You know what Mike Lowry...


I would like to kindly ask one more time (though I am not a moderator)....PLEASE, PLEASE.....let's stay on the topic which is discussing the upcoming 3 disc edition of BA.

...because I am getting really close to responding to some of the ridiculous claims in this thread.

For political bashing/discussion please refer to the "other" forum.

THANK YOU,

Cheers,
Pro-B

You know what the problem with the English is? Their imperialism is so ingrained that it has become a part of the fabric of their very being.

Look at Daniel Windsor (is that name English enough for you?) happily giving his advice on what America's government should do and how American's should feel about it. Leave us alone friend. I don't recall any Americans on this board offering any advice to the English.

You don't know a damn thing about the health care situation in this country. Many of the factors that determine the way our health care system works you don't have to deal with in your homogeneous culture. You have one religion, one race, and comparatively little immigration (in fact your interest in preserving your "free" health care creates a modern day England that is unwelcoming of immigrants). I imagine you don't like me handing out advice and passing judgment on your health care system or your country...well now you know how it feels.

Most of all we have the English to blame more than anyone for stirring up the situation in the Middle East. From the Suez Canal, to the Turkish front in WWI, to England seeding land to the Jews and allowing them to establish a nation of Israel, England’s ambition in the Middle East has been the source of, not the solution to, most of the problems in the Middle East. You may see Isreal as terrorists but it was your country’s imperial adventures that led to the country's creation.

The bottom line is this: ALL OF YOU Stop insisting on the one to one similarity between Algeria/France and the current war in Iraq. Algeria was a coloney of France. America has never had a colony in the middle east and we have no colonial interests whatsoever.

In both conflicts there is urban warfare. The similarities end there!

Edit: I wanted to ammend once more to point out that in spite of the tone of the above post I love the English. They are the greatest friend America has, their continual support is appreciated by all Americans, hell even my business partner is English. So don't take anything to heart that I'm some kind of euro-basher.

Oh, and on topic: Buy the Criterion I'm sure it will be great!

Excellent points. Don't you love it when folks like Mr. Windsor don't have a clue about their own country's history.

You can also attribute the current problems in Iraq to the British Empire and thus eventual pull-out (I think it was like 1928 wasn't it?) that left the region in a mess.

But's it's clear, that our friend, Daniel Windsor, here is obviously a member of the Marxist-Islamist Alliance. And if you don't know what that means, you can easily figure it out if you think about it long enough.

Whoa Pants, you rule!! I came in here hoping to see some Cover Art and instead I get some great social commentary. I'm not being sarcastic I liked it.

Glad my fellow Americans appreciate it

And Pro-basson: Quit insisting we stay on topic, this is a great conversation. Besides...in essence we are discussing the film

I found a quick trailer for this film at Apple.com. It's in B&W, no?

Dear Pants,

First of all this is not the forum where we discuss film, but the quality, production values, and antying else that might be related to the DVD, NOT the film. If you would like to discuss the merits of the film, it's message(s), or anything of that nature you could go to the movie section of DVDTALK.

Second of all, you are clearly abusing the forum rules by attacking Daniel Windsor's name and personality. You draw paralles that specifically target Daniel's personality (regardless of whether or not this is his real identity). The forum clearly forbids personal attacks!! (I refer to your remark about the nature of Daniel's name and the context you have used to state your point).

Last but not least, drawing a parallel between Iraq, Israel, and Britain has notthing to do with the upcoming Criterion release or any of the extras that the forum members are curious about.

Sincerely,

Pro-B

Heya PB. Have you ever dabbled, or would you consider dabbling, with any other woodwinds?

Hey Matt,

I wondered when you will start interrogating me again

To answer your question though....I tried the oboe once but the sound and size never really appealed to me.

Pro-B

Well played!

It seems that bassoon effectivly killed this thread. I hoped there would be more discussion over the weekend...but alas.

I can't wait untill we can put all this politics behind us and talk about what really matters...you know, like the cover art and whether or not there's an insert.

You know what Pants...I am going to respond to you although your initial comment is directed towards Matt....(although I see myself in the context of your sarcastic comment).

His question had nothing to do with hi-jacking "your" thread. You are absolutely free to persue your search for more interesting information regarding BOA. Your sarcasm is absolutely pointless as anyone that looks through this thread will see that the bulk of it had to deal with personal attacks and drawing parallels with the current status quo of the political reality in the US...which has nothing, ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the nature of the film. So, feel free to continue....(and save yourself the personal sarcasm).

Cheers,
Pro-B

I find it sad, especially when it comes to those smug, self-righteous BBC schmucks.And the fact that it was clear before the war that the war would cost many times more than the US could possibly hope to recoup in oil revenue.

To say that the US has had no colonial interest is riduculous, you have not only had colonial interests but still hold colonies. I can think of a couple of islands, can you? Obviously you also have no understanding of US history, ever heard of Manifest Destiny, the spanish-american war, a president called Wilson and his agenda, etc.? that was based on colonial interest. Why did the US go to Vietnam but to help the French maintain their colony which they had given up on. It was not about communism until later, Ho Chi Min was a nationalist and asked US help a number of times before turning to the communist for help. Before you or anyone in here comes to attack any other member of this forum, it might be in your best interest to "have your facts straight".

Pro-B I'm really sorry to bring this to the front, but you are so right, there has been personal attacks and purely ignorant statements made by a couple of posters and I just couldn't believe the ignorance that some people have, and instead of bringing out facts result to political and personal attacks. Again I apologize to you and any one else, who like me opened this threat to find out more about this great movie and the release that was posted.

Angel

I'm well aware that Guam and the Philippines were seized during the Spanish-American War. Both have since been awarded complete autonomy and self governance. We also gave back the Panama Canal. And it was Teddy Roosevelt, not Wilson...Wilson was a staunch isolationist who entered WWI with the greatest possible hesitancy.

Of course America has made mistakes in its past, we genocided the Indians and little more than 60 years ago we imprisoned all our Japanese citizens for no reason and without trial.

But that is way off the topic. The topic is: "Battle of Algiers does not equal Iraq war". And the singular thing differentiating the two is that we have no current colonial interest anywhere in the world, nor have we had any colonial interest in the last 75 years, nor have we EVER had any colonial interest in the Middle East.

Europeans are understandably suspicious that America might have colonial interests because every war they've ever fought, every bullet they've fired, and every drop of blood they ever spilt has been in acquisition or defense of a colonial interest.

Interesting that in your attempt you seem to have forgotten some other island which are still in your pocession and that are colonies. You might not consider them so because of some use of a word here or there, or because the lack of a backbone by the US and the UN. Mr. Pants lets not forget why the Philippines are autonomous now, because they fought against the spaniards and against the americans. You might not know but the Philippines were staunch nationalist, getting a lot of inspiration by other southeast asian countries during spanish rule, and they continued those movements against the americans. And just because you have a handfull of colonies (look at my location handle) doesn't mean that there was no colonial interest. What do you call the western expansion? but colonization especially since that was part of another country, oh yes lets not forget that. You are telling me that the United States didn't want to annex Cuba after the war, even after they beat the spaniards and had formed their own country yet the US felt it necesary to go there and "help" them form a country colonizing them for a number of years, and eventually just setting up puppet governments. Have you ever heard of the Island of Puerto Rico? obviously not since you think the US has no colonies. This is just one of a few. This island has been a US colony for over 100 years. How's that for colonial interest. Don't be fool by titles such as autonomous states, or any other sweet title you want to throw out there because you feel disgusted by the word colony and can't come to admit that you do have them (there are more not just PR) You are also acting as if the US made a nice gesture by returning back the panama canal to Panama, something the US did not want to do partially due to economic, political interest and just racial conotations that us poor darkies in the third world were too stupid, corrupt and who knows what else to take care of it or to sell it to someone else, and only did because contracts such as those can only last 99 years, oh yeah the United States still manages the canal with national panamanian government. Is also ridiculous to say that Europe's only interest has been colonialism or previous colonies, then by your own generalization those european countries that are in Iraq are there because of colonial interest, yet isn't the reason the same one as that of Bush? So, if they are there for colonial interest and they agree and are doing it with Bush, then Bush must also be in it for the same reason, no? if not then send a telegram to the european nations that they are getting it all wrong. Also, what interest is there for European countries to go to places such as Haiti or Congo or Sierra Leon? Do europeans not have enough cocoa or plantain in their diet?
I will and do agree with you on this. I am off topic but so are you. The topic is not "Battle of Algiers does not equal Iraq war" as you cared to point out to me in you atttempt to show your contempt. but rather the topic is THE ANNOUCEMENT OF A 3 DISC PRODUCTION OF THE FILM BY CRITERION.

Twenty bucks says Peter Cowie will give audio commentary.

Has anybody else noticed that this will apparently be the first three-disc Criterion of a single film, which doesn't devote a DVD to an alternate version of the film?

hubba hubba

Well, they haven't announced the details on the special features yet and I'm guessing there will be a feature-length doc. included.

anyone knows if there's been any documentaries about the movie or what happened? there might be a french produced documentary or even an algieran one. I'm very intrigued. When can we expect more details?

Well, this seems to be a new trend. The Leopard also is a 3-disc set:

http://criterionco.com/asp/release.a...ection=feature

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by jough
Well, this seems to be a new trend. The Leopard also is a 3-disc set:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Leopard is a three disc set with an alternate version of the film.

Brazil and Scenes From A Marriage are also three disc sets, but both offer different versions of the films.

I apologize for being unable to quote properly. PC problems.

No, the Leopard only contains one version of the film, AFAIK, but with two different audio tracks for the dialogue (English and Italian).

At least, according to Mulvaney.

The special features list on Criterion seems to suggest two versions. The original running time is 185 minutes and then they talk about "New transfer of the 161-minute American release, with English-language dialogue."

Yeah, that's wrong. The Leopard will be:

Disc 1: Italian version
Disc 2: English version
Disc 3: Supplements

BuddhaWake: Your rebuttal drifts into so many different topics that are tangential to our debate that I don't know where to begin. References to racial bias and such are too far off topic for me to really address your underlying topic. However I will apologize for forgetting Puerto Rico. It completely slipped my mind. I really know nothing about Puerto Rico. Tell me; is there dissent among Puerto Ricans? Do they want their own sovereignty? Are there nationalist interests that want a free PR, or are most Puerto Ricans comfortable with their relations to the USA?

I can't wait for this DVD.