27 replies to this topic

[Overstreet]

I gotta say, I *hate* what the board updates have done to old posts. Combing through these old threads and trying to separate QUOTES from the responses to them is like playing Operation. It takes a steady cursor.

Anyway:

On this day in 2005:

- Red-Headed Stepchild nominated "Ralph Fiennes' Amon Goeth in Schindler's List" as the most evil character in any movie. (But I think this was topped by Erik Russell's response the next day.)

- And everybody's favorite spiritually significant movie - Constantine - inspired SDG to talk about Catholic understanding of hell (which I found very surprising and intriguing):

Quote

Catholic tradition certainly does not insist on any understanding of the nature (or location) of hell. St. Augustine: "It is my opinion that the nature of hell-fire and the location of hell are known to no man unless the Holy Ghost made it known to him by a special revelation", (City of God, XX, xvi). Pope St. Gregory the Great: "I do not dare to decide this question. Some thought hell is somewhere on earth; others believe it is under the earth" (Dialogues, IV, xlii).

In the words of John Paul II: "The images of hell that Sacred Scripture presents to us must be correctly interpreted. They show the complete frustration and emptiness of life without God. Rather than a place, hell indicates the state of those who freely and definitively separate themselves from God, the source of all life and joy. This is how the Catechism of the Catholic Church summarizes the truths of faith on this subject: 'To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell"'" (Wednesday Audience, August 4, 1999).

Edited by Overstreet, 25 February 2010 - 01:16 PM.

[M. Leary]

So what was the solution to the Riddle of The Mando?

[Overstreet]

You think Imma gonna just tell you?!

[Peter T Chattaway]

Not entirely related, but I just realized it's been exactly six years and five days since my review of Against the Ropes went up at CT Movies, which might be the first review they ever posted. (Even my Passion of the Christ review, which was written for the magazine and not for the website, didn't go online until a few days later -- until exactly six years ago today, in fact.) Link to our thread on that topic.

And so, on a related note, six years ago today marked the release of The Passion of the Christ and a flurry of posts by people at this board.

[Persona]

Baal_T, on 25 February 2010 - 10:19 AM, said:

Followed immediately by this response from Stef (Persona)...

Quote

Posted 05 August 2004 - 09:59 AM
ugH, Jeffrey, this is the kind of uncomfortable miserableness i was referring to.

Which I do believe referred to another post by Stef from the same day, about the quality (or lack thereof) of some of the newer contributors. I can't for the life of me find that original post... perhaps it was in short term parking... or perhaps Persona finally realized the error of his ways regarding the Lindsey Lohan Disney years.

I am an idiot and I apologize.

FWIW, I should win the most embarrassing moment contest, not from something from years ago but from yesterday, when I referred to a certain Pretty Woman as Julia Rogers...

What, was she Fred's wife?

Edited by Persona, 27 February 2010 - 09:46 PM.

[Persona]

Peter T Chattaway, on 25 February 2010 - 02:59 PM, said:

And so, on a related note, six years ago today marked the release of The Passion of the Christ and a flurry of posts by people at this board.

Isn't it true that I had the very first review posted anywhere in the whole world and that it beat everyone else by like two weeks and attracted all kinds of embargo fun? Please tell me I'm remembering this correctly as I have practically nothing left to brag about anymore...

[Peter T Chattaway]

Persona wrote:
: Isn't it true that I had the very first review posted anywhere in the whole world and that it beat everyone else by like two weeks and attracted all kinds of embargo fun?

Was it the final theatrical version that you saw, or one of the earlier cuts with the slightly-unfinished visual effects and the temporary music etc.? If you saw the unfinished version, which got shown at a lot of "grassroots" venues prior to the release of the film, then I don't know that it would be fair to say that you reviewed the film, per se; and I'd also be surprised if no other reviews had come out of those "grassroots" screenings prior to that point (that is, if you saw it only two weeks before the release date).

[Persona]

It was close enough to finished. And I was the only one I could find on the web. Crashed the website, IIRC.