MovieChat Forums > CalvinJarrett
CalvinJarrett (244)
Posts
Stern interviewed Biden Friday morning, April 26, 2024
Stern interviewed President Biden Friday morning, April 26, 2024.
We'll know that America has gotten Trump out of its system when a day goes by and he's not trending on movie chat.org.
It's nice to see him trending on Moviechat ...
Is it still worth watching?
Questions (SPOILERS)
What do you think of Mick Jagger's treatment of the theme song?
Goofs, anachronisms
Lee Remick - gorgeous and youthful
Was Elliott married?
View all posts >
Replies
Yes, I would.
Perhaps it's naive of me, but this is why I've never seen this movie. I was 14 when JK came out, but even at that age I remember thinking, "So 28 years later they expect us to believe an epic conspiracy. Why wasn't this prosecution successful in the 60's when the evidence was fresher and witnesses were still alive? No thanks."
Woah, easy there, Gd5150. I don't know what TDS stands for because I'm not interested in debating politics. I explicitly said I come to movie chat.org to write about and read about movies, actors/actresses, directors, etc. Yes, I like Biden a heck of a lot more than Trump, but I wouldn't want to see him or any politician headlined on a site like this. Maybe Ronald Reagan if people were legitimately talking about his movie career.
Looked at all of them. Alyssa Milano looked about as good,but I didn't like the nose pierce. Others were pretty, but lacked that eroticism Natalie Wood possessed.
Yes, and I suppose it's a chicken-and-egg kind of thing, but I figure once the GOP goes back to normality, Trump will no longer be trending on Moviechat. Might be some fuzzy logic on my part, but, yes, I do think once he no longer has such control of the Republican Party, he won't be talked about on what should be apolitical sites like Moviechat.
I'm assuming the 'T' stands for 'Trump.' What about the 'D' and 'S'? Daily Spoonful?
Wow, ReneeFindley! I'm sorry I didn't check back earlier. What a nice thing to say! I'm happy to offer my take; I'm glad it helped you appreciate Coma even more!
Yes, I thought she was hitting on him, and I would go even further. I think her rebuke of his calling her Agda and her calling him Isak was at play here. To her, calling him by his familiar name and vice versa represented a degree of intimacy even more special than sex. I think she felt something like, "How can I call him Isak, he's never even kissed me?" I feel she was thinking about remedying that situation by leaving the door ajar. Also, the movie did not specify which door she was leaving ajar. Like I don't think the subtitles stated, "I'll leave <i>your<I!> door open," so I thought she could mean her own, which would be a far more provocative message.
That's interesting, stickman38. I always thought Defending Your Life was a lot more than "an afterlife romance featuring Meryl Streep." In fact - though I don't detest it - I always felt the romantic storyline between Brooks and Streep seemed tacked-on. I did think Streep needed to be part of the film because it was very funny to see her life footage and the disposition of both of her 'attorneys' and 'judges,' compared to that of Daniel's proceeding. And I guess he had to fall in love with her because otherwise he wouldn't have performed such a brave overture at the end. But there had to have been so much more to this film than a Meryl Streep romance because it has stayed with me (and seemingly so many other people) over the past 33 years.
Though I don't think fear should be the barometer to determine who should 'move on,' and who must try again, this movie often appears in my head whenever I am at a crossroads between doing something safe and conservative vs. the risky/brave. I often choose the more courageous, albeit riskier proposition, because of Defending Your Life. And while it may not make a bit of difference once I die, I can happily say that those decisions have not haunted me while alive. And I think my life has been better for having made them. So if one movie can change a person's outlook that profoundly, and it has not led to harm, it's got to be a lot more than a simple romantic comedy.
I think he did suspect something was amiss and that's why he borrowed those ten charts from the medical records section. But when he looked though each chart, he couldn't see any errors in the application of the anesthesia. And why would he? The oxygen line would have been turned on and kept on for the appropriate amount of time in each case. He would have no idea that CO is actually coming through that line from a radio-controlled device mounted above the ceiling. Now you might say that he should have noted the fact that in all ten cases these comas were occurring in operation room 8. I think that's where his hubris came in to play. He might have overlooked it while someone like Dr. Wheeler is coming in with a fresh set of eyes (as well as the inside information from the janitor). Dr. Wheeler also had the boldness to talk to the pathologists about how they'd go about killing someone with anesthesia to see if her theory had legs. Dr. George may not have had the disposition to engage in that kind of banter. He may have so much faith in the hospital and his staff that the idea that anything but oxygen could be coming through that line was anathema.
View all replies >