Subject:
|
Re: Bicentennial Man (don't bother)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 29 Dec 1999 18:59:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
960 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> Just a side note: don't see the movie--it's awful. Well, not awful,
> exactly, but pretty darned uneven with not a single moment giving us any sense
> of what Robin Williams' character really has at stake. The short story is a
> much better evocation of his character's journey. The Silverberg/Azimov novel
> is supposed to be okay, but I'm still sold on the short story.
c /Azimov/Asimov/ (getting the master's name right takes you up a notch on my
"credence-o-meter" when discussing his work :-) )
I confess to a bit of shock at your perception. What a radically different
perception than mine! As I said, I found it to be one of the best movies I've
seen in a long time. I had a great deal of "sense of what Robin Williams'
character really has at stake" all the way through it. But then, perhaps our
aesthetic and emotive thresholds are different. I also did say that I expected
80% of the viewers not to get it. Perhaps you're in that bracket.
How old are you, if you don't mind my asking?
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
86 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
