Chris Beilby (
Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:45:25 -0700

Alfred Urrutia wrote:

> On Apr 26, 1:00pm, Edward Ju wasted bandwidth discussing:
> > Subject: Re: [gundam] [OT] The Matrix & Dark City <spoiler>
> >
> > You know, there was another futuristic comic book type of movie which
> > attempted to lay the groundwork for background info in the first movie
> > so the sequels will come naturally... remember Judge Dredd?!
> >
> That was one of the worst movies ever made. Just because it started out
> as a comic book doesn't mean the shit directing and shit story (a friend
> of mine who read those comic books was insulted to the point of rage) and
> shit acting can't torpedo it. Thank god for Diane Lane in tight pants,
> huh?
> > Anyway, while I agree that The Matrix rocked and its exposition on the
> > background was not a waste of time, there are some who'd disagree. For
> > example, check out this review at:
> >
> >
> >
> > I am not even sure if I saw the same movie this guy saw! His opinion on
> > how The Matrix unfolds was not unlike your description of Dark City.
> >
> The first review (in yellow) must have been based on the trailer or some
> other bit or two of info that his overactive imagination added to. What
> crap. The second review said it was one of the best sci-fi movies in years,
> like the worthless "Star Trek: First Contact" and "Starship Troopers"? Is
> he nuts? Those movies bored the shit out of everyone I know (not counting
> the carnage in Troopers and the built-in love from the Trekkies). At least
> we agree that the talking Neo back to life part was stupid.
> This reviewer tends to concentrate on points that don't jibe with what he
> thinks a sci-fi movie should be, like complaining that the movie relied on
> "the bland idea of conventional gunfights". What, every sci-fi movie must
> have ray guns? The whole point was that it was faked 1990s. I'm not aware
> of ray guns or anti-gravity yet, are you? And then he complains about it
> being unoriginal because it pulls from other movies. I guess he never saw
> "Star Wars".
> > >I don't know about you but I hate a poor explanation hiding behind "alien
> > >artifacts" that can't be described so I have to just buy into that "thing"
> > >being able to do X and Y just because.
> >
> > Well... I don't think how the aliens were able to do what they could, along
> > with their machine, was the point of Dark City. Besides, it's alien
> > technology, not something created directly or indirectly by men as in
> > The Matrix. If you go around thinking and asking how things worked, you'll
> > go insane watching one of David Cronenberg's movie, such as his new film
> > eXistenZ.
> >
> Ya, but I want *some* explanation, not just "they can do it using that" and
> that's it. Then it becomes more of a fantasy movie.
> Alfred.
> --
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> "Did you know that I shot your father on Melpomene? Between the eyes,
> so he could see it coming."
> - Major Joachim Steuben/Hammer's Slammers
> Alfred Urrutia - Disney FA - 818.526.3338 -
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> -
> Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at

I just read the review, and I wonder if Garth has any idea of the concept of

Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue Apr 27 1999 - 06:47:52 JST