quote:

---

Originally posted by Hasta:
Well Shaun, I'm still not sure, I know you are a smart ass though... and Zimmer still wrote a huge amount of original material for Gladiator, so step down =)... With Hollow Man, who cares if Goldsmith wrote it when it's as bad as it is anyway...

---

I dunno why most of you don't like Goldsmith's score for "The Hollow Man", I love it... I've purchased most the new scores this year and I'd say that "Hollow Man" is definately one of my favorites so far. It isn't groundbreaking, no... But it's extremely enjoyable... all the way through. There really isn't one dull track. Talk about a bad score, look at Zimmer's "Gladiator". Some of you guys are just so one sided, you have to be more open it seems. Dunno, I have to stick up for this score because when I first got it I must have listened to it more than 20 times in the first week... I'm a freak, sorry!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hasta:
With Hollow Man, who cares if Goldsmith wrote it when it's as bad as it is anyway...

---

Amen to that! Down with Hollow Man! Up with Gladiator!

Besides, at least Zimmer has used some different synth sounds since the 1980's...can't say the same for Goldsmith...

-Brendan

Besides, at least Goldsmith has used some different synth sounds since the 1980's...can't say the same for Hanzimmer...

Hollow Man is indeed a fine score!

seriously underrated, and an awesome album to boot.
can't wait for iso to come out on DVD.

of course, we can all agree that the movie blows chunks (except for the gratuitous nudity, of course).

NP -- Masada, another good Goldsmith score

Now, imagine he doing the score for GLADIATOR... Ok, the movie is pure lame, but still more interesting than HOLLOW MAN!

quote:

---

I don't understand the need to so excessively prove something that you didn't really prove that well anyway.

---

If you would, once again, re-read the paragraph directly below that nuisance of a blur on your screen, you will notice something very specific about the premise it sets forth...but, so you don't have to incur any further spit buildup from your rabid cleaning, I'll reproduce it here:

quote:

---

Actually, it more or less a story of curiousity killing the cat: taking the plunge, spending $24.00 in the process, just to hear what all the fuss is about and, hopefully, finally, arriving at my own definitive conclusion of this composer's merits.

---

Perhaps the first thing you will note about it is its cheery, optimistic tone; second, and surely more obvious...I hope you would agree...it is not cast in stone; nor, thirdly, does it bare a zip code for either Mt. Olympus, Mt. Sinai or the offices of Film Score Monthly. And lastly, my presumptive friend, nowhere in that paragraph will you find evidence of my desire to proove a damn thing. As I clearly stated, they were strictly "my own" conclusions based on what my $24.00 bought me. I was not challenging you, or anyone, to a duel...though clearly the tone of this forum leaves one little room to manoeuvre (<--- note, not US spelling).

As to your stated interest in my "idea of a good" film score vs." my "idea of Gladiator"...I would point you in the direction of my questionnaire which amply demonstrates both my ambivalence to precisely the question you asked of me in your second reply. Because, despite it taking up a significant chunk of my dialogue, my critique of Mr. Zimmer's compositional prowess and efficacy ends with my giving the CD a passing grade.

And, if we turn back to that section, with credence paid to the technical points I chide him for, it should be apparent that my reservations hinge on the "lightweight" conventions of Rock-n-Roll/Heavy Metal/New Age music that he employs to convey dramatic import. The corollary of which is my detailing of specific examples of music and musical styles which did not originate from his pen or imagination, but which are, for lack of a better analogy, and filtered through my classically oriented bias of course, the sturdiest of the two legs this CD stands upon. And, you will notice, I did not provide an opinion, pro or contra, on the validity of their usage.

Dear Probable:

re: grammatical errors and lingual inconsistencies

speling erors kan bee an isoar. Darn tootin! And truly, a proofreader is a writer's best friend. But, it's yet to be scientifically proven, for example, that the Anglo spelling of potatoe, what with that supposedly superfulous 'e', suffers in meaning when translated to Yank. Simultaneously, but not necessarily to the last micro-second (who wants to count by nanos anyway), it still might be possible that your neural pathways are too narrow and inflexible to allow more than one variable to be cross-referenced at a time. For instance, when you come upon a spelling error or an unexpected shift in a paragraph's tone or structure, do you find yourself caught in a feedback loop that shuts down ocular function, making progresss to the next word or sentance physically impossible? Hmmm...if this is the case, I can see how this could pose a problem.

Perhaps imbreeding is to blame?

But do feel free at any time to address, if any, those points of discussion you did, or did not, understand.

Immodestinglyful yours,

SPQR

And SPQR...your real name wouldn't be Professor Bob Ludwig would it...I haven't heard so much pretentious blather since sitting through Quantum Mechanics.

quote:

---

Originally posted by André Lux:
So now Gladiator is better than Hollow Man, Brendan? This just keeps getting better and better! Not only is Gladiator boring, but Zimmir just plain got some parts of fitting the score and the film wrong. There were points in the movie where I laughed out loud at the score as I was watching it because it was so blatently off kilter.

---

You talk and think you're clever with your banterings, yet you never say anything definite. Hollow Man is trite, uninspired, and annoying (just my opinion of course). I think Gladiator has listening value and Hollow Man doesn't (I think MANY of Goldsmith's scores have little to no listening value...but that's an argument for another time).

I will therefore agree to disagree. Happy film score listening to you sir.

-Brendan

Pretentious? Baloney! Your knee just works faster than your brain.

By the way, do you really need two 'l's in your name, or it 'aint manly enough with just one?

There are a few good themes here, but there was so much of the same thing that it came close to making my head spin. Wall-to-wall music. Some of the scenes just didn't call for any underscore whatsoever, yet Zimmer makes sure that there is always some sort of ZIMMERTAINMENT going on. If he had taken some of the cues out for the less important scenes and kept the standout cues for the bigger moments, it would have had more of an effect.

Goldsmith's HOLLOW MAN, however, I have more respect for. Not only because of the complexity of Goldsmith's action/suspense compositions but that his ideas and motifs for the score started out quiet and developed along with the story, taking a completely different direction from mystery and awe to horror.

Ahhh, heck...let's just see how it fits anyway: SPQRL.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quill:
uuhhhhh...I think I just heard Andre tell someone to be open-minded....owwww, stop...that's so funny it hurts!

---

Yeah. I am not open minded. I forgot that one must like crap to be considered open minded nowadays...

I assure you, I have no physical or psychological deficiencies that prevent me from reading text marred with persistent assaults on the conventions of our bastardized language. In fact, I read through many a message board post daily which is pocked with the symptoms of a mind that learned to spell from cathode-ray tubes, and move on, unbothered. It is only when the grievous rape of my native tongue is accompanied by such pompous bombast and astonishingly obdurate arrogance that I feel it necessary to request a shift in the perpetrator's mode of communication. Lest you be lost already, let me sum up: If the speaker is humble, his words may pass being humble also. If the speaker is prideful, let him take pride in his language first!

(Sweet John, now look at what you've started )

Now none of my comments are directed at anyone in particular so
please don’t personalize this post. I just sometimes wonder if
people understand the psychology of communication. Seems like
if someone disagrees with what we enjoy, we become defensive
and feel attacked. I have a confession to make. I don’t enjoy
Goldmsith’s Under Fire score. Gasp! Heresy! Mark Hatfield posted
a thread on this score, and everyone chimed in on how miraculous and
marvelous this score is. I’m not sure why, but I don’t really enjoy it and
don’t listen to it very often. I’ve tried, but it doesn’t appeal to my musical
tastes. Hey, if the rest of you love it, great! I’m thrilled it works
for you.

If someone wants to write a detailed essay that analyzes its brilliance,
I won’t feel insulted. The writer may be correct, but I won’t get defensive
because I don’t enjoy it. (Thanks Mark for NOT offering to send me
hearing aids for Christmas when I told you how I felt about Under Fire.)
And if someone thinks a score I adore is trash, I’m not going to
feel guarded or attacked. I hope all of you have enough self-
confidence to accept and CELEBRATE your own predilections.

All the above leads me to this point.
I’ve seen nothing pretentious in SPQR’s posts. He OWNS some
Zimmer. He expressed an opinion and backed
it with substantive narration. I do understand that his
tone may have offended a few because most of us want to think
our preferences in music or films reflect discerning, intelligent taste.
That doesn’t diminish the fact that he did support, with narrative flesh,
his thesis that the music was light weight. We all shouldn’t choose
to take umbrage because we personalized his opinions.

I think I have enough self esteem that if someone calls a movie that
I love, “enjoyed only by the severely brain damaged,” I don’t feel
denigrated because I like it. Taste is individual. And if I think a piece
of music is rich in its complexity, I can always post my opinion backed
with examples. Or I can cop out and accuse the offending person
of intellectual and verbal gobbledygook and pretentiousness instead
of writing an equally persuasive opinion supporting an opposing stance.

I personally agree with John’s original post on Gladiator. I, like John,
enjoy two themes heard in the battle and later resurrected in the arena.
I bought the CD. I found it dull as a stand alone and transferred my
favorite cues to a tape. I like the main theme from The Crimson Tide.
Zimmer can write a rousing melody. My only complaint is the derivative
orchestration he has employed for the past five years.
(Exception: As Good As It Gets.) I’d like to see him
move on (evolve) or go back to some of the flair demonstrated in Black
Rain, A League of Their Own, and Rain Man.

I guess SPQR you should either type more S L O W L Y or use
a monosyllabic vocabulary to avoid chastisement. It doesn’t matter if
I agree or disagree with him; I enjoyed the read and am not threatened
when I have to use a dictionary. (Or when Shaun ranks on my favorite
score, Dinosaur. )

Buy boxers!

(Ugh, I’m starting to sound like someone’s mother. I promise to take
a break.)

NP Superman

What you fail to realize good sir, and do pardon the expression if you believe it does not apply to you on this or any future occassion, the more thickheaded your approach in addressing comments credited to me, be they sound or silly, can only incite me to further, astonishingly imaginative replys.

I would offer, however, for your literal-minded consideration, that what you may perceive as a reproach could also be read as a friendly barb. On the other hand, I had no idea I was publishing for a Reader's Digest public. Perhaps, if spend more time here, I will become as you would prefer: boring, eaily inclined to react to the slightest provocation without the slightest proof of due cause, and overly condfident of my opinion that no rationale need be provided. Who needs ideas when you've got a pocketful of unearned indignation and long expired aphorisms to fetter your foes.

Sounds like a cowards paradise to me.

Joan:

I personally feel that a message board should be more along the lines of casual conversation, and I think some people might interpret your tone as condescending when you write in the manner you do. Please note that this is only an opinion, and I do not view your writing as condescending.

I have no problem with insults or criticism aimed at my taste in film music, but your juvenile remarks concerning my username are not warranted. Andre and I have some heated arguments, but they remain civil because we do not resort to such tactics.

Keep posting though, contrary to what you might think, I enjoy well conceived arguments that differ from my own. Your opinions and intentions are easily discernable in your writing, as they should be with any well written dissertation.

Hi. I don't mean to beat a dead horse here--I certainly agree with you, for the most part. An opposing view doesn't bother me--however, let me illustrate what I feel to be "pretentious" and "insulting" to fellow posters--here are some questions that were asked previously:

1) IS THE 'GLADIATOR' AND THE ACCOLADES ATTRIBUTED TO ZIMMER SIMPLY THE RESULT OF A CULTURALLY IMPAIRED AUDIENCE NOT REALIZING OR, FOR THAT MATTER, ALL THAT CONCERNED BEING SOLD USED GOODS?

Loaded/Leading question? Sounds more rhetorical, not one that requires an answer, but reflects the opinion of the individual asking the question. Let us say the answer is "yes." Then what? We are clearly culturally impaired, and purveors of used goods. No? Then we're not culturally impaired, and "Gladiator" is a random masterstroke? How are we to answer this question--if at all--and not sound dignified? The implication is that if we are to find any enjoyment in the film, or its' score, that we cannot be taken seriously, because we have lost the ability to discern culture from commercialism.

2) AND WHAT OF THE INVERSE: THOSE LISTNERS WHO ACKNOWLEDGE THE OVER-RELIANCE ON SOURCE MATERIAL, YET FEEL COMFORTABLE TOSSING THE WORD "GENIUS" HIS WAY. DO THESE PEOPLE OWN A DICTIONARY? AS I'VE SAID BEFORE: IF ZIMMER'S A GENIUS, WHAT OF BEETHOVEN?

"Genius" (as per Merriam-Webster):
1. An attendant spirit of a person or place.
2. A strong leaning or inclination.
3. A peculiar or distinctive character or spirit.
4. The associations and traditions of a place.
5. A nature spirit, also a person who influences another for good or evil.
6. A single strongly marked capacity.
7. Extrodinary intellectual power; also a person having such power.

Having provided a visual answer--for those who have been assumed to be lacking a dictionary--I will leave it to the capable readers to discern whether one or more of these definitions apply to Zimmer, Scott, Beethoven, or whomever they should feel suitable.

3) IS ZIMMER INADVERTANTLY OR INTENTIONALLY PAYING HOMAGE TO ALL THESE DEAD WHITE GUYS (GORECKI EXCEPTED?)

Though the implied answer is "intentionally", I would venture to guess that is also the truth. Zimmer (reference DVD interview) makes a point of indicating the Wagnerian influence, at the very least.
The counter to this, though not intended to be facetious, is "So what?" The answer to that is: "Then Zimmer's a copycat! (and, lacking originiality, therefore not a true artist.)" Therefore, we can't appreciate art, only the copycat version of it.

4. IS [ZIMMER] SIMPLY SAVING HIMSELF TIME, MONEY, AND MENTAL PERTURBATION TAKING THE ROYALTY-FREE ROUTE, PRODUCING PASTICHE SCORES?

I would refer the reader, once more, to the DVD interview, wherein Zimmer references a tape of several different themes (all stolen from other composers, of course) which he had prepared for Gladiator, but were abandoned. Whether the effort to (dare I say "compose"), but at least, "assemble" these themes is a time saving effort, when clearly he could have used a remixed "Hooked on Wagner"....well....we'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.

5) IS THERE ANY REAL APPRECIATIVE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A ZIMMER SOUNDTRACK AND, LET'S SAY, A MADONNA ALBUM OR [THE MUSIC FROM] THE LATEST FORD EXPLORER COMMERCIAL?

I think there is certainly an implication here, which, in turn, puts implications on the listner.
As they are different genres of music, from different *artists*, I will venture to say Yes, there are real appreciative differences, and it is a short-sighted individual who places any of those in the same category.

5) LIKE JAMES HORNER, IS ZIMMER JUST ANOTHER MINOR TALENT WHO KNOWS ALL THE RIGHT PEOPLE, AND SIMPLY FILLING A COMMERCIAL NICHE?

Answer A: Yes!
Answer B: No!
The question itself can be invalidated, however, based on the observation that the implications made regarding James Horner are true or untrue in the first place, leaving the comparison to Zimmer unfair or innacurate. I'm certain there are several on both sides of issue.

And the final--

6) SINCE MONEY DOES MAKE THE WORLD GO 'ROUND, IS IT NOT INEVITABLE THAT FILMSCORES WILL FOLLOW, FOR THE MOST PART, WHATEVER TRENDS THE MARKETPLACE HOPES TO PROFIT BY AND, UNTIL SUCH TIME AS IT POINTS ANOTHER DIRECTION, THOSE OF US WHO TAKE UMBRAGE WITH IT MAY AS WELL GRIN AND BEAR IT, KEEPING OUR WALLETS FIRMLY TUCKED AWAY IN HIBERNATION (OR PROTEST)?

I would venture to say that it is NOT inevitable what trend film *scores* will follow, as they are clearly undervalued and unappreciated and often abandoned in favor of "Music Inspired by" releases, much to the chagrin of film score appreciators. This question seems more one of jealousy that while those who have lesser opinions of Hans Zimmer must sit and fume while scores of his are featured on Best Seller racks, rather than inspired score of other composers, such as Max Steiner, Miklos Rozsa, Jerry Goldsmith, and the like.
I have no answer for this--it's an unfair world. It shouldn't be important to us whether our favorite music is everyone else's favorite, but that we extract from it as much enjoyment and appreciation as we are able to do. The fantastic thing about film music is that it IS so diverse, and that most of these composers are still alive, and currently employed. Yes, we're going to have differing opinions, and there's going to be disagreements short of a knock-down-drag-out fight, (or whatever the internet equivalent of that is.) But--(and this is just me talking, here)--nowhere should there be these claims that because we enjoy one form of expression are we somehow the lesser for it. It is only when we choose not to appreciate that we lose.

You may write this off as the words of a "new-age Yoda." That is your obligation. However, as presenting opposing views to those who claim "if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen", I take some umbrage at those who suggest I do so in any attempt at "self-martyrdom".

Lancelot, I’m NOT sorry for my support of a well-articulated argument.
That was my main point. I didn’t address the other issues of tone, etc. Maybe I should have.
I truly believe it is O.K. to challenge our thinking with supported ideas.

However, I do understand what you are saying. Please know that I also uphold
RESPECTFUL attitudes and tone when debating or challenging ideas.
I have NEVER supported belittling nor rudeness, and if I’m ever guilty of
being rude or hurtful, I’d want to know that and would sincerely apologize.

He is wrong.

But he has the right to say whatever he wants on this message board.

But like I said the important thing is that you have the right to post your views here. Being it nonsense or not.

people still cry foul. how unoriginal! how hackish! what a fruit Zimmer is!

question is: how does one score a "triumphal" entry into Rome? 12-tone rows?
muted violin passages? string quartet?
glass harmonicas? mixing bowls?
oh, how about brass fanfares?
pipe organ, perhaps?

well, can't be brass fanfares cuz then, he'd be ripping off Rozsa...can't use a march cuz then he'd be ripping off North. No pipe organ, cuz that would've been a rip of Morricone's M2M. no glass hormonicas, cuz that'd rip off Mozart, Beltrami, Danna.
mixing bowls? ripping off Goldsmith!

truth be told, I'm not sure what exactly has been ripped from Gorecki 3, and I've listened to that piece zillions of times.

SPQR is dead on about the musical inadequacies and originality of the music.
dosen't sway me one bit from the fact I still like it, and can get just as much personal enjoyment from it, as I get from any film score, or the music of Bach, Beethoven, Bernstein, Boulez & Brahms.

tphtpthpthtpth!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lancelot:
Sounds like a quote for your Membership Profile, Andre.

Regards--

---

Yeah... Great, Lancie.
I will consider it.
Your opinions about things are important to me, you know...

Yeah... Great, Lancie.
I will consider it.
Your opinions about things are important to me, you know...

<HR size=1></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gee, and I thought you hated my guts. That's really kind of you. Take care, now.

I am appreciative of the time and energy you have put into your reply, and I will address each of your responses in a moment...but, first, I feel I must remark upon this preoccupation you have to recklessly presume the intent of an author and proceed to harass said author for crimes he/she may or may not have committed by prefacing your comments with unsubstantiated claims suggesting that my questionnaire, for example, is motivated by ill will toward you, or those you see yourself as representing. And, though what follows may only exacerbate the situation further, may I remind you that there can be more than one definition or implication to a word. Simply put, there are two sides two any given coin, as in:

Martyr Complex:

a) "Martyrs frequently let the people whom they feel are taking advantage of them know how badly they are being treated. Martyrs often resort to badgering, nagging, scolding, threatening, belittling, antagonizing, and verbally putting down those whom they perceive to be taking advantage of them".

b) "Frequently knowingly plays an active part in the problem".

c) "Wears problem as a badge of courage (purple heart)".

d) "Holds a "yes- but'' attitude to all new ideas".

e) "Martyrs often knowingly continue to enable or set up situations in which their rights are violated or ignored. This "setting up'' is like a prediction or prophecy of failure into which, consciously or unconsciously, the martyrs play, fulfilling the prophecy".

...all of which, but particularly the last, suggests to me a possible root cause for the manner in which you choose to interpret and address opposing views and values.

Make of this what you will...myself, I'm only trying to understand the source of your hostility.

In any case, I said I would address your responses to my questionnaire, and so I shall:

As regards:

#1: Perhaps its is due to its lack of specificity, but by "cultural impairment" I had intended to coin a phrase to apply to those viewers and listeners who, whether by choice or circumstance, are ignorant of the vast history of film, art and music which informs popular culture, and might construe unattributed or overtly derivative material as original and, thusly, ascribe more credit than is properly due.

What strikes me as odd about your reply Lancelot (actually, down-right strange), is the extent to which you have internalized my hypothesis - as though I had pointed you out in a crowded room and said:

"There he is! Just look at him, would ya. Isn't he the most culturally impaired dufous on the planet"!!!

...and then you proceed to draw erroneous assumptions based on this perceived slight, concluding, for example, that I must think it impossible to enjoy 'Gladiator' and other derivative fare without being culturally impaired. WOW! Did you catch me when I was stoned or something? Listen up. As someone who has seen the film twice, owns the damn CD, listens to it, has composed a lengthy, and mysteriously controversial missive on the subject...you're reaching.

#2) It is a personal pet peeve of mine that, in this day of regurgitated commodities and half-baked ironies, the word, genius, is thrown at "the next best thing" like just another cream pie. Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer this defintion best:

fromthe Oxford Dictionary of Current English

genius: exceptional intellectual or creative power or other natural ability or tendancy

...with particular emphasis on "exceptional".

#3) Is he inadvertantly or intentionally paying homage? Frankly, I don't know the answer to this one. But, just for the fun of it, let's play devil's advocate. Shall we?

BEELZEBUB: One could opine that it is a poor artistic choice considering the Wagner thing was put to the same, and better use in 'Excalibur' (a war movie), and while he didn't utilize Barber's Adagio during the hand-to-hand battle sequence, he may as well have, since his faux Wagner/Mahler mix succeeds in aping the very same effect Oliver Stone set out to achieve in 'Platoon' (a war movie). Oh irony of ironies. These filmmakeer fellows don't live in a vacuum you know. They're constantly copying one another...watching the same films you and I do...trying to reformulate what's already been said and done a thousand times before (because their jobs depend upon it). Hollywood is a cookie-cutter production line. Which essentially means they're in the business of making more of the same. Just take a look at your local cineplex. Now, the real talent lies in the marketing departments of the major studios. These clever folks have the unenviable, but well paid task of packaging thinner and thinner material for audiences to buy. Hell, just look at 'The Grinch'. So, as far as I, Beelzebub, am concerned, Zimmer is only practicing the same scavenging act everyone else has partaken in. Paying homage implies more than acknowledgement:

"Ya, I killed the bitch! What about it"?

ANGEL OF MERCY: Putting aside the issue of accreditation for a moment, and possibly the issue of artistic validity...uhhh...he's really a cool guy, he's just doing what everyone else is. Besides, it's only you few stalwarts who begrudge him his success and you're all Goldsmith lackies anyway.

As I said...I don't have the definitive answer, though a third explanation is possible: Zimmer, in his quest to so-call, reinvent forms, applied to the battle sequences specifically what is conceptually similar to the scratch and mix techniques practiced by DJ's at dance clubs on, what is to many people, sacrosanct material.

#4) Without running simultaneous MRI scans on Goldsmith and Zimmer, it's almost impossible to determine which puts more demands on the brain: concocting substanitially original material or reformatting recycled material. Albiet, considering Zimmer is not classically trained, he may have made the job more difficult for himself. Can you just imagine how many times he had to listen to 'Siegfreid's Rhine Journey' before he could copy down the chord modulations? Of course, he probably used a manuscript copy...

(Sorry, it simply makes for an amusing scenario: picture Nick-Glennie Smith with a doobie in one hand and the CD remote in the other: "Hey, ZimmerDude, my thumbs gettin sore man")...

#5) I would suggest, however, if one derives the same emotional response from two or more stimuli with seperate purposes but with similar qualities, there is little, if any, appreciative difference... Hint: this one was definitely rhetorical.

#6) Answer A: Yes
Answer B: No/Yes...depends what criteria used to judge major talent.

I would add, however, that both men wouldn't get paid the big bucks and land the big pictures if they weren't hot commodities. That is, they sell CD's.

#7) Getting back to my earlier observations of this relentless need of yours to implicate me in some grand scheme to squash the "little people", if I might borrow the term, you've completely missed the boat on this one.

a) There's enough literature on the subject already, even from within a community as small as ours, pertaining to the historical influence movie studios, producers, directors and actors have had on the content and context of film scores and filmscore albums. Its par for the course that we're the beneficiaries of those producers, directors and companies who are themselves sympathetic to our curious taste in music.

b) And, what's this bit about jealousy, eh? What crabapple tree d'you pluck that one from?

I'd say, if you don't condone the wanton slaughter of dolphins, you probably only eat from tuna safe cans. What more is there to say, except, that we as film music consumers can be heard in our own little way: whether we're buying the wares of each and every con-man that knocks at our doors, choosing to ride out the storm in glum despair, launching a consumer protest, or fastening our seat-belts and giving everyone a bumpy ride!

NP: The Cell **** (for substantial originality)

dave

quote:

---

NP: The Cell **** (for substantial originality)

---

good to hear someone else liking The Cell.

it'll of course be looked iover at the Academy's simply because of it's striking originality.