For about 5-10 minutes, near the beginning of the movie, there was an audible whine coming from the vicinity of my center channel. Loud scenes, quiet scenes, didn't matter. I turned the volume down (to -20) on my Denon 2802, but the whine persisted for a while. I run the rears at like +8 so when I had the Denon at -15, I guess it was more akin to -7. My M60s are set to "large".

What is the deal? Anybody else hear that whine? Could it have been the disc (rental - already gone back )? Overdriving the amps?

Muchos grassyass.

Assuming this whine issue doesn't exist for others, how's the sound for this movie compare to the first two on DVD?

It was a 2 hour battle scene followed by 30 minutes of anti-climactic character summation. And people thought Master & Commander was long and drawn out!

I would say the SQ was on par with the other two. Treebeard was a little difficult to understand. Smiegel was good. There seemed to be some poor sound dubbing when Gandolf meets with the steward of the throne of Gandor (name of the guy escapes me) for the first time.

The half hour of "anticlimactic character summation" was both necessary (IMO), and considerably cut down from the book. What was the whole story about if not so Frodo and Sam could go back to the shire and live long full lives and so Aragorn could get the girl and become the king of Men? When you take into account that it is a 9 hour plus story, 30 minutes of epilogue isn't excessive.

Mark

And the sound was great on my system, btw.

bigwill, you're killing me with those names.

BigWill, I can't help you with your question. However, (I can't help myself here), do you want some cheese with that whine?

Sorry about the names. I stopped reading the books after "The Hobbit".

"Analyze That" last night had about 5 minutes of whine and then it disappeared.

sounds like you might be having some probs with your equip somewhere there bigwill??

BTW- i plan on watching the LOTR/ROTK this week.. i will update with my thoughts on the sound and the movie in general later on. in case anyone is interested?

OH- and i watched a movie this weekend called 'UNDERWORLD'. now, its been out on dvd for a while and a friend of mine let me borrow it. its about vampires and werewolves, and its set in this very dark, goth-like world. i wouldnt normally like movies like this, but i found myself completely interested and sitting on the edge of my seat for every scene. it has unpredicitable plot twists and is filmed very well.. it does have an extreme amount of graphic violence, but overall, i thought it was an interesting and entertaining movie. and it has great sound effects. forget reality, and let yourself emmerse in the fantasy of the movie. i give it two thumbs up!! ZANG

bigjohn

I second the Underworld recomendation. It's a good flick - and Kate Beckinsale is tasty. Back to the ROTK topic - does anyone know when the extended edition DVD is coming out? I haven't seen it yet.

Pete

Radspecv,

If memory serves me right, the Extended Edition DVD is slated to come out in November, just like the previous two...perfect Christmas gift...

Enjoy the Theatrical Release until then...

WhatFurrer

No release date yet as far as I know...it is promised in time for Christmas, though I hope it comes out considerably sooner.

Mark

Bigwill - We watched ROTK yesterday (in DD, not DTS - my DVD player requires too much futzing, but I digress). Neither whine nor cheese was evident.

Good movie and good sound processing, IMO.

Sorry I can't be more helpful.

Thanks anyway. I wonder if it has something to do with the "fullscreen" versions I've been watching? I have a 4:3 HDTV and sometimes opt for the larger image.

That shouldn't be causing a problem. Both aspect ratios use the same soundtrack.

BigWill, what kind of audio netherworld are you living in? Yuor sister-in-law's sub hums and your DVD player whines. Acouple more pieces of gear and you could do a whole Spike Jones Band thing. BTW, I personally don't know who Spike Jones is; my grandmother told me about him.

I must add a comment about "Underworld". Special. I wathced it twice. Serios LFE enhanced by Kate. Oh YEAH.

Yeah, Ray, I hear ya'. I'm fixin' to go take a closer look at the sister-in-laws box. Do you think a new outboard amp for my poor Denon 2802 is in order, as well? I'd hate to have like 400 watts per channel to drive my M60s if it weren't really necessary.

OK - I am exercising tremendous professional restraint in completely passing over the initial remark in your post relative to your sister-in-law. I can understand how lonely it must get where you are.

I don't know if an amp is anywhere near being the right answer. Is this DVD the only one you are having trouble with? Have you borrowed, rented or chacked the same DVD out of the library for comparison? It might just be that the DVD Player or receiver is a little under the weather.

BigWill,
it wouldn't be something else in your chain of electronics would it? I know my tv had a really high pitched whine that was pretty easily drowned out when pushing a bit of volume (it came and went). Come to think of it, I haven't noticed it for a while, could be it's gone away.

That would be the only thing I regret about buying a CRT, it is such a heavy beast that I would tend to ignore minor functional problems because it's such a pain in the a@@ to haul it in for servicing (not that there has been many problems).

By the way, guys...

LORT:ROTK EE wil be released in December, NOT JANUARY. They don't have to rush it out this year to beat a movie into the theaters, so I guess they're taking a little extra time to do it....44 extra minutes or so though put it over 4 hours I heard.

In reply to:

---

I know my tv had a really high pitched whine that was pretty easily drowned out when pushing a bit of volume (it came and went).

---

A pint at the King's Head says it's a flyback issue.

Bren R.

i'll buy you a whole tray if it's a flyback issue (but you have to help me lug it into Winnipeg to be eligible )

Over 4 hours!! That's two movies. Can they make a part A and B so there is a good breaking point to watch the rest some other time.

If you wear the Heavy Duty Depends, you don't really need to take a mobile bio break.

Hell, if you're watching it in your own house, all you'll really need is an empty beer bottle. Depends? We don't need no stinkin' depends!

Mark

Maybe an empty beer bottle will suffice for you, Mark. I think some of the other boys will declare they need marshmallow cream jars (or at least a Mickey's Big Mouth).

Now that's hitting below the belt!

Mark

I find a 55 gallon drum to be adequate.

In reply to:

---

I find a 55 gallon drum to be adequate.

---

I thought we were still talking about going #1.

LOTR-ROTK:EE UPDATE:

Entertainment Weekly magazine posted a short blurb in their June 19th issue about what we can expect on the forthcoming The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King - Special Extended DVD Edition (which arrives in December - street date TBA). Look for the film to be a whopping 49 minute longer, complete with more than 300 new FX shots completed just for this release. Among the new scenes you'll see will be Gandalf facing down the Witch King at Minas Tirith, the Mouth of Sauron taunting Aragorn and company at the Black Gates, Aragorn tending to Eowyn at the House of Healing, and Gandalf's final confrontation with the wizard Saruman. You'll also get more audio commentaries from everyone involved, two discs worth of exclusive, in-depth documentaries and (we've heard) a pretty funny Easter egg or two. Look for the 4-disc set's faux leather slipcase to be blue. We'll post further details as they become available.

I'd pay money if they released a version that was shorter.

Oh no! I'm waiting for the 3 movie 'get a colostomy bag it is so long' version. I have the special edition of the first one (and it's great of course), but want to wait to see what an all inclusive set has. Longer is better! I can always skip the parts I don't want to watch.

jr

I think that this current version is only 5.1. I've resisted buying this version and waiting for the extended version. the extended version for the other 2 releases(as you all probably already know) is 6.1 ES. I've done some experimenting with my 7.1 setup and find that turning down (a little) the surrounds and turning up (a lot) the rear surrounds gives some interesting results... like, "where the H@ll did that come from" I found myself looking over my shoulder quite a bit.

My big disappoint with "The Return of the King" is that they left our the "scouring of the Shire" chapter" I realize it would of been rediculous to try and inlcude due to time -- but, it's probably one of the best chapters of the book. Anyway, I realize for "non-readers" of the trilogy, the wrap up probably goes long. But, for anyone whose read the books, the characters are so much closer than the movie can reveal, and that the "good-byes" almost seem short in the movie.

"it's just an oppinion, I don't want to be beaten up for it"

first: *ridiculous*

But seriously, I think to have added the book ending would have made the movie unbearable to the non-readers. Not to mention, Saruman doesn't even appear in the 3rd movie at all. (Sure he will be in the extended version, but so might be some more of the original ending, and hopefully something about Aragorn showing himself to be the king by healing everyone with the kingsfoil, and Frodo and Sam pretending to be orcs would be nice too.) So yes, I wish it were there as well, but I am ok with the way it was wrapped up.

We're definitely going to see Aragorn with the kingsfoil in the houses of healing.

We're also going to see Aragorn's final confrontation with Saruman, and his ultimate demise (which was notably missing in ROTK in the theaters).

Can't hardly wait for the EE

I truly enjoy the longer versions of these movies. Not because I can't get enough - but because I think the pacing and flow is better and so is the character development.

wait wait wait here.....
A spoiler to follow from the books, although somehow I don't think anyone here cares...



Saruman gets killed in the Shire by Grima in the books...to have that in there would essentially require having the entire scouring of the shire added back, which I'm not sure there's time to do properly even in the extended version...I would love to see it though if they can do it. You really think they'll add that whole part back? I am skeptical.

I'm not sure that they could add the scouring of the shire part back because I don't think that they filmed it in the first place.

Maybe you mean the addition of Aragorn confronting Sauron's emmissary at the Black Gates. That has been added.

It's for certain that they will add in the mouth of Sauron shot.

I had heard that they shot the final confrontation between Saruman and Gandalf. Now, I could be mistaken. They might not deal with it in the shire - rather, they might add the scene back in right after Gandalf picks up Merry and Pippen at Isengard. Gandalf confronts Saruman there in the book. Jackson might add some of this dialogue back in and take care of Saruman this way.

We'll just have to wait and see, though, I guess.

Yes, I can hardly wait. And I don't even have a decent Home Theatre!

The Aragorn/mouth of Sauron scene will be great as well as the houses of healing scene.

I agree with you on the Gandalf/Saruman scene at Isegard. I think I read something from Jackson about that scene. Anyways, that is one of my favorite scenes (along with hundreds more ) in the book. I hope we get to see Saruman of many colors!

In reply to:

---

I truly enjoy the longer versions of these movies. Not because I can't get enough - but because I think the pacing and flow is better and so is the character development

---

pacing and flow?? are you kidding me??

dont get me wrong, these are very well made movies.. visually, costumes, special effects, sound effects, story lines, the whole deal. but to say that the "pacing and flow" is better in the EE is ridiculious.. these movies are TOOO long.. i didnt go see a single one in the theater simply for that reason. i, along with millions of others, cant sit in a theater for 3-4 hours, just cant do it. i completely understand that detail of the books, and the sheer amount of story there is to be told. but, my main complaint about the whole series is the fact that they are ridiculiously long.. really on my threshold of how long i can sit in one place, and stay focused on a subject.

this is not a 'cut' or 'dig' toward the movies.. they are great.. just long.. and i just had to laugh at that quote..

bigjohn

I had no problem sitting in the theatre for these movies. I was surprised when they were finished.

This is diametrically opposite to when I saw The Postman. About halfway through, I looked at my watch, realized it was going to be a 3 hour movie, and groaned.

I don't think the length of the movie has much to do with it. I think the quality of the movie does. Anyone who complains about the length is copping out.

well, since I've gone so far being the "ridiculous police" today, I can't help it...you slipped an extra 'i' in there john... And yes they are loooooooooooooong...but being a fan of the books, I am very glad they are. Every little thing that gets cut out to make them as *short* as they are, we sorely miss.

"i didnt go see a single one in the theater simply for that reason. i, along with millions of others, cant sit in a theater for 3-4 hours, just cant do it"

How did the movies make so much money if "millions" of people can't sit down for three hours to watch them?

If your take is that they are too long, fine, that is your opinion. But to me and many others they are not too long. If the choice is to have a longer movie to do the books justice then so be it. If he had to make 5 three hour movies I wouldn't mind. If that's what it took.

Would you have rather he produced it with the first company (I forget which) that only wanted two 2 hour movies? I know I'm glad he didn't.

ringmir- the evil xtra "i".. slipped it in there on ya..

i can dig the position peter jackson was in.. trying to put on film, and be a fair representation to the books, was almost an impossible task.. but, i think its fair to say, that the majority of the people that saw these movies, never read these books.. so, for those people, they would have never missed the movie being cut down a little, cause they would never know what they were missing.. but, jackson being a true fan of the series, wanted to be as true to the books as he could. and as ya'll have mentioned, he still had to cut stuff out, and the movies were still loooooooooong.. you said that the parts that were cut out, "we sorely miss".. yes, "we" as in the people that read the books.. the die-hard fans.. and i have no prob with that. but like i was saying, the majority of people that went to the movies never read the books..

do i have a point, not really.. i just think they are long.. there good movies, i like them.. i just think they are long.. quit backin me into a corner here people.

bigjohn

In reply to:

---

The Aragorn/mouth of Sauron scene...

---

Is it just me, or does that sound like something Mr. Bear would enjoy watching?

Yeah, yeah. They were long. Get over it.

The EE's are really only for fans of the movie who were willing to sit on their asses til they got numb teh first time around, only to want more when the credits rolled.

The point I was trying to make (because I too agree that they are long) is that the movie is about a journey, a huge, monumental journey in which characters ACTUALLY DEVELOP. Frodo becomes something he is not -slowly degrading into a slave to the ring. Sam, the slave, becomes a hero (samwise the brave). Aragorn goes from a nomadic loner to king of all men. Merry and Pippen finally leave the shire to face their fears. Both Legolas and Gimli face their prejudices and come out the most unlikely of best friends. All of this takes time. But at the same time, there are an incredible number of other characters which serve other roles, and a tremendous amount of action that has to take place to get characters from one place to another, etc., etc.,

What the EE's allowed PJAckson to do was to slow down and take soem time when the story and the characters needed it, rather than cut those quiet moments for fear that the audience would fall asleep or lose interest. In the EE's, he knows he's got us, and he can take the time to let a character laugh or smile or have a side diversion that is not entirely related to the plot (to show us something more about the character). These things make the movie, in my opinion, better. It also allows the movie to have a more natural pacing, which is what I meant in the beginning, rather than the unnatural editting that needs to be doen in order to please the masses (which they apparently did very well too.)

Anyway - it's just my opinion. Yours may vary.

cool man, i can dig it.. trust me, its nothin personal.. the quote just made me laugh..

my wife and i actually just watched the 3rd in the series this past weekend, and liked it.. although, it did take all of sunday afternoon, and we had to stop for an hour to make dinner.. but, it was a fitting end to the series, and i was pleased to finally get closure.. with that said, will i choose to watch the EE versions, not a chance..

bigjohn

The way I read this is...John doesn't want to sit in a movie seat that long. Honestly? I can't blame ya. Those things are uncomfortable, and if you get a lousy seat your neck gets all twisted around.

When I said "we sorely miss" I most certainly meant us serious fans. I know the majority of the audience never read the books, and probably won't go out and do so (although a lot have to be sure.) But considering what was left in the movies, not much could have been removed without seriously compromising the story line. There were only a few entire concepts removed from the movies. (Like Tom Bombadil in the first, Scouring of the shire in the third.) And a large portion of the second book was pushed into the third movie to even out the timeline (given that the Scouring of the shire was removed, which is practically half of the third book.) This resulted in a much less suspenseful ending of the second movie than the second book provides. But it also made the third movie more exciting than the third book. All in all, I say he did the best to appease both worlds. Any less movie and he would have met scathing reviews across the board for cutting so much out that he decimated the story itself, any more movie and people would have shot themselves in the theater (the non-die hard fans).

agreed, totally!!

BTW- what is scouring of the shire?? short and sweet, what could possibly take half of the third book??

just curious.. and no, i will not read these books.. i cant read big books. i am more of a short story, newspaper, magazine type reader..short, sweet, and simple.. i guess i am primitive that way

bigjohn

Ok as condensed as possible...

The whole reason Frodo leaves with the elves is because when he returns to the shire it has changed, and he can't go back to his old way of life. What ends up taking the second half of the book is really Aragorn's wedding, the whole return home, scouring of the shire, and wrap-up with Sam becoming mayor etc etc...

What happens in short is: men, under the command of "Sharky" take over the Shire. When the hobbits return they find that they are not allowed in, and that there's a whole system of sherrifs and whatnot that have made up a whole long list of "rules". And essentially life pretty much sucks.

Turns out that Sharky is Saruman. Treebeard had let him go from the tower (in the books, Gandalf breaks Saruman's staff and he is thereafter deemed powerless. Saruman's true inate power in the books is a persuasive voice like that seen in Grima wormtongue, which he retains to a lessened extent.) He decided to go to the Shire, mostly to make Frodo's life miserable because he can (at least, that's the impression given). So the hobbits, two of whom are quite large compared to normal hobbits from drinking the ent's drink (which isn't in the normal versions of the movies at all), proceed to retake the Shire. Grima it turns out is still Saruman's assistant, and at the very end when insulted by Saruman after the hobbits have reclaimed the Shire, kills him in a fit of rage and then gets shot by hobbits himself.

This all really takes up quite a bit of real estate page-wise. It is interesting, in context of the rest of the story, because it wraps up the story with a much less "hollywood" ending, and serves to reinforce the point that one can never go back to an old way of life. Without it, Frodo's departure seems contrived, if it makes any sense at all.

Anyway, that is a very condensed and butchered recount of what happens.

In reply to:

---

I don't think the length of the movie has much to do with it. I think the quality of the movie does. Anyone who complains about the length is copping out.

---

I thought they could have edited out at least 1/2 hr per film and they would have been better because of it. I was groaning thru each movie praying for the end. Now I could sit thru an entire season of Babylon 5 with no problems.

Heh, I've got Season 1 on order. Costco is good!

ringmir-

thanks for the synopsis.. i can see why mr jackson left it out.. it seems not completely necessary for the story..

my wife keeps urging me to read the harry potter series, but i just cant do it.. 1st, i dont do big, long books.. 2nd, i am not into fantasy type stuff.. i am sure they are great books for people who dig that, but i dont..

and speaking of watching series, i am fixing to start the 'band of brothers' series this weekend.. i dont have HBO, so i havent seen a single episode.. i am looking forward to it!

bigjohn

I think you'll love Band of Brothers. I'm a WWII history buff, so I'm slightly biased, but I did enjoy it.

I've read all the Harry Potter's and have really enjoyed them too. Haven't seen the latest movie yet. Will have to wait till it comes out on DVD. It's my belief that anything that gets kids reading is wonderful. Reading has been one of the great joys in my life. I spend a lot of time waiting for doctors to get around to me, and as long as I have my book, I'm never bored.

Definition of "bummer": Finishing a book, and knowing the library is closed.

In reply to:

---

I've read all the Harry Potter's and have really enjoyed them too. Haven't seen the latest movie yet

---

I've read all the books as well (at the insistance of my 16 year old daughter). I have seen the third moviel and it was great. a bit of a different look to the movie, darker and more realistic. This goes along with the tone of the books, which get darker with each volume. I think it was the best of the three movies so far, and it has me anxiously awaiting the fourth in the series.

Mark

AH! Another child at heart.

I'm 43 and have read all the Lord of the Rings books (even attempted "The Silmarillion"(sp?)) as well as all the Harry Potter books...

After seeing the movies, it has prompted me to go back and re-read the books to refresh my head as to the original content as well as give me a different perspective on the filmmakers' interpretation of the books.

Anxiously waiting the EE of ROTK...

BigJohn, I understand your not wanting to sit for an extended period for the extended versions but that is what is good about having them on DVD...you can watch them at your pace...not what the theaters enforce...

I have found the EE of the first two films to be "more complete" having read them...

My .02,

WhatFurrer

Band of Brothers is terrific. Even if you are not a fan of war movies, this series is really all about the relationship of these guys. The final episode with the interviews of the actual guys was special.

Harry Potter has snared me. Read the books, saw the movies. Nicely done in general and entertaining to boot.

With cgi, it is astounding to see how much movies have improved in a short period. I though Dr. No was da bomb when I saw it as a youngster. Now it seems dull.

At least HT advances allow us to take advantage of all of the magic in the comfort of our homes. While I miss the cell phones ringing, the conversations, the uncomfortable (and SMALL) seats and my feet sticking to the floor, I only get to the movieplex once in a great while. Being able to hit "pause" and move around a bit with a nice HT setup to provide the thrills has become very attractive.

The last episode of Band of Brothers (and the interviews)made me cry. I have a huge soft spot for stuff like that. Gets me almost every time.

I've been through the trilogy bookd 2 times... had to re-read a third time before each release. OK, I admit -- I have a bit of a problem. I can't wait for the EE, especially now with the Axioms!

I give the people who sat through the movies without reading the books a lot of credit.

From the digital bits

The set will feature more than 50 additional minutes of footage, including some 300 additional effect shots. Among the new scenes we were able to preview this weekend were: the final confrontation between Gandalf and Sarumon at Isengard, the "mouth" of Sauron at the Black Gate, Aragorn revealing the sword Anduril to Sauron's eye in the Seeing-stone, the confrontation between the Witch King and Gandalf at Minas Tirith, more battle footage on the Pelennor fields, Frodo and Sam marching with Sauron's forces disguised as Orcs, Faramir telling Denethor that he would never use the power of the Ring, Aragorn looking down upon a fleet of Corsair ships from a ridgetop, Faramir and Éowyn at the House of Healing, Merry pledging allegiance to King Theoden at Gondor, Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli narrowly escaping an avalanche of skulls deep inside the Dwimorberg and MUCH more.

Not to interrupt y'all's very cultured discussion of Middle Earth, but I have discovered the source of the whine. Also present on "Nemo" at times. It is on the disc - I also heard it at 2x6's with his very nice HT gear. And "Nemo" is a THX certified disc! Shows what that rating is worth.

Wow. That's kind of bizarre. At least you know what it is, now.

Explain the "Whine" again to me....

How could this be on the two discs? Are they just on your discs, or will mine whine too?

It's a high frequency whine that comes and goes, but always in the same scenes on "Nemo". It comes out of the center and left front.
Maybe it is just the disc I have, but I doubt it. 2x6 didn't seem to be able to hear it at his place so it is possible that I am a golden-eared audiophile.
BTW, I wasn't trying to be bitchy about a thread hi-jack. Carry on.

Which scene, Mark? I'm about to watch the movie again sometime in the next couple of days, and I'll look to see if it's in mine.

One scene that I know has it: between Dory and Marlin getting swallowed by the whale and when they are ejected from the whale. We watched the whale scene to demo SVS. I'll try to get a look at the movis and be more specific. Got Ice Age?

Matter of fact, I DO have Ice Age. Just got it along with Nemo. I also have and adore Monster's Inc. I love today's animated movies. Thinking about getting A Bug's life, Ants, and the two Toy Stories. Just a kid at heart.

Got em all...

Love em all...

Anyone for Speed Racer?

WhatFurrer

Another kid. Can someone explain how this 15 year old got trapped in this 58 year old body? Such a mystery.

Hey Jack...

They have recently released the '67 animated series of Spiderman on DVD...

How about that for a Christmas present?

Who said you had to grow up?

WhatFurrer

Jack, that whine can definitelt be heard at the beginning of the whale scene (when they have already been swallowed).

I also hear it on the "Scrats Missing Adventure" clip on the "Ice Age" bonus features disc. When ol' Scrat looks up at his tree trunk or storage place, whatever it is, the whine is VERY noticeable.
Give her a listen for me would you?

In reply to:

---

Can someone explain how this 15 year old got trapped in this 58 year old body?

---

I don't often compliment men for their appearance but to put it succinctly, if a 15 year old had the same number of life-experiences that you've had 58 years to enjoy (and not enjoy as is probably the case in some instances), they would probably look like a sausage left too long on the grill.

I guess what I'm saying is you look much better than a shriveled up sausage.

How's that for a compliment, huh?!

jack- i am not a big fan of antz.. but bugs life and the toy story series are excellent. i will also mention the obvious shrek?? dont know if you have that, but it is most definitely a keeper.. you could actually wait til the shrek 2 comes out on dvd, i am sure they will be offering the two in a package deal.

bigjohn

Ah, Peter. There are parts of me that DO look like a shriveled up sausage. My right big toe strongly resembles a kielbasa. But I thank you for your kind, unsolicited, if back handed, compliment. You should've seen me when I looked GOOD! 1975 anyone?



OK! Sorta good! Any cracks about the hair will be dealt with severely by explosive PM!

BigWill, I'll try to get to those spots today if I can. Whenever I do check them, I'll report back.

John. Forgot about Shrek. I'd like to get that one too. Haven't heard a lot good about Shrek II. But, I'll rent it when it comes out on DVD to see if I want to add it to my list.

In reply to:

---

Any cracks about the hair will be dealt with severely by explosive PM

---

forget about the hair..

how bout that belt-buckle, and the moustache. i thought handle-bars went out in the 70's.. oh wait, that was the 70's.

classic man.. cool pic.. the super-fly, ladies man.. i bet you even owned some lava lamps??

bigjohn

Actually, I never owned a lava lamp. But, a black light and glow in the dark posters? Now you're talkin'.

In reply to:

---

black light and glow in the dark posters

---

HELL, i've still got some of those!!

bigjohn

Jack, I'm shocked. Such unattributed piracy of pictures of WKRP's Dr. Johnny Fever will surely be met by swift legal action.

Shrek 2 was good. We took our urchins to see it in the theatre. Perhaps not *quite* as relentlessly clever as the first one, but clearly upholding the standard.

Nice hair, btw.

In reply to:

---

WKRP's Dr. Johnny Fever

---

BOOOOOOGGGGGGEEEEERRRRRRRR!!!!!

Thanks Tom. I'll be sure to check out Shrek II when it's released on DVD. C'mon! I got more hair than Howard Hessman. He, however, has lots more money.

Jack, while you were way to pretty then, I will admit that it is nice to see a man's head that still has hair on it. This whole reverse mohawk thing is depressing.

Well, there's considerably less up there now.

I was 1 year old in 1975

...anyway, Shrek 2 was pretty damn good, I'd say equal POSSIBLY better than the first even.

I wasn't even a twinkle in may parent's eye in 1975. My brother was just being born though.

I think that movies like Shrek and Shrek 2 only get better with time. The first time you see the movie, you are worried about how it is going to end (even if it ended predictably). Without knowing how the characters will be resolved in the movie, you aren't able to "let go" as much and just enjoy the little bits of comedy that are present. I often find this to be the case with comedies - especially like this one - where the story is basically just a vehicle for either (1) laughs or (2) eye candy.

While the story is nice, ultimately, it has been told before - if only in a different way. On second viewing, I anticipate the movie to be funnier, more enjoyable and more memorable.

I enjoyed both movies in the theater, though, first time I saw them. I only came to really love the movie after it came out on DVD.

INANE, Jack has ties that are older than you.

A suit, too.

hehe, ya well I'm at the age now where I'm not realy young anymore, but I'm not old either I guess... just depends on who I'm talking to.