional watching it. My second pick in the poll would be Philadelphia. This was another emotional movie for me. I remember when the Neil Young song started playing at the end, and the home movies were being played, I felt this overwhelming sadness.  I felt sad for the rest of the night. I had a friend who died of AIDS in 93.  He was my neighbor for a couple years in the late 80s. He was a few years older than me. He had contracted HIV from a former girlfriend that had been an IV user in her past. A clinic made her call all of her former partners and tell them to get tested. He got the call, and got tested, and tested positive. Back then HIV turned into full blown AIDS, because of the lack of treatment for it. I remember some of his friends alienating him. We had cookouts with him all the time. He was such a nice guy. I remember a friend telling me she wouldn't hang around him, because what if she picked up a fork he ate off of, or accidentally picked up his beer, blah, blah, blah. His name was Garland, and I can't imagine how hard it was for him. I went to Florida in 90, and was still in Florida when he died. He was learning to fly the last time I saw him, as it was one of his dreams, and he was going to fulfill it. I'm sure he did. ✈️

 
Did you listen to the Cine-files this week? They nailed QT
For the 2 part episodes I have been trying to wait until both are out to start my listen.  Plus I have been wanting to rewatch IB so I was trying to get that in before I checked out the episode.  Looking forward to it though.  I get the feeling that they would be 50/50 with him and they are doing this movie just because it won the vote, and not because it was a favorite of theirs.  

 
For the 2 part episodes I have been trying to wait until both are out to start my listen.  Plus I have been wanting to rewatch IB so I was trying to get that in before I checked out the episode.  Looking forward to it though.  I get the feeling that they would be 50/50 with him and they are doing this movie just because it won the vote, and not because it was a favorite of theirs.  
I won’t spoil it but they come up with the absolute description of QT and it made so much more sense of his work for me.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top