![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I'm listening to Ron and Fez on the radio, and they just asked a question that totally made me giggle.
What movie would they be showing in your Hell?
If I went to Hell, and they shoved me into the movie theater, House of 1000 Corpses would be playing on a continuous loop. And just for good measure, Kenneth Turan from the LA Times would sit next to me and talk about film, and I'd have to agree with every bloody thing he said.
I'd go nuts in less than ten minutes. Five if I had to share my popcorn with the moron.
EDIT: Ooo, and like Ron just said ... Pay It Forward. Damn, did that movie make me want to bash my head in with a plank of wood. The good part was, I could have used Haley Joel Osment's performance.
SON OF EDIT: Ron and Fez are interviewing a guy from Move Ahead America about their attempts to get American theaters not to show "Fahrenheit 9/11". I'll give him credit ... when he's not getting really into his points (when he starts to ramble a bit condescendingly), he's making a good argument for his side.
NAUGHTY MISTRESS OF EDIT: Okay, he really needs to make blaming Michael Moore for everything ever, 'cause otherwise his argument's not bad.
What movie would they be showing in your Hell?
If I went to Hell, and they shoved me into the movie theater, House of 1000 Corpses would be playing on a continuous loop. And just for good measure, Kenneth Turan from the LA Times would sit next to me and talk about film, and I'd have to agree with every bloody thing he said.
I'd go nuts in less than ten minutes. Five if I had to share my popcorn with the moron.
EDIT: Ooo, and like Ron just said ... Pay It Forward. Damn, did that movie make me want to bash my head in with a plank of wood. The good part was, I could have used Haley Joel Osment's performance.
SON OF EDIT: Ron and Fez are interviewing a guy from Move Ahead America about their attempts to get American theaters not to show "Fahrenheit 9/11". I'll give him credit ... when he's not getting really into his points (when he starts to ramble a bit condescendingly), he's making a good argument for his side.
NAUGHTY MISTRESS OF EDIT: Okay, he really needs to make blaming Michael Moore for everything ever, 'cause otherwise his argument's not bad.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 05:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 06:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 08:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 06:17 pm (UTC)Wow. I can't imagine what "good" excuse anyone could give to censor another person's film that way. If he doesn't like the movie, he can simply vote with his feet and not go to the theater to see it. Doing anything else is kinda, you know, UnAmerican. I do wish someone would point out to these guys waving the AMerican flag around that suppressing the opinions of someone they happen to disagree with and not allowing anyone else to hear those opinions is about as UnAmerican as you can get. And that's something both the Far Right and the Far Left are guilty of. Please tell us what the guy said!
no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 06:49 pm (UTC)Having said that, the guy did get a bit vehement when Ron and Fez would call him on simple basic points. When they asked him if he'd even seen the movie, he said he'd seen parts of it. (And quite frankly, the parts he described sounded like they were right out of the trailer.) And like I said, he'd start acting like a taunting 13-year-old the second Michael Moore's name would come up.
I did like the fact that after the interview, most of the response was against him, who all thought he was getting his info wrong. (Which, to be honest, he was at some points). My personal favorite was this elderly lady who called up, sweetly complimented Ron and Fez's show, then said that the man had told a fib and she wasn't about to let him get away with it. (He'd said that Michael Moore's assertion that Bush had shipped out the bin Ladin family on 9/11 was crap and that Richard Clark did it, but the little old lady said he testifid that the order came from higher up at the 9/11 hearings.) She was incredibly cute. :)
Long time lurker, first time poster... ;-p
Date: 2004-06-18 07:11 pm (UTC)I must interrupt this post to tell you how envious I am that you have Ron & Fez! My mis-spent youth took place in central Florida listening to "WJRR" which stood for Just Ron And Ron (as they were known back then). Fez was the fantastic sideman and it was the ONLY funny morning show I've ever heard. Probably around 8 years ago one of the Rons' wife died (from AIDS, if I remember correctly) and Ron & Fez's tribute show that morning was the most powerful radio I've ever heard.
Our local radio sucks. I'd looooooove to have Ron & Fez!
no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 08:20 pm (UTC)Heh. Protesting a film doesn't mean you make it impossible for anyone else to see it or hear it. This is exactly like the idiot students who make so much noise, they drown out the voices of right-wing speakers who have been invited to speak at their college, under the guise of (their own) freedom of speech. Preventing another from voicing his opinion is NOT freedom of speech; never has been, never will be. This guy is obviously trying to censor the film, he's just putting a nice little uber-PC spin on it.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 07:07 pm (UTC)That's moviefan hell for me.
*twitch twitch twitch*
no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 07:21 pm (UTC)It would involve the Catwoman trailer.
Over. And over. And over.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 08:05 pm (UTC)Gigli, and then Catwoman when it comes out, interspersed with ANY FUCKING MEG RYAN/TOM HANKS SACCHARINE CHIKFLIK FUCKERY and of course all 17 hours of Meet Joe Black.
Hell is not other people. Hell is Nora Ephron with a side order of puréed Ben Affleck and Matt Damon.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 08:44 pm (UTC)In my hell, it would definitely have to be...
Date: 2004-06-19 12:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-19 12:11 am (UTC)Doesn't help that I read the book, so I would have two terrible things at work: both an absolutely ghastly movie, and a bad novel-to-film adaption.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-19 02:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-19 03:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-19 03:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-19 07:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-21 06:30 am (UTC)