Dek Rollins

^I love that one!

That blockade is so dense.

http://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/906303

^Or just science-fantasy works, I think.

I Can’t See Nobody - Bee Gees

Spicks and Specks - Bee Gees

I’ve Gotta Get a Message to You - Bee Gees

I Started a Joke - Bee Gees

To Love Somebody - Bee Gees

World - Bee Gees

Massachusetts - Bee Gees

Words - Bee Gees

New York Mining Disaster 1941 - Bee Gees

Lord Haseo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Lord Haseo said:

Melissa and Don’t Break The Oath are great albums. But those are the only two I heard from them.

Never heard of them so they probably aren’t any good.

I haven’t heard a lot of the music you’ve posted ITT so by that logic… I haven’t listened to a lot of good music.

Finished.

Ah… so it really has no bearing. 😄

So do I. That’s what I was wondering about (“Why is it incorrect to call an instrumental song a song?”).

moviefreakedmind said:

Instrumental is almost always written next to the title on the back of albums.

Yeah, instrumental is written as a specifier, but I was never under the impression that meant it could’t be called a song.

DuracellEnergizer said:

TV’s Frink said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

“Gun Shop/Reese in Alley” by Brad Fiedel.

To paraphrase Bingowings (I think), it ain’t a song if it ain’t got words.

And he’s absotively correct.

Still, until someone creates a “Last Instrumental You Listened To” thread, I shall lump them in here.

I never knew that a song without words wasn’t a song. Especially when you have songs that are almost entirely instrumentals with one line of lyric placed somewhere in the midst (like Magnum Opus by Kansas). I’ve always used instrumental as a specifier of a given song.

moviefreakedmind said:

Yeah, the blue screen was real bad in Temple of Doom. Short Rounds feet always bothered me the most because it was just so unnecessary. The practical effects they did use always looked good to me though.

Wouldn’t the blue screen be practical?

moviefreakedmind said:

Dek Rollins said:

LuckyGungan2001 said:

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984): 8/10

…with amazing practical effects…

Not very many… 😄

Did you fast-forward through the mine-cart chase, the raft in the water, the car chase, the bug scene, the sacrificial tearing out of the heart, the rock crusher fight, most of the bridge scene etc. etc. and then only watch the part where the water shot out of the side of the mountain and Short Round’s feet dangled from the bridge?

Yeah, I generally don’t give that film the credit it’s due. It just always annoys me how almost all of the blue screen/matte effects range from wonky to terrible, and a lot of the locations are obvious set pieces. There were definitely quite a few great effects throughout the film.

LuckyGungan2001 said:

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984): 8/10

…with amazing practical effects…

Not very many… 😄

I’m glad to see things are moving along! I should be able to give around 5-10 dollars later today 😄.

I’m still curious about what was going on there! Who was he? Why was he posing as TV’s Frink? Where even were they?

Interesting… so, why does the audio clip you posted sound so similar to the person in the video? Now I’m just curious.

moviefreakedmind said:

No one knows what Television’s Finks looks like, so he may actually be the guy who played Ric_Olie.

What about…

LuckyGungan2001 said:

Isn’t there a video of Frink discussing his edit at some convention?

EDIT: Found it: https://vimeo.com/92208327

And as for…

TV’s Frink said:

That’s Neglify pretending to be me.

In the common words of DE; I don’t believe you, It’s another trick!

Anchorhead said:

Lord Starfish said:
I can’t imagine how anyone could have read that script and said “Okay, I have no problem with the idea of having my name associated with this product”.

I guess when the prime time line-up was Love Boat, ChiPs, Starsky & Hutch, Three’s Company, Donnie & Marie, and Vega$ - how much worse could it have been?

Wait, don’t answer that. 😉

I actually like Starsky & Hutch.

Wish You Were Here - Pink Floyd

^I have three on VHS. 😄

lol

SilverWook said:

Dek Rollins said:

^It’s too bad that it was shot on video. In all honesty though, I’m not sure it would have the same feel without that video look to it.

Classic Who, like most BBC series, was shot on a combination of film and video. The restoration team went back to the original film when it could be found.

I am aware of this. IIRC, it was mostly location scenes that were shot on film, because lugging a video setup around outside the studio would be too expensive and troublesome.

They could release restored episodes on Blu Ray with less compression though if there was a market for it.

I wish there was a bigger market for it, because it would be nice to see them on blu.

(this is getting off topic now… sorry 😄)

^Really? I guess I’ll have to check.

suspiciouscoffee said:

Dek Rollins said:

^It’s too bad that it was shot on video. In all honesty though, I’m not sure it would have the same feel without that video look to it.

Yeah I suppose you’re right about that. Although I actually like NuWho, it can never replicate the charm of the old. Shame that it was all removed from Netflix as soon as I really started getting into the old stuff.

If you want to stream it, Hulu has pretty much every available episode (old and new). I’d recommend using that, as long as you can get past how broken their servers can be sometimes.

^It’s too bad that it was shot on video. In all honesty though, I’m not sure it would have the same feel without that video look to it.