this is nonsense...

What new ideas? Tell me of five or even one movie, that was not influenced by some other work of art from the past.

This crap that hollywood turns out, and people go see is a cause of supply and demand. If nobody watched the movies, then they would not be made. Stuido execs may be stupid, but ultimately they are making a product to make money. This crap makes money because it has mass appeal.

What percentage of the world's population is on this board? Miniscule. And most of us agree that most of the movies are crap. But the truth is, we are in the minority. If 99.9999% of the world's population wants to go see Crossroads, then who are we really to say that this is an absolute wrong. Most people in this world are not intellectuals or connoisseurs of art. They want a story with simple concepts that they can understand, and be happy or sad or excited.

Have you ever watched the Three Colors trilogy? It is in my opinion one of the most beautifully filmed, thought provoking masterpieces of cinema. Yet there are very few people around with the background and eductation that can appreciate all its subtle nuances, complicated topics, and deep themes. And movies like that are being made, but why should we expect every movie to fit a category that only a tiny percentage of people can enjoy or appreciate. For that matter, even people that can appreciate those works of art don't necessarily want to watch them all the time. I like sushi, but I can't eat it all the time, sometimes I like a turkey sandwitch.

Its pointless to get frustrated, because as my friend tells me all the time, we are trying to apply our way of thinking to the world at large, which, chances are, thinks differently. Because you have the awareness of just how crappy the whole hollywood system is, and that you have the ability to know that better things exist, then be happy that you are better than the hoi polloi, and when you find a movie or book that is worthy of your praise, then ensure that you spread knowledge of it to your friends and acquaintances so they can appreciate it.

To the best of my knowlege, "Traffic" was never a book. The Oscar-winning movie was based on a British TV mini-series called "Traffik" by Simon Moore... because it's own screenplay was based off of that teleplay, it earned the "Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar."

So, essentially, this mini-series is based upon a movie which was in itself based upon a mini-series.

God is nowhere, God is now here

not sure anyone won't say Traffic was a great movie. and I do agree with a couple points here. screwtape, good call on the original thinking bit and the next post however is right on with their thought that all art forms are derived from something previous.

however, kudos to the producers of USA or whoever is responsible for this because we all have to admit the ratings will be soaring tonight. and on a monday night, that's good for USA. because every person who liked that movie will be tuned in, well not literally but you get the point.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no plans to make any "Traffic" action figures. So the sarcasm is not necessary. Also, it is correct that "Traffic" was never a novel. It finds it roots, as already stated, in a British mini-series, "Traffik", written by Simon Moore. This may not be trivia that most people are aware of, but even a minimum of research at this very website will yield the answer. Next time, know exactly of what you speak, unless you're too wrapped up into finding your original thoughts. Really, that's nothing but pretense. Anybody with even the broadest knowledge of art - in all of its forms - knows that every "new" idea or movement is based firmly on what came before.

"Traffic", the American miniseries, is spun off from Steven Soderbergh's finely-crafted film, TRAFFIC. Non of the characters or storylines from the film are repeated in this miniseries. It merely takes the social topic of drug trafficking as the basis of its very human stories. In that regard, it does repeat the film. However, the same could be said of every film that becomes a series, or series that becomes a film. But that's not a fair comparison, since the majority of movie-to-television or television-to-movie projects are markedly inferior. In the case of "Traffic", the story is intriguing, the direction top-notch, and the acting compelling. That alone makes it worthy. In fact, screwtape, I have to wonder if you've watched any of at all. Or are you just the type to rail against something based on some preconceived notion?

But I suppose you are also opposed to THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy and MASTER AND COMMANDER: THE FAR SIDE OF THE WORLD (both of which are based on great literature), according to misguided principles?

No, what is nonsense is that people like you have to bitch and moan about every single thing.

I just love critiques from someone who hasn't even seen a show, or even plans on giving it a chance. Reminds me of all the idiots knocking "The Butterfly Effect" long before it came out, just because Ashton Kutcher is in it.

"Monk" is on USA, one of the best shows on TV.

the movie was based on the miniseries Traffik

I won't go near the sloppy writing as far as the actual Afghanistan operations go, since film seldom resembles reality, but it's rather appalling that no one did enough research into drug trafficking to realize that this "heroin" hiden in Afghani caves cannot really be heroin since the raw opium (which is what this product has to be) is processed into heroin much later in the distribution chain. There are no sophisticated lab and production facilities up in those hills. Like the sloppy story arcs, this was a pretty lame oversight. One would think they could afford to hire some ex-Fed or ex-cop ... or even someone who hadn't slept through "The French Connection."