[TAN] V for Vendetta

[Mark Erikson]

Why not start this topic? It's supposed to be the big blockbuster of
the year. The shiny new followup to the Matrix Trilogy that also
cashes in on the comic-book-movie craze. I'm surprised it hasn't been
discussed here already.

It kinda sucked.

I read the comic a while ago, and really liked it. But what I read was
a surprisingly current bit of allegory with a really clever plot. What
I saw was a heavy-handed allegory with a garbled plot that forcibly
tells us that it's clever in the final scenes.

I also saw this over at rottentomatoes.com:

"Portman is mesmerizing, while Weaving bores."

What?

Portman blows in this movie. She really, really sucks. There is the
brief period, during the jail scene and the aftermath, where she
believably inhabits her character, but the rest of the time she looked
like she was concentrating so hard on maintaining her accent that she
barely managed to read her lines coherently.

Weaving, on the other hand, gives life and personality to a character
with some seriously awkward dialogue and no face, He's a damn good
actor.

And the finale just fell flat. The comic was all about the transition
from destruction to construction. The movie was about a fancy
fireworks display. In the comic the whole point of the jail scene was
to shape Evey into a constructor. In the movie it was there only to
provide a "cool" plot twist that didn't actually add anything to the
story.

I'm now hoping that HBO gets its hands on the Watchmen license and
makes a miniseries out of it. That would be really, really good.

-Mark Erikson

[Daniel Packman]

In article <***@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,

There are some spoilers here.

....

Post by Mark Erikson
I read the comic a while ago, and really liked it. But what I read was
a surprisingly current bit of allegory with a really clever plot. What
I saw was a heavy-handed allegory with a garbled plot that forcibly
tells us that it's clever in the final scenes.

Perhaps it is different for those of us who saw the movie first.

....

Post by Mark Erikson
Portman blows in this movie. She really, really sucks. There is the
brief period, during the jail scene and the aftermath, where she
believably inhabits her character, but the rest of the time she looked
like she was concentrating so hard on maintaining her accent that she
barely managed to read her lines coherently.

Perhaps I'm just a biased Portman fan, but I liked her throughout. I thought
the scenes after the jail scene were the most problematic: how realistic can
it be to normalize your relationship to your torturer?

Post by Mark Erikson
Weaving, on the other hand, gives life and personality to a character
with some seriously awkward dialogue and no face, He's a damn good
actor.

I am also a biased Weaving fan.
I liked the parallel purification of the characters: one by fire,
one by water. Worked for me.

Post by Mark Erikson
And the finale just fell flat. The comic was all about the transition
from destruction to construction. The movie was about a fancy
fireworks display......

I was concerned that the crowd scene at the end was going to give the
wrong message with everyone wearing the same mask. I was pleased to see
them consciously remove their masks and reveal very different people.

[David Chapman]

I
thought the scenes after the jail scene were the most problematic: how
realistic can it be to normalize your relationship to your torturer?

You'd be amazed. Stockholm Syndrome is just the beginning.

I was concerned that the crowd scene at the end was going to give the
wrong message with everyone wearing the same mask. I was pleased to see
them consciously remove their masks and reveal very different people.

Many of whom were dead. It's all symbolic.

[Jasper Janssen]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 23:01:18 +0100, "David Chapman"

Post by David Chapman

I
thought the scenes after the jail scene were the most problematic: how
realistic can it be to normalize your relationship to your torturer?

You'd be amazed. Stockholm Syndrome is just the beginning.

Stockholm Syndrome is also considered abnormal -- although I just realised
Mr Paxman actually said 'realistic' rather than 'normal', which kinds of
rons my point of meaning. So uhh.. carry on.

Jasper

[Mark Erikson]

Post by Daniel Packman
There are some spoilers here.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

Post by Daniel Packman
....

Post by Mark Erikson
I read the comic a while ago, and really liked it. But what I read was
a surprisingly current bit of allegory with a really clever plot. What
I saw was a heavy-handed allegory with a garbled plot that forcibly
tells us that it's clever in the final scenes.

Perhaps it is different for those of us who saw the movie first.

Well essentially, the comic was a lot...cleverer. In the movie it made
out that he killed the people he did as revenge. In the comic it's
obvious that he's protecting the integrity of his plans. And there's a
whole lot more that he does such that in the end, a chain of seemingly
seperate events all come together. In the movie it was just a mob with
masks.

Post by Daniel Packman
....

Post by Mark Erikson
Portman blows in this movie. She really, really sucks. There is the
brief period, during the jail scene and the aftermath, where she
believably inhabits her character, but the rest of the time she looked
like she was concentrating so hard on maintaining her accent that she
barely managed to read her lines coherently.

Perhaps I'm just a biased Portman fan, but I liked her throughout. I thought
the scenes after the jail scene were the most problematic: how realistic can
it be to normalize your relationship to your torturer?

I'm a Portman fan too, but I felt like I was watching Natalie Portman
struggling to maintain a British accent. I rarely felt like I was
watching Evey Hammond.

I also didn't like that they made her into a TV station employee. I'm
pretty sure that the comic had her as a desperately unemployed 16 year
old who had was attempting to turn to prostitution (which is why she's
out after curfew in the opening scenes).

Post by Daniel Packman

Post by Mark Erikson
Weaving, on the other hand, gives life and personality to a character
with some seriously awkward dialogue and no face, He's a damn good
actor.

I am also a biased Weaving fan.
I liked the parallel purification of the characters: one by fire,
one by water. Worked for me.

That worked for me too. Unfortunately, Evey's character didn't go on
to do anything with her newfound purpose. Yeah, she pulled a lever.
I'm pretty sure that in the comic she became the new V. A V whose
purpose was rebuilding, now that the V who destroyed everything was
dead.

-Mark Erikson

[Aaron F. Bourque]

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Daniel Packman
There are some spoilers here.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

Post by Daniel Packman
....

Post by Mark Erikson
I read the comic a while ago, and really liked it. But what I read was
a surprisingly current bit of allegory with a really clever plot. What
I saw was a heavy-handed allegory with a garbled plot that forcibly
tells us that it's clever in the final scenes.

Perhaps it is different for those of us who saw the movie first.

Well essentially, the comic was a lot...cleverer. In the movie it made
out that he killed the people he did as revenge. In the comic it's
obvious that he's protecting the integrity of his plans.

And also?

Revenge.

Why else would he systematically kill every other survivor of the
concetration camp?

Post by Mark Erikson
And there's a whole lot more that he does such that in the end, a chain of seemingly
seperate events all come together. In the movie it was just a mob with
masks.

Here's a hint: Movies are not comics, and comics are not movies.

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Daniel Packman

Post by Mark Erikson
Portman blows in this movie. She really, really sucks. There is the
brief period, during the jail scene and the aftermath, where she
believably inhabits her character, but the rest of the time she looked
like she was concentrating so hard on maintaining her accent that she
barely managed to read her lines coherently.

Perhaps I'm just a biased Portman fan, but I liked her throughout. I thought
the scenes after the jail scene were the most problematic: how realistic can
it be to normalize your relationship to your torturer?

I'm a Portman fan too, but I felt like I was watching Natalie Portman
struggling to maintain a British accent. I rarely felt like I was
watching Evey Hammond.

But you have stupid issues with accents already. You thought Hugh
Laurie was doing an awful job with an American one in House.

Post by Mark Erikson
I also didn't like that they made her into a TV station employee. I'm
pretty sure that the comic had her as a desperately unemployed 16 year
old who had was attempting to turn to prostitution (which is why she's
out after curfew in the opening scenes).

She was employed. She worked at a matchstick factory.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

[Mark Erikson]

Post by Aaron F. Bourque

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Daniel Packman
There are some spoilers here.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

Post by Daniel Packman
....

Post by Mark Erikson
I read the comic a while ago, and really liked it. But what I read was
a surprisingly current bit of allegory with a really clever plot. What
I saw was a heavy-handed allegory with a garbled plot that forcibly
tells us that it's clever in the final scenes.

Perhaps it is different for those of us who saw the movie first.

Well essentially, the comic was a lot...cleverer. In the movie it made
out that he killed the people he did as revenge. In the comic it's
obvious that he's protecting the integrity of his plans.

And also?
Revenge.
Why else would he systematically kill every other survivor of the
concetration camp?

To protect his identity. He never seemed particularly _angry_ with the
people he killed. He seemed more pissed at what they did to the others
than at what they did to him.

Post by Aaron F. Bourque

Post by Mark Erikson
And there's a whole lot more that he does such that in the end, a chain of seemingly
seperate events all come together. In the movie it was just a mob with
masks.

Here's a hint: Movies are not comics, and comics are not movies.

My point is that the comic had a perfectly servicable plot. I can
understand cutting it down for time and editing, but changing it into
something vague didn't make sense.

Post by Aaron F. Bourque

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Daniel Packman

Post by Mark Erikson
Portman blows in this movie. She really, really sucks. There is the
brief period, during the jail scene and the aftermath, where she
believably inhabits her character, but the rest of the time she looked
like she was concentrating so hard on maintaining her accent that she
barely managed to read her lines coherently.

Perhaps I'm just a biased Portman fan, but I liked her throughout. I thought
the scenes after the jail scene were the most problematic: how realistic can
it be to normalize your relationship to your torturer?

I'm a Portman fan too, but I felt like I was watching Natalie Portman
struggling to maintain a British accent. I rarely felt like I was
watching Evey Hammond.

But you have stupid issues with accents already. You thought Hugh
Laurie was doing an awful job with an American one in House.

It didn't have anything to do with the quality of her accent. It had
to do with her piss poor acting. I was simply suggesting that it
_appeared_ like all her effort went into the accent and she forgot to
act.

Post by Aaron F. Bourque

Post by Mark Erikson
I also didn't like that they made her into a TV station employee. I'm
pretty sure that the comic had her as a desperately unemployed 16 year
old who had was attempting to turn to prostitution (which is why she's
out after curfew in the opening scenes).

She was employed. She worked at a matchstick factory.

Whatever. Replace "desperately unemployed" with "desperately poor".

-Mark Erikson

[Kristoffer Björkman]

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Aaron F. Bourque

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Daniel Packman
There are some spoilers here.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

Post by Daniel Packman
....

Post by Mark Erikson
I read the comic a while ago, and really liked it. But what I read was
a surprisingly current bit of allegory with a really clever plot. What
I saw was a heavy-handed allegory with a garbled plot that forcibly
tells us that it's clever in the final scenes.

Perhaps it is different for those of us who saw the movie first.

I love the comic. I think the movie was very good too. I know there are
many who have read the comic first and like the movie.
Before I saw the movie, especially when I heard that it would be the
Matrix guys behind it, I feared that it would be totally awful to one
who had read the comic. (I found, and still find, The Matrix as boring
and stupid, though it showed a bit of nice imagework.)
Obviously(?) the plot/story is better in the comic, but when has ever
the opposite been true of a literature-to-movie conversion. *As a movie*
it is very good IMO, and I don't think it is fair to compare it
storywise on the same level as the original work.

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Aaron F. Bourque

Post by Mark Erikson
Well essentially, the comic was a lot...cleverer. In the movie it made
out that he killed the people he did as revenge. In the comic it's
obvious that he's protecting the integrity of his plans.

When he does the camp tour with Prothero in the comic and leads him past
the cell doors in 'the funny farm', he really makes an effort to drive
home the point that he was the man in room V. I find it difficult to
make this episode not look personal.

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Aaron F. Bourque
And also?
Revenge.
Why else would he systematically kill every other survivor of the
concetration camp?

To protect his identity.

One feels there is more to it really.
If nothing else (though I wouldn't say so), a way to carry (part of) the
story...

Post by Mark Erikson
He never seemed particularly _angry_ with the people he killed. He
seemed more pissed at what they did to the others than at what they
did to him.

You know, the name of the comic is "V for *Vendetta*".
The difference between revenge and avenge is fleeting, yes.
Showing low-emotion "anger" is not really V in the comic OR the movie.
Depending on your definition of anger (low-emotion mind-less temporary
rage, careful execution of plans against the cause, or something else or
inbetween?) perhaps your first sentence here makes sense, but I really
can't understand what you mean. Since English is not my first language,
I looked up a defintion to be sure that I understood you:
"Strong feeling of displeasure against someone or something combined
with an urge to strike back."
And this is not associated with V's agenda you say?

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Aaron F. Bourque

Post by Mark Erikson
And there's a whole lot more that he does such that in the end, a
chain of seemingly seperate events all come together. In the movie
it was just a mob with masks.

Here's a hint: Movies are not comics, and comics are not movies.

My point is that the comic had a perfectly servicable plot. I can
understand cutting it down for time and editing, but changing it into
something vague didn't make sense.

Opinions about this clearly differ. I think it worked well as a movie,
and carried the spirit of the book as well as could be expected.
But perhaps I just did not expect as much as you.


[Portman acting discussion snipped, can't be bothered really]

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Aaron F. Bourque

Post by Mark Erikson
I also didn't like that they made her into a TV station employee. I'm
pretty sure that the comic had her as a desperately unemployed 16 year
old who had was attempting to turn to prostitution (which is why she's
out after curfew in the opening scenes).

She was employed. She worked at a matchstick factory.

Whatever. Replace "desperately unemployed" with "desperately poor".

Definitely not whatever. The "Matchstick Girl" is a motif in history and
fictional writing. Look up "phossy jaw", "match girl's strike", "Annie
Besant" for history, or "The Match Factory Girl" (Kaurismäki), "The
Little Match Girl" (Andersen) for examples of fictional works. I cannot
see Moore/Lloyd choosing this profession for Evey without intention.
One could also theorize about Evey as a "match" to V as the "gunpowder",
and go on about this... :)
To give the movie more credit than I think it is worthy of, you could
perhaps see analogues in the TV station of the "updated" movie setting,
and that they wanted to say something about this. And one could go on
about this too... It would be interesting to have DVD-style commentaries
for the movie to see how (/if) they thought about things as this.


But to sum things up.. In the very constructed situation that I was to
advise someone who could only *either* see the movie or read the comic -
of course I would say 'read the comic'! But that does not make the movie
inherently bad and unworthy of seeing IMO.

One thing that I did not like with the movie was that they used roses
with a deep red color and still refered to them as "Violet Carsons".
Sloppy really, though of course it was a (questionable) 'design'
decision that the deep red would look better and almost noone would know
anything about roses anyway. Too many of these "treat the audience like
they don't know or understand anyway" touches have ruined too many
movies and goes totally against the very well-researched work by
Moore/Lloyd.

/Kristoffer

P.S.
I wrote shortly about V for Vendetta recently in another (off-topic)
newsgroup post:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.tv.twin-peaks/msg/360c3b9a909308af

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Daniel Packman
There are some spoilers here.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

Post by Daniel Packman
....

Post by Mark Erikson
I read the comic a while ago, and really liked it. But what I read was
a surprisingly current bit of allegory with a really clever plot. What
I saw was a heavy-handed allegory with a garbled plot that forcibly
tells us that it's clever in the final scenes.

Perhaps it is different for those of us who saw the movie first.

Well essentially, the comic was a lot...cleverer. In the movie it made
out that he killed the people he did as revenge. In the comic it's
obvious that he's protecting the integrity of his plans. And there's a
whole lot more that he does such that in the end, a chain of seemingly
seperate events all come together. In the movie it was just a mob with
masks.

How in the world did V distribute all those masks in a dictatorship without being
caught, and without his customers being caught?

Post by Mark Erikson
That worked for me too. Unfortunately, Evey's character didn't go on
to do anything with her newfound purpose. Yeah, she pulled a lever.
I'm pretty sure that in the comic she became the new V. A V whose
purpose was rebuilding, now that the V who destroyed everything was
dead.

Prime Minister V?

[Shawn Wilson]

Post by Tim Bruening

Well essentially, the comic was a lot...cleverer.  In the movie it made
out that he killed the people he did as revenge.  In the comic it's
obvious that he's protecting the integrity of his plans.  And there's a
whole lot more that he does such that in the end, a chain of seemingly
seperate events all come together.  In the movie it was just a mob with
masks.

How in the world did V distribute all those masks in a dictatorship without being
caught, and without his customers being caught?

He had coopted the State's own production and distribution mechanisms
to do it for him. Low level flunkies get official orders. Low level
flunkies obey official orders. They don't know or care about V. In
the comic had had gained secret control of the Fate computer before
his campaign officially started.

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Shawn Wilson

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Mark Erikson
Well essentially, the comic was a lot...cleverer. In the movie it made
out that he killed the people he did as revenge. In the comic it's
obvious that he's protecting the integrity of his plans. And there's a
whole lot more that he does such that in the end, a chain of seemingly
seperate events all come together. In the movie it was just a mob with
masks.

How in the world did V distribute all those masks in a dictatorship without being
caught, and without his customers being caught?

He had coopted the State's own production and distribution mechanisms
to do it for him. Low level flunkies get official orders. Low level
flunkies obey official orders. They don't know or care about V. In
the comic had had gained secret control of the Fate computer before
his campaign officially started.

Wouldn't the secret police have noticed that government run factories were producing V
masks? Wouldn't the lower level flunkies have wondered "Why are we producing masks
like that one on that terrorist we have seen on TV?

[Wayne Throop]

: Tim Bruening <***@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us>
: Wouldn't the secret police have noticed that government run factories
: were producing V masks?

No.

: Wouldn't the lower level flunkies have wondered "Why are we producing
: masks like that one on that terrorist we have seen on TV?

No.

Hey, you asked.


Wayne Throop ***@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw

[a***@yahoo.com]

Post by Wayne Throop
: Wouldn't the secret police have noticed that government run factories
: were producing V masks?
No.
: Wouldn't the lower level flunkies have wondered "Why are we producing
: masks like that one on that terrorist we have seen on TV?
No.
Hey, you asked.

"SF Movies Without Logical Plot Holes" might be a tough category to
fill on Jeopardy. Come to think of it, one could probably remove the
"SF" from the category title.....

[Shawn Wilson]

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Shawn Wilson

Post by Tim Bruening
How in the world did V distribute all those masks in a dictatorship without being
caught, and without his customers being caught?

He had coopted the State's own production and distribution mechanisms
to do it for him.  Low level flunkies get official orders.  Low level
flunkies obey official orders.  They don't know or care about V.  In
the comic had had gained secret control of the Fate computer before
his campaign officially started.

Wouldn't the secret police have noticed that government run factories were producing V
masks?

Why would the secret police know? They don't check every item of
every production run on the off chance that some criminal mastermind
is using it for some bizarre plot. Besides, presumably Guy Falkes
masks were a common production item. V just wore one, he didn't
invent them.

Post by Tim Bruening
 Wouldn't the lower level flunkies have wondered "Why are we producing masks
like that one on that terrorist we have seen on TV?

Maybe. But they presumably already made them anyway. V didn't invent
it. Make the costumes and ship them out is pretty standard.

"Why are we shipping masks to everyone in the UK?"

"Because the work order says to."

"That's pretty strange."

"Yes. But so what?"

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Shawn Wilson

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Shawn Wilson

Post by Tim Bruening
How in the world did V distribute all those masks in a dictatorship without being
caught, and without his customers being caught?

He had coopted the State's own production and distribution mechanisms
to do it for him. Low level flunkies get official orders. Low level
flunkies obey official orders. They don't know or care about V. In
the comic had had gained secret control of the Fate computer before
his campaign officially started.

Wouldn't the secret police have noticed that government run factories were producing V
masks?

Why would the secret police know? They don't check every item of
every production run on the off chance that some criminal mastermind
is using it for some bizarre plot. Besides, presumably Guy Falkes
masks were a common production item. V just wore one, he didn't
invent them.

Were Brits in the habit of wearing those masks to celebrate Guy Fawkes Day before V showed
up?

Post by Shawn Wilson

Post by Tim Bruening
Wouldn't the lower level flunkies have wondered "Why are we producing masks
like that one on that terrorist we have seen on TV?

Maybe. But they presumably already made them anyway. V didn't invent
it. Make the costumes and ship them out is pretty standard.
"Why are we shipping masks to everyone in the UK?"
"Because the work order says to."
"That's pretty strange."
"Yes. But so what?"

Who paid for all those masks?

Wouldn't the secret police be interested in anything strange such as everyone in the UK all
ordering the same mask a prominent terrorist wears?

[Wayne Throop]

: Tim Bruening <***@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us>
: Who paid for all those masks?

No one. The manufacturer bills, nobody pays. V doesn't care at that point.

: Wouldn't the secret police be interested in anything strange such as
: everyone in the UK all ordering the same mask a prominent terrorist
: wears?

Probably not.


Wayne Throop ***@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw

[Shawn Wilson]

Post by Tim Bruening

Why would the secret police know?  They don't check every item of
every production run on the off chance that some criminal mastermind
is using it for some bizarre plot.  Besides, presumably Guy Falkes
masks were a common production item.  V just wore one, he didn't
invent them.

Were Brits in the habit of wearing those masks to celebrate Guy Fawkes Day before V showed
up?

They have them now. I don't know that it's a 'habit'.

Post by Tim Bruening
Who paid for all those masks?

The government, via Fate.

Post by Tim Bruening
Wouldn't the secret police be interested in anything strange such as everyone in the UK all
ordering the same mask a prominent terrorist wears?

People didn't order them, they were just shipped. If they thought
anything about it before the denoument it would be 'computer glitch'.

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Shawn Wilson

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Shawn Wilson
Why would the secret police know? They don't check every item of
every production run on the off chance that some criminal mastermind
is using it for some bizarre plot. Besides, presumably Guy Falkes
masks were a common production item. V just wore one, he didn't
invent them.

Were Brits in the habit of wearing those masks to celebrate Guy Fawkes Day before V showed
up?

They have them now. I don't know that it's a 'habit'.

Post by Tim Bruening
Who paid for all those masks?

The government, via Fate.

Post by Tim Bruening
Wouldn't the secret police be interested in anything strange such as everyone in the UK all
ordering the same mask a prominent terrorist wears?

People didn't order them, they were just shipped. If they thought
anything about it before the denoument it would be 'computer glitch'.

When V showed up wearing such a mask, wouldn't the British government have banned them and set
the secret police to shutting down the mask makers?

[Shawn Wilson]

Post by Tim Bruening
When V showed up wearing such a mask, wouldn't the British government have banned them and set
the secret police to shutting down the mask makers?

Why?

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Tim Bruening
When V showed up wearing such a mask, wouldn't the British government have banned them and set
the secret police to shutting down the mask makers?

Why?

On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!

[Scott Fluhrer]

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Tim Bruening
When V showed up wearing such a mask, wouldn't the British government
have banned them and set
the secret police to shutting down the mask makers?

Why?

On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!

Tim has a good point. In exactly the same way, if someone were to wear
pantyhose on their head and hold up a bank, we would ban pantyhose, because
the manufacturer might be linked to the robber.

[Mike Ash]

Post by Scott Fluhrer

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Tim Bruening
When V showed up wearing such a mask, wouldn't the British government
have banned them and set
the secret police to shutting down the mask makers?

Why?

On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!

Tim has a good point. In exactly the same way, if someone were to wear
pantyhose on their head and hold up a bank, we would ban pantyhose, because
the manufacturer might be linked to the robber.

In a fascist nation which is the last outpost of civilization in a
devastated world, and where pantyhose serve no purpose seen as
legitimate by the government, and are being used by the most wanted
criminal in the country to hide his identity? Yeah, I think that banning
pantyhose manufacture would be precisely what the government would do.

[Wayne Throop]

: Mike Ash <***@mikeash.com>
: In a fascist nation which is the last outpost of civilization in a
: devastated world, and where pantyhose serve no purpose seen as
: legitimate by the government, and are being used by the most wanted
: criminal in the country to hide his identity? Yeah, I think that
: banning pantyhose manufacture would be precisely what the government
: would do.

I would be unsurprised if a government did so.
I would also be unsurprised if it didn't do so.


Wayne Throop ***@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw

[noRm d. plumBeR]

Post by Mike Ash

Post by Scott Fluhrer

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Tim Bruening
When V showed up wearing such a mask, wouldn't the British government
have banned them and set
the secret police to shutting down the mask makers?

Why?

On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!

Tim has a good point. In exactly the same way, if someone were to wear
pantyhose on their head and hold up a bank, we would ban pantyhose, because
the manufacturer might be linked to the robber.

In a fascist nation which is the last outpost of civilization in a
devastated world, and where pantyhose serve no purpose seen as
legitimate by the government, and are being used by the most wanted
criminal in the country to hide his identity? Yeah, I think that banning
pantyhose manufacture would be precisely what the government would do.

That sounds fairly silly. I must be misreading it. That or the
pantyhose industry on that world must be onesey-twosey with no
distribution pipeline whatsoever.

Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
serve except to provide profits to manufacturers? Women seem to find
them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
not comfortable). I don't know about other men, but I've always found
them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.
In fact I can only imagine a few actual uses for the things, with
"makeshift filter" being the most useful of the lot and "underwear"
not appearing in the list.

Go ahead, ban pantyhose, good riddance.

[Wayne Throop]

::: In exactly the same way, if someone were to wear pantyhose on their
::: head and hold up a bank, we would ban pantyhose, because the
::: manufacturer might be linked to the robber.

: "noRm d. plumBeR" <***@money.com>
: Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
: serve except to provide profits to manufacturers? Women seem to find
: them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
: not comfortable). I don't know about other men, but I've always found
: them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.
: In fact I can only imagine a few actual uses for the things, with
: "makeshift filter" being the most useful of the lot and "underwear"
: not appearing in the list.

Field expedient restraints for terrorists.
You're not in favor of terrorism, are you?

Basically, no more useful than a necktie. Of course, neckties
are field expedient garrots, even when employed as intended,
so neckties, on balance, are worse.

Also, a while back there was some discussion on this
newsgroup about whether they were really all that inconvenient,
disrobing-enough-for-fornication-wise. I'm not so sure they are at all
effective at chastizing non-chastity.

Wayne Throop ***@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw

[a***@yahoo.com]

Post by Wayne Throop
: Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
: serve except to provide profits to manufacturers?  Women seem to find
: them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
: not comfortable).  I don't know about other men, but I've always found
: them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.

And if you're legs are hairy like mine, then they can be a real pain
in the ass.

Post by Wayne Throop
Field expedient restraints for terrorists.
You're not in favor of terrorism, are you?
Basically, no more useful than a necktie.  Of course, neckties
are field expedient garrots, even when employed as intended,
so neckties, on balance, are worse.

The point of a necktie is to provide a pointer in the direction of the
genitals.

[noRm d. plumBeR]

Post by a***@yahoo.com

Post by Wayne Throop
: Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
: serve except to provide profits to manufacturers?  Women seem to find
: them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
: not comfortable).  I don't know about other men, but I've always found
: them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.

And if you're legs are hairy like mine, then they can be a real pain
in the ass.

Post by Wayne Throop
Field expedient restraints for terrorists.
You're not in favor of terrorism, are you?
Basically, no more useful than a necktie.  Of course, neckties
are field expedient garrots, even when employed as intended,
so neckties, on balance, are worse.

The point of a necktie is to provide a pointer in the direction of the
genitals.

For a codpiece it's worn awfully high up, the belt must locate around
the nose somewhere.

[Robert Bannister]

Post by a***@yahoo.com

Post by Wayne Throop
: Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
: serve except to provide profits to manufacturers? Women seem to find
: them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
: not comfortable). I don't know about other men, but I've always found
: them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.

And if you're legs are hairy like mine, then they can be a real pain
in the ass.

Post by Wayne Throop
Field expedient restraints for terrorists.
You're not in favor of terrorism, are you?
Basically, no more useful than a necktie. Of course, neckties
are field expedient garrots, even when employed as intended,
so neckties, on balance, are worse.

The point of a necktie is to provide a pointer in the direction of the
genitals.

I'm fairly sure most boys and girls are quite clear about where they are
by the age of at most four. Perhaps the knowledge is beaten out of them
as they grow older.

[Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc [e-mail]]

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by a***@yahoo.com

Post by Wayne Throop
: Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
: serve except to provide profits to manufacturers? Women seem to find
: them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
: not comfortable). I don't know about other men, but I've always found
: them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.

And if you're legs are hairy like mine, then they can be a real pain
in the ass.

Post by Wayne Throop
Field expedient restraints for terrorists.
You're not in favor of terrorism, are you?
Basically, no more useful than a necktie. Of course, neckties
are field expedient garrots, even when employed as intended,
so neckties, on balance, are worse.

The point of a necktie is to provide a pointer in the direction of the
genitals.

I'm fairly sure most boys and girls are quite clear about where they are
by the age of at most four.

But not what they are...

I use my genitals as a pointer for my necktie. I adjust the tie to
just the right height to cover my penis, if there isn't a draught.
And then I tie a knot in it.

Actually it works.

[Kurt Busiek]

On 2010-04-23 14:43:42 -0700, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc

Post by Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-***@moderators.isc.org

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by a***@yahoo.com

Post by Wayne Throop
: Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
: serve except to provide profits to manufacturers? Women seem to find
: them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
: not comfortable). I don't know about other men, but I've always found
: them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.

And if you're legs are hairy like mine, then they can be a real pain
in the ass.

Post by Wayne Throop
Field expedient restraints for terrorists.
You're not in favor of terrorism, are you?
Basically, no more useful than a necktie. Of course, neckties
are field expedient garrots, even when employed as intended,
so neckties, on balance, are worse.

The point of a necktie is to provide a pointer in the direction of the
genitals.

I'm fairly sure most boys and girls are quite clear about where they are
by the age of at most four.

But not what they are...
I use my genitals as a pointer for my necktie. I adjust the tie to
just the right height to cover my penis, if there isn't a draught.
And then I tie a knot in it.
Actually it works.

I'd think it would hurt like the Dickens.

And doesn't the tie blow off?

kdb

[noRm d. plumBeR]

Post by Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-***@moderators.isc.org

Post by Robert Bannister

Post by a***@yahoo.com

Post by Wayne Throop
: Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
: serve except to provide profits to manufacturers? Women seem to find
: them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
: not comfortable). I don't know about other men, but I've always found
: them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.

And if you're legs are hairy like mine, then they can be a real pain
in the ass.

Post by Wayne Throop
Field expedient restraints for terrorists.
You're not in favor of terrorism, are you?
Basically, no more useful than a necktie. Of course, neckties
are field expedient garrots, even when employed as intended,
so neckties, on balance, are worse.

The point of a necktie is to provide a pointer in the direction of the
genitals.

I'm fairly sure most boys and girls are quite clear about where they are
by the age of at most four.

But not what they are...
I use my genitals as a pointer for my necktie. I adjust the tie to
just the right height to cover my penis, if there isn't a draught.
And then I tie a knot in it.
Actually it works.

Okay, but does it hurt to tie a knot in yer winkie?

[trag]

Post by noRm d. plumBeR
Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
serve except to provide profits to manufacturers? Women seem to find
them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
not comfortable). I don't know about other men, but I've always found
them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.
In fact I can only imagine a few actual uses for the things, with
"makeshift filter" being the most useful of the lot and "underwear"
not appearing in the list.

Some divers find them a useful undergarment to wetsuits.

[noRm d. plumBeR]

Post by trag

Post by noRm d. plumBeR
Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
serve except to provide profits to manufacturers? Women seem to find
them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
not comfortable). I don't know about other men, but I've always found
them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.
In fact I can only imagine a few actual uses for the things, with
"makeshift filter" being the most useful of the lot and "underwear"
not appearing in the list.

Some divers find them a useful undergarment to wetsuits.

For added warmth?

[Wayne Throop]

::: exactly what purpose do pantyhose serve
:: Some divers find them a useful undergarment to wetsuits.

: "noRm d. plumBeR" <***@money.com>
: For added warmth?

I would have expected it to be to make it easier to don or doff
the wetsuit.


Wayne Throop ***@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw

[trag]

Post by Wayne Throop
::: exactly what purpose do pantyhose serve
:: Some divers find them a useful undergarment to wetsuits.
: For added warmth?
I would have expected it to be to make it easier to don or doff
the wetsuit.

Exactly. It can be challenging to get into the things. Pantyhose
reduces the friction.

[noRm d. plumBeR]

Post by Wayne Throop
::: exactly what purpose do pantyhose serve
:: Some divers find them a useful undergarment to wetsuits.
: For added warmth?
I would have expected it to be to make it easier to don or doff
the wetsuit.

Maybe, but that seems like begging the question if it's difficult to
get shut of the pantyhose.

[Kurt Busiek]

Post by noRm d. plumBeR

Post by Wayne Throop
::: exactly what purpose do pantyhose serve
:: Some divers find them a useful undergarment to wetsuits.
: For added warmth?
I would have expected it to be to make it easier to don or doff
the wetsuit.

Maybe, but that seems like begging the question if it's difficult to
get shut of the pantyhose.

It's much, much easier to put on and take off pantyhose than to put on
or take off wetsuit pants.

kdb

[Wayne Throop]

::::: exactly what purpose do pantyhose serve
:::: Some divers find them a useful undergarment to wetsuits.
::: For added warmth?
:: I would have expected it to be to make it easier
:: to don or doff the wetsuit.

: "noRm d. plumBeR" <***@money.com>
: Maybe, but that seems like begging the question if it's difficult to
: get shut of the pantyhose.

I expect thin nylon pantyhose are much, much easier to stretch, and
hence to get off and on, than a thick neoprene wetsuit. (That's what
they're made of, right?)

It is told that Pannalal the Sage, having sharpened his mind with
meditation and divers asceticisms, had divined the operation of the
lock and entered Hellwell, spending a day and a night beneath the
mountain. He was thereafter known as Pannalal the Mad.

--- narration in Lord of Light

Wayne Throop ***@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw

[noRm d. plumBeR]

Post by Wayne Throop
::::: exactly what purpose do pantyhose serve
:::: Some divers find them a useful undergarment to wetsuits.
::: For added warmth?
:: I would have expected it to be to make it easier
:: to don or doff the wetsuit.
: Maybe, but that seems like begging the question if it's difficult to
: get shut of the pantyhose.
I expect thin nylon pantyhose are much, much easier to stretch, and
hence to get off and on, than a thick neoprene wetsuit. (That's what
they're made of, right?)
It is told that Pannalal the Sage, having sharpened his mind with
meditation and divers asceticisms, had divined the operation of the
lock and entered Hellwell, spending a day and a night beneath the
mountain. He was thereafter known as Pannalal the Mad.
--- narration in Lord of Light

Whatever suits a fellow is pretty much up to him, I find it a lot
easier to stay warm and dry by not jumping in the water.

[T Guy]

Post by trag

Post by noRm d. plumBeR
Not to sidetrack the discussion, but exactly what purpose do pantyhose
serve except to provide profits to manufacturers?  Women seem to find
them an annoyance that must be endured (apparently they are hot and
not comfortable).  I don't know about other men, but I've always found
them to be a form of modern chastity belt, in effect if not intent.
In fact I can only imagine a few actual uses for the things, with
"makeshift filter" being the most useful of the lot and "underwear"
not appearing in the list.

Some divers find them a useful undergarment to wetsuits.

(T Guy):

Also used on site in the winter months.

T Guy

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Scott Fluhrer

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Tim Bruening
When V showed up wearing such a mask, wouldn't the British government
have banned them and set
the secret police to shutting down the mask makers?

Why?

On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!

Tim has a good point. In exactly the same way, if someone were to wear
pantyhose on their head and hold up a bank, we would ban pantyhose, because
the manufacturer might be linked to the robber.

I figure that the secret police (led by that inspector who was investigating V
and eventually figured out that he was planning to bomb the parliament building
by train) would question all mask wearers and manufacturers they could find in
the hopes that some of them might know who V is and where to find him.

[Wayne Throop]

::: On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!

:: Tim has a good point. In exactly the same way, if someone were to
:: wear pantyhose on their head and hold up a bank, we would ban
:: pantyhose, because the manufacturer might be linked to the robber.

: Tim Bruening <***@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us>
: I figure that the secret police (led by that inspector who was
: investigating V and eventually figured out that he was planning to
: bomb the parliament building by train) would question all mask wearers
: and manufacturers they could find in the hopes that some of them might
: know who V is and where to find him.

Yep, just like in real life, the first thing police do after a robbery
by a guy wearing a ski mask is to question all the manufacturers of ski
masks, since of course they are notorious for keeping accurate records
of everybody who buys one.


Wayne Throop ***@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Wayne Throop
::: On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!
:: Tim has a good point. In exactly the same way, if someone were to
:: wear pantyhose on their head and hold up a bank, we would ban
:: pantyhose, because the manufacturer might be linked to the robber.
: I figure that the secret police (led by that inspector who was
: investigating V and eventually figured out that he was planning to
: bomb the parliament building by train) would question all mask wearers
: and manufacturers they could find in the hopes that some of them might
: know who V is and where to find him.
Yep, just like in real life, the first thing police do after a robbery
by a guy wearing a ski mask is to question all the manufacturers of ski
masks, since of course they are notorious for keeping accurate records
of everybody who buys one.

Surely, wearing Guy Fawkes masks would be much rarer than wearing pantyhose,
so their sales would be much less, so tracking their sales should be easier,
especially in a dictatorship that can ORDER that careful records be kept of
all mask sales, and that cameras be placed in all mask makers and venders.
Perhaps the masks themselves could be bugged!

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Wayne Throop
::: On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!
:: Tim has a good point. In exactly the same way, if someone were to
:: wear pantyhose on their head and hold up a bank, we would ban
:: pantyhose, because the manufacturer might be linked to the robber.
: I figure that the secret police (led by that inspector who was
: investigating V and eventually figured out that he was planning to
: bomb the parliament building by train) would question all mask wearers
: and manufacturers they could find in the hopes that some of them might
: know who V is and where to find him.
Yep, just like in real life, the first thing police do after a robbery
by a guy wearing a ski mask is to question all the manufacturers of ski
masks, since of course they are notorious for keeping accurate records
of everybody who buys one.

I suggest that secret police agents don Guy Fawkes masks in order to
infiltrate the Guy Fawkes mask association.

[Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc [e-mail]]

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Wayne Throop
::: On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!
:: Tim has a good point. In exactly the same way, if someone were to
:: wear pantyhose on their head and hold up a bank, we would ban
:: pantyhose, because the manufacturer might be linked to the robber.
: I figure that the secret police (led by that inspector who was
: investigating V and eventually figured out that he was planning to
: bomb the parliament building by train) would question all mask wearers
: and manufacturers they could find in the hopes that some of them might
: know who V is and where to find him.
Yep, just like in real life, the first thing police do after a robbery
by a guy wearing a ski mask is to question all the manufacturers of ski
masks, since of course they are notorious for keeping accurate records
of everybody who buys one.

I suggest that secret police agents don Guy Fawkes masks in order to
infiltrate the Guy Fawkes mask association.

Do they get days of the week as code names?

(A little G. K. Chesterton joke there. Or it could be a spoiler...
aw, never mind.)

[Dorothy J Heydt]

Post by Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-***@moderators.isc.org

Post by Tim Bruening
I suggest that secret police agents don Guy Fawkes masks in order to
infiltrate the Guy Fawkes mask association.

Do they get days of the week as code names?
(A little G. K. Chesterton joke there. Or it could be a spoiler...
aw, never mind.)

Oh, I caught that one ... but if they only use days of the week,
it will limit their numbers considerably. (Even considering that
they're all doubling. :) )

Come to think of it, the seven Days were the supreme council or
something, there were lots of other members.

[David DeLaney]

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-***@moderators.isc.org

Post by Tim Bruening
I suggest that secret police agents don Guy Fawkes masks in order to
infiltrate the Guy Fawkes mask association.

Do they get days of the week as code names?
(A little G. K. Chesterton joke there. Or it could be a spoiler...
aw, never mind.)

Oh, I caught that one ... but if they only use days of the week,
it will limit their numbers considerably. (Even considering that
they're all doubling. :) )
Come to think of it, the seven Days were the supreme council or
something, there were lots of other members.

Meanwhile, the Guy Fawkes mask association members can simply then don Guy
Fawkes masks to infiltrate the secret police agents who are infiltrating them.
Right?

Dave "of course they have to keep VERY clear in their minds whether they're
wearing the mask ironically or not" DeLaney

[Dorothy J Heydt]

Post by David DeLaney

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-***@moderators.isc.org

Post by Tim Bruening
I suggest that secret police agents don Guy Fawkes masks in order to
infiltrate the Guy Fawkes mask association.

Do they get days of the week as code names?
(A little G. K. Chesterton joke there. Or it could be a spoiler...
aw, never mind.)

Oh, I caught that one ... but if they only use days of the week,
it will limit their numbers considerably. (Even considering that
they're all doubling. :) )
Come to think of it, the seven Days were the supreme council or
something, there were lots of other members.

Meanwhile, the Guy Fawkes mask association members can simply then don Guy
Fawkes masks to infiltrate the secret police agents who are infiltrating them.
Right?
Dave "of course they have to keep VERY clear in their minds whether they're
wearing the mask ironically or not" DeLaney

Best of British luck to them.

[William December Starr]

Post by David DeLaney
Meanwhile, the Guy Fawkes mask association members can simply then
don Guy Fawkes masks to infiltrate the secret police agents who
are infiltrating them. Right?
Dave "of course they have to keep VERY clear in their minds
whether they're wearing the mask ironically or not" DeLaney

And then you could have a bad Philip K. Dick novel!

(Insert "pardon the redundancy" snark here.)

-- wds

[Tim Bruening]

Post by David DeLaney

Post by Dorothy J Heydt

Post by Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-***@moderators.isc.org

Post by Tim Bruening
I suggest that secret police agents don Guy Fawkes masks in order to
infiltrate the Guy Fawkes mask association.

Do they get days of the week as code names?
(A little G. K. Chesterton joke there. Or it could be a spoiler...
aw, never mind.)

Oh, I caught that one ... but if they only use days of the week,
it will limit their numbers considerably. (Even considering that
they're all doubling. :) )
Come to think of it, the seven Days were the supreme council or
something, there were lots of other members.

Meanwhile, the Guy Fawkes mask association members can simply then don Guy
Fawkes masks to infiltrate the secret police agents who are infiltrating them.
Right?
Dave "of course they have to keep VERY clear in their minds whether they're
wearing the mask ironically or not" DeLaney

The secret police would have code words or gestures.

[Tim Bruening]

Post by Wayne Throop
::: On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!
:: Tim has a good point. In exactly the same way, if someone were to
:: wear pantyhose on their head and hold up a bank, we would ban
:: pantyhose, because the manufacturer might be linked to the robber.
: I figure that the secret police (led by that inspector who was
: investigating V and eventually figured out that he was planning to
: bomb the parliament building by train) would question all mask wearers
: and manufacturers they could find in the hopes that some of them might
: know who V is and where to find him.
Yep, just like in real life, the first thing police do after a robbery
by a guy wearing a ski mask is to question all the manufacturers of ski
masks, since of course they are notorious for keeping accurate records
of everybody who buys one.

Surely, wearing Guy Fawkes masks would be much rarer than wearing
pantyhose,
so their sales would be much less, so tracking their sales should be
easier,
especially in a dictatorship that can ORDER that careful records be kept
of
all mask sales, and that cameras be placed in all mask makers and
venders.
Perhaps the masks themselves could be bugged!

Panty hose has a legitimate use. What legitimate use do V masks have?

[Shawn Wilson]

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Tim Bruening
When V showed up wearing such a mask, wouldn't the British government have banned them and set
the secret police to shutting down the mask makers?

Why?

On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!

Sigh...

They aren't 'V' masks, they are Guy Fawkes masks. V just wears one.
They would have no more reason to do that than a modern police force
would investigate Levis because a criminal was wearing blue jeans.

[TB]

Post by Shawn Wilson

Post by Tim Bruening

Post by Tim Bruening
When V showed up wearing such a mask, wouldn't the British government have banned them and set
the secret police to shutting down the mask makers?

Why?

On the theory that the manufacturers of V masks might be linked TO V!

Sigh...
They aren't 'V' masks, they are Guy Fawkes masks. V just wears one.
They would have no more reason to do that than a modern police force
would investigate Levis because a criminal was wearing blue jeans.

The UK government in the movie is a dictatorship, so I would expect
them to be tougher on mask wearers than democratic governments,
especially if they are wearing masks identical to a mask worn by a
prominent opponent of the regime.

Would V be called the Mask King?

[Beowulf Bolt]

Post by TB
The UK government in the movie is a dictatorship, so I would expect
them to be tougher on mask wearers than democratic governments,
especially if they are wearing masks identical to a mask worn by a
prominent opponent of the regime.

For all we know, the Gov't, as depicted, *may well* have responded to
the shipment of Guy Fawkes masks by shutting down the mask makers. Up
until that point, however, there's really no need for them to have
expended the effort. The terrorist clearly already had such a mask, so
there was no obvious advantage to going after a company that was
presumably doing its part to support the economy.

Biff

[Robert Carnegie]

Post by Tim Bruening
How in the world did V distribute all those masks in a dictatorship without being
caught, and without his customers being caught?

Printed on breakfast cereal cartons. You get an adult to help you cut
them out with scissors. The eye holes are tricky to do right.

To avoid alerting the authorities, the design was printed on the /
inside/ of the carton.

You only saw the people who got the V mask. Others included Spider-
Man and Yogi Bear, but because of the image rights... well, anyway,
you could buy another carton of cereal, try again. It's Yogi Bear
again! Darn!

[Jasper Janssen]

Post by Mark Erikson
Portman blows in this movie. She really, really sucks.

Ya know, I wouldn't have expected this movie to be a porno.

Jasper

[Robert Sanderson Pratt]

Post by Mark Erikson
And the finale just fell flat.

What I do give the finale credit for is picking Street Fighting Man at
the end. It fits the film what Wake Up did for the Matrix.

Sandy

[Mark Erikson]

Post by Robert Sanderson Pratt

Post by Mark Erikson
And the finale just fell flat.

What I do give the finale credit for is picking Street Fighting Man at
the end. It fits the film what Wake Up did for the Matrix.

And why didn't they use the much better RATM version?

It's not that I'm a modernist, it's just that I dislike the Rolling
Stones. They come from an era of some of the most fantastic music ever
produced, and they somehow got famous doing washed-out dull music
lacking in any kind of umph. Most of which are covers.

Is Streeting Fighting Man even one of theirs?

-Mark Erikson

[David Chapman]

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Robert Sanderson Pratt

Post by Mark Erikson
And the finale just fell flat.

What I do give the finale credit for is picking Street Fighting Man at
the end. It fits the film what Wake Up did for the Matrix.

And why didn't they use the much better RATM version?

RATM were, are and ever shall be shit. Maybe if they'd tried to make music
instead of ranting about how the Big Bad White Man hates niggers, they would
have done better.

Post by Mark Erikson
It's not that I'm a modernist, it's just that I dislike the Rolling
Stones. They come from an era of some of the most fantastic music ever
produced, and they somehow got famous doing washed-out dull music
lacking in any kind of umph. Most of which are covers.

No, they're not.

Post by Mark Erikson
Is Streeting Fighting Man even one of theirs?

Yes, it is.

[Mark Erikson]

Post by David Chapman

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Robert Sanderson Pratt

Post by Mark Erikson
And the finale just fell flat.

What I do give the finale credit for is picking Street Fighting Man at
the end. It fits the film what Wake Up did for the Matrix.

And why didn't they use the much better RATM version?

RATM were, are and ever shall be shit. Maybe if they'd tried to make music
instead of ranting about how the Big Bad White Man hates niggers, they would
have done better.

What's your point here? You're a Stones fan and you needed to strike
back? I don't care. Tom Morello can do funky stuff with his guitar,
and as a band, they had a passable grip on rock. I'm not gonna call
them paragons of musicianship. What I liked about RATM was that Zack
was very good sounding angry, and that they were an immensely popular
band whose entire thrust was about an immensely unpopular subject.

You could say that I liked them for their ranting, and not their music.
In fact, Audioslave have pretty much proven that the ranting was the
significant thing RATM had going for them.

Post by David Chapman

Post by Mark Erikson
It's not that I'm a modernist, it's just that I dislike the Rolling
Stones. They come from an era of some of the most fantastic music ever
produced, and they somehow got famous doing washed-out dull music
lacking in any kind of umph. Most of which are covers.

No, they're not.

Let's say "many of which" instead. They're still a dull band, from an
era that gave us Cream and the Beatles. No excuses.

Post by David Chapman

Post by Mark Erikson
Is Streeting Fighting Man even one of theirs?

Yes, it is.

Good for them. Tell them that, would you?

-Mark Erikson

[Aaron F. Bourque]

Post by Mark Erikson
You could say that I liked them for their ranting, and not their music.
In fact, Audioslave have pretty much proven that the ranting was the
significant thing RATM had going for them.

. . .

In fact, it proves that the music of RATM was and always will be better
than any lyrics, ranting, or message they ever had.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

[Mark Erikson]

Post by Aaron F. Bourque

Post by Mark Erikson
You could say that I liked them for their ranting, and not their music.
In fact, Audioslave have pretty much proven that the ranting was the
significant thing RATM had going for them.

. . .
In fact, it proves that the music of RATM was and always will be better
than any lyrics, ranting, or message they ever had.

I guess that's a matter of opinion. I happen to like music, and don't
like seeing it abused. I'd also like to see a comparison of record
sales. I'd bet that RATM are still a long, long way ahead.

How come Chris Cornell sounded half decent when he was with
Soundgarden, and now sounds like a guy who, well, can't sing very well?

-Mark Erikson

[David Chapman]

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by David Chapman

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Robert Sanderson Pratt

Post by Mark Erikson
And the finale just fell flat.

What I do give the finale credit for is picking Street Fighting Man at
the end. It fits the film what Wake Up did for the Matrix.

And why didn't they use the much better RATM version?

RATM were, are and ever shall be shit. Maybe if they'd tried to make
music instead of ranting about how the Big Bad White Man hates niggers,
they would have done better.

What's your point here? You're a Stones fan and you needed to strike
back?

No. My "point" is that no matter how much you think you've matured in the
last few years, your comments about the Stones are the same kind of
ill-informed drivel that used to see Novak slapping you upside the head on a
regular basis. A little research would have shown you that the only cover
song for which the Stones are known is Time Is On My Side. Their entire
singles output during their peak popularity years from 1964-1974 were
original compositions.

[Mark Erikson]

Post by David Chapman

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by David Chapman

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Robert Sanderson Pratt

Post by Mark Erikson
And the finale just fell flat.

What I do give the finale credit for is picking Street Fighting Man at
the end. It fits the film what Wake Up did for the Matrix.

And why didn't they use the much better RATM version?

RATM were, are and ever shall be shit. Maybe if they'd tried to make
music instead of ranting about how the Big Bad White Man hates niggers,
they would have done better.

What's your point here? You're a Stones fan and you needed to strike
back?

No. My "point" is that no matter how much you think you've matured in the
last few years, your comments about the Stones are the same kind of
ill-informed drivel that used to see Novak slapping you upside the head on a
regular basis. A little research would have shown you that the only cover
song for which the Stones are known is Time Is On My Side. Their entire
singles output during their peak popularity years from 1964-1974 were
original compositions.

And you've achieved what here? Made yourself look good and me look
bad? Slapped me down, as Novak might have? I think at best you made
us both look bad.

Around 40% of Rolling Stones' songs are covers, according to the brief
bit of research you inspired me to do (kudos). Not quite most, but
still many.

But that wasn't _my_ point. My point was that the Stones sound washed
out, slow and dull. That'd be fine if they were famous for being
washed out, slow and dull (like Coldplay, except for the washed out
part). But the Stones are famous for being energic and fun - they're
put up there with The Who and Led Zeppelin. They're not.

-Mark Erikson

[Robert Sanderson Pratt]

Post by Mark Erikson
Let's say "many of which" instead. They're still a dull band, from an
era that gave us Cream and the Beatles. No excuses.

Wait, you called the Stones "dull" and in the same sentence implied that
the Beatles weren't?

WTF, over.

Sandy

[Mark Erikson]

Post by Robert Sanderson Pratt

Post by Mark Erikson
Let's say "many of which" instead. They're still a dull band, from an
era that gave us Cream and the Beatles. No excuses.

Wait, you called the Stones "dull" and in the same sentence implied that
the Beatles weren't?
WTF, over.

Have you, you know, listened to what the Beatles put out from Sgt
Peppers onwards?

It may not be your kind of music, but it wasn't dull either.

-Mark Erikson

[Kristoffer Björkman]

Post by Mark Erikson

Post by Robert Sanderson Pratt

Post by Mark Erikson
And the finale just fell flat.

What I do give the finale credit for is picking Street Fighting Man at
the end. It fits the film what Wake Up did for the Matrix.

I didn't think SFM fit well at all. But perhaps I'm from the wrong
generation.
Not that I dislike the song, but it felt like a really cheesy piece to
have at that moment.

Post by Mark Erikson
And why didn't they use the much better RATM version?
It's not that I'm a modernist, it's just that I dislike the Rolling
Stones. They come from an era of some of the most fantastic music ever
produced, and they somehow got famous doing washed-out dull music
lacking in any kind of umph. Most of which are covers.
Is Streeting Fighting Man even one of theirs?

Jagger/Richards wrote SFM.

/Kristoffer

[Robert Sanderson Pratt]

Post by Kristoffer Björkman

Post by Robert Sanderson Pratt

Post by Mark Erikson
And the finale just fell flat.

What I do give the finale credit for is picking Street Fighting Man at
the end. It fits the film what Wake Up did for the Matrix.

I didn't think SFM fit well at all. But perhaps I'm from the wrong
generation.
Not that I dislike the song, but it felt like a really cheesy piece to
have at that moment.

They needed something English, and that had the dry and bland sense of
peevishness rather than the outright rage of other, seemingly more
appropriate songs.

"Righto, bout time for a riot, eh? Well let me fetch my mask."


Sandy

[Robert Sanderson Pratt]

Post by Mark Erikson
And why didn't they use the much better RATM version?

I've heard the Ramones cover, but not RATM.

Post by Mark Erikson
It's not that I'm a modernist, it's just that I dislike the Rolling
Stones. They come from an era of some of the most fantastic music ever
produced, and they somehow got famous doing washed-out dull music
lacking in any kind of umph. Most of which are covers.
Is Streeting Fighting Man even one of theirs?

That's the genre. English blues and rock at the time were like that
(c.f. Led Zeppelin, Clapton/Cream/etc.). They played blues-derived
music (just like Elvis and Eminem, they brought black music to white
people... sort of), and at the time that meant doing alot of covers,
alongside doing some music that had its roots in blues but with some
more experimental stuff done.

As Arlo Guthrie commented at a concert I saw a while ago, "That's the
folk music process. If Bob [Dylan] won't play his songs, I will!"

Furthermore, doing covers produces some great music. A few examples:

No Quarter from Tool or Maktub are very different and very nearly better
than the real thing.

All Along the Watchtower
Hurt (arguably)
The Man Who Sold the World (IMHO)
Bittersweet Symphony - Jagger and Richards had a hand in that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Sweet_Symphony

And yes, Street Fighting Man is one of theirs. Maybe it's just me, but
those twangy chords and the bass drum pretty much did it for me after
seeing parliament blow up. It grows on you. In exactly the same way
Wake Up at the end of Matrix did.

Sandy