yea, and there was something about the "bear" that just kept getting commented 
about on the internet.  I didn't pay any attention to that either.   

 I thought you were being a tad too serious.  (-:

---In, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

 Ah Steve, don't feel like that.  The problem with email and the internet is 
that you couldn't see the good-natured glint in my eye or hear the playful tone 
of my voice. I thought it was pretty amusing, actually, that they played up the 
point of "natural light" in the promotion.  I assure you that I could/would 
have missed it, amidst all the grunting and moaning you mention.  Not a movie I 
need to see. :)

---In, <steve.sundur@...> wrote :

 Wow, I feel like a real dodo.  Yes, the scenery was exquisite, and I guess I 
was somewhat in the dark about the lighting, (-:  but reflecting on it now, the 
natural light did make a difference.  That and the scenery were the strong 
points.  It was just a long movie, and some point it occurred to me the guy 
just keeps escaping death through somewhat impossible means, and yes, he does 
grunt a lot. 

 I didn't mean to imply the scenery was mediocre.  Just the overall movie.

---In, <emily.mae50@...> wrote :

 Did you think it was a better movie because it was filmed using only "natural" 
light and not "electrical" light? Did you notice?  Did you say to 
yourself...."there is something special about the lighting in this movie that 
makes the scenery extra-special."  Or, maybe it was a subconscious 
appreciation.  Or, maybe, none of the above and it didn't even occur to your 
finely tuned senses!

---In, <steve.sundur@...> wrote :

 Jesus, an awful lot of moaning in that movie.

 I enjoyed the scenery.   Sorta mediocre, I think. 

 Mildly entertaining?

Reply via email to