Eccentric Flower talk:200906/Not Quite Recidivism
From Eccentric Flower
Comments on Eccentric Flower:200906/Not Quite Recidivism
You have at least one real-time person who has said, on a number of occasions, that maybe we should grab lunch, which would give you some interaction with a real-life person AND get you food.
And if you haven't figured it out by now, it's not just because I'm a charitable person who reaches out to folks who are feeling lonely, but also because I don't have that many non-work interactions in my everyday life either, so it'd work out on both sides.
Besides, in the hour or so to have lunch at Mary Chung's, I don't really have enough time to judge you as a person, so there's very little faking necessary!
-- 12:45, 7 June 2009 (BST)
I know, and I'm not doing great about that. Although some of it is the phobias, lunch is often very problematic. On the work days when I get to take a normally-timed lunch at all, I tend to want to get food somewhere where there is no human contact whatsoever! Both of these factors have conspired to have me take lunch at 1 pm or later - sometimes considerably later - because by then it's usually calm enough for me to go, and by then the lunch crowd has left the restaurants.
-- 15:05, 7 June 2009 (BST)
I recognize that the last part of the post is the important one, but you've heard me on this subject before, and I have nothing new to add. So I'll go with this: The original The Taking of Pelham One, Two, Three is one of the great movies of all time. I remember when it came out, and I remember New York in the 1970s, and the film captured it perfectly, both the grimness and the black humor it engendered. I'll likely see the remake, but I dread it. I sat through the horrid TV movie version -- horrid not for the cast (Vincent D'Onfrio as Mr. Blue, Edward James Olmos in the Walter Matthau role, and Lorraine Bracco in the Jerry Stiller role), but for BEING SHOT IN TORONTO. (This is the opposite of the problem I had with the U.S. Life on Mars, shot beautifully in New York City, but utterly miscast. I've been meaning to rant about that for months over on LJ, but haven't gotten around to it.)
I'm not a film geek, as you know, but I'd love to curate a New York in the '70s film festival with Taxi Driver and Pelham to open and close. (Manhattan would be in there, too; I'd have to think about the others I'd include.)
-- 16:24, 7 June 2009 (BST)
Who says the last part of the post is the important one? heh.
It struck us over and over as we watched the film what a perfect snapshot of New York in the mid-seventies that film is. But that may work against it. One of the two bits of trivia on the film I found very interesting, on its IMdB page, was that
I think you almost have to be in an urban environment, or have spent a lot of time in one, to appreciate the film fully. Which is not to say it's not worth seeing for everyone else; it's just that having been there adds that extra frisson.
Also, the film almost wasn't shot there, which would have been a huge disaster:
-- 16:58, 7 June 2009 (BST)
I keep wanting to see the original Pelham and not doing it. Which is unfortunate, because I'm probably going to see the remake Tuesday morning as a way to get my mind off stuff going on Tuesday afternoon. OTOH, seeing the original first may make it seem even better.
I get you on the feeling lonely thing. I am often fine with in-person contact, it's just that I somehow don't know a lot of people well and don't see them often enough. And I can hardly ever go out to lunch with non-coworkers because it's logistically difficult.
-- 22:55, 7 June 2009 (BST)
Jette, I think you'd really like the original. The script is fantastic, which made perfect sense once we realized it was written by the same guy who'd written Charade.
-- 00:12, 8 June 2009 (BST)
Follow-up on Pelham 123: I saw the remake yesterday and thought it was your basic entertaining summer action film. Tony Scott gets a little crazy with the camera but it didn't bother me. But a) a lot of the critics with me didn't like it as much and b) I've liked Scott's previous two films and others haven't, so it's obviously a matter of how much you can put up with his directorial style.
I'm watching the original movie right now; it's available for streaming on Fancast. It's a little dark and grainy but still good: http://tinyurl.com/l8kupq
-- 17:44, 10 June 2009 (BST)
@Jette: Did the remake have the dark humor of the original (and I don't mean Travolta mugging for the camera)? I don't think I could stomach the remake if it were turned into a straight action-thriller.
-- 00:25, 11 June 2009 (BST)
Yes, the remake has a good streak of humor in it. James Gandolfini plays the mayor and this is one area that improves on the original. I haven't finished watching the original yet but I think I prefer Travolta over Robert Shaw ... on the other hand, no one is better than Walter Matthau.
-- 14:27, 11 June 2009 (BST)
Phoenix review seems to match what has been said here: Travolta good, Washington good, Gandolfini better than the original, good script ...
-- 19:20, 11 June 2009 (BST)
Mel:
Well, let's just say that if you truly didn't play well with others, we never would have lasted, what, three years and counting playing games together. On the other hand, I am sort of in the same boat as you about in-person friends. Or actually, you're ahead of me because you have some. All mine are people I know from some particular something: they quilt, or I used to work with them, or I'm related to them. I don't have any people who are just my friends. And I don't seem to know how to find such a thing any more.
-- 05:41, 7 June 2009 (BST)