[MOPO] the original KONG is on the loose ! (film at eleven...
The other day the special 2-disc DVD set of the completely restored version of the original KING KONG hit the stands. Not only has it been verycarefully restored and digitized, but apparently Peter Jackson managed to dig up and put back in somedeleted scenes -- and scenes that were in the original theatrical release in 1933, but which got edited out of later releases (particularly the version which showed on TV during our youth). Plus, there seems to be about 6 hours of additional material in the form of documentaries, commentaries, etc. I see it advertised at BEST BUY for $18.00 bucks... I'll be grabbing my copy as soon as I can get into town. I think it is so cool that a couple of generationswho grew up knowing nothing but the lame De Laurentis/Jessica Lange version of KONG will finally get exposed to the original. Tip of the fedora to Mr. Jackson for producing this and making the conscious decision to use the buzzabout his new film to promote it to a generation that really doesn't like to watch black and white movies. --JR (who now has to constantly be on the alert for the sudden appearance of TV commercials for Jackson's new version of KONG during prime time viewing, so that I can shut my eyes quick enoughand start chanting "No... No...I don't want to see... I don't want to hear until I get to the theater...!" loud enough to drown out the 30-second soundtrack. An act which is really starting to bug my long-suffering spouse... Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] the original KONG is on the loose ! (film at eleven...
Huh? I think they've been exposed to the original 50 times if they've ever watched Turner Classic Movies. It's not like it hasn't been seen. And I'm getting a little suspicious of all of these restored and remastered claims. While it might be true for this issue of KING KONG, many of them are close to outright lies. The DVDs themselves are getting better, and the new HDCD hasn't even appeared. All of this stuff will come around again in that format. And that truly WILL be better. And it seems to me I heard all this scenes added stuff when KONG first appeared on laser disc. And furthermore, I saw those scenes when I was a kid when the movie was broadcast in KTVT Channel 11 in Dallas, one of the great old indy TV stations! I like the RINGS cycle, and I admire Peter Jackson, but there is something sort of tacky in redoing such a thorough classic. I will be very surprised if Jackson, despite his admittedly awesome technology, can really get at the mystery and wonder. I'll hold my judgment in abeyance, but wouldn't Peter Jackson's considerable talent be better applied in finding a new and original story to provide a sense of wonder? I can't help but think that it's the gunslinger mentality that says my digital Kong topped the original. That's a nasty thing to say, but there it is. But maybe he knows that with digital, more truly is less. Maybe. Kirby On Nov 21, 2005, at 3:30 AM, JR wrote: I think it is so cool that a couple of generations who grew up knowing nothing but the lame De Laurentis/Jessica Lange version of KONG will finally get exposed to the original. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
[MOPO] $$$$$$$$$$$$$WTB$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Hello Mopo, I am looking for the following ANIMATION posters.. SHATTERS THE SHEIK (1926) 1SH FELIX THE CAT THE POINTER (1939) 1SH Mickey Mouse / Pluto SUPERMAN (1940s)` 1SH Fleischer Jpgs + prices please. Many thanks, Tony Tony Nourmand The Reel Poster Gallery Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
[MOPO] FA movie posters auctions on ebay
Hello there Friends I have at least 96 movie posters auctions this week in ebay, including great titles and stars, Below you can watch the EBAY USer ID and you need the complete list with your links, please email me. Excellent pieces, Great prices . auctions ending on the next sunday Ebay USer id: tango19 Click for watch my auctions http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZtango19QQhtZ-1QQfrppZ200QQfsopZ1QQfsooZ1QQr dZ0? Remeber set up your snipers Good Luck Argentinean Posters Martin Pacheco Fax: (54-11) 4307-2909 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Buenos Aires Argentina Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
[MOPO] FS: HOLMES IN WASHINGTON DC I MARRIED A WITCH
HEY MOPO'ers. Pleased to give you guys first pass ontwo scarce one sheets from the early 40's -1943 and 1942 to be exact SHERLOCK HOLMES IN WASHINGTON and I MARRIED A WITCH Both are consignments(different owners as well)so I haven't wiggle room like usual but all offers considered.However with a little evaluation Ithink you'll agree the asking prices arevery fair AND INCLUDES SHIPPING ANYWHERE IN THE CONTINENTAL US AND A FLAT $25 ABOAD.Holmes I have only seen offered twice in 5 years and this is one of the two. Its how I first met the inimitable Claude Litton who promptly emailed me after prevailing overan avalanche of snipessome 4 or 5 years ago and congratulated me. A victory made even more satisfying. And a gentleman whose memory I would caution anyone to challenge, he can certainly attest that the asking price including a de-mount and linenbacking by Poster Mountain is very, very close to break even. Onesheet is in very fine condition, displays even better, and has had minor touch ups to fold lines primarily where vertical and horizontal folds meet at center half way down the poster atthe center (or second)horizontal fold lineas well as the thirdhorizontal fold line. This amounted to filling in at the cross foldsthe diameter of an eraser on the end of a #2 pencil. SHERLOCK HOLMES IN WASHINGTON $1375 http://images.andale.com/f2/103/113/1705198/1132095239642_SherlockHolmes1sht.jpg http://images.andale.com/f2/103/113/1705198/1133006521805_SherlockHolmes1sht2.jpg Veronica Lake has demonstrated astonishing escalation in value with prices realized on titles as diverse as Sullivan's Travels, The Glass Key, This Gun For Hire and The Blue Dahlia. But I MARRIED A WITCH is truly in demand by virtue of Miss Lake alone. This onesheet is in fine condition as is but I would definitely have demounted and re-linenbacked for one reason, and that is to brighten the paper. It has toning throughout then againthat only serves to demonstrate just how vibrant the colors are. imagine the overall leap in appearance with the power of non-invasive scrubbing bubbles and whitening agents do their trick. A onesheet sold at Heritage two weeks ago for $4200 AND IT WAS TRIMMED one half inch on top and bottom measuring 27x40. All paper is present on this one offered with pin holes in the corners, crudely filled in and touched up. The fold lines tight with no enhancements. Poster for some is perfectly acceptableas is.Butfor a couple of hundred dollars, remounting would prove bewitching and still fall well below the price ofthe trimmed1sht at Heritage I MARRIED A WITCH $3550 http://images.andale.com/f2/103/113/1705198/1132328124639_MarriedWitch1sht.jpg http://images.andale.com/f2/103/113/1705198/1131852055784_MarriedWitch1sht2.jpg http://images.andale.com/f2/103/113/1705198/1134404592548_MarriedWitch1sht3.jpg Let me know, a simple email, first in first out gets you a great rare poster from the 40's. I think RARE qualifies here yes? freeman fisher8601 west knoll drive #7west hollywood, ca90069 Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] the original KONG is on the loose ! (film at eleven...
All the surveys I've seen (plus random sampling of my own among my son's friends) indicate that most "young people" (who at this point are anyone under 30 as far as I'm concerned... what an ironic turnaround... but I digress...). Anyway, it seems most "young people" really won't watch old black and white movies, even if the old fogies keep telling them they are classics and they don't know what they're missing. Such is youth. Besides, since the only place the original KONG has played on TV in decades is Turner Movie Classics, there's a good chance that even a lot of those who might watch a film in black and white haven't had the opportunity. I doubt that TMC reaches more than 30 million households in the U.S. (if that). It is a premium "add-on" channel that a lot of people don't get, even if they have cable, believe it or not. Like a lot of people, at first I was surprised that Jackson didn't take his new found wealth and power and strike out with a completely original screenplay -- but, unlikeGeorge Lucas,who really wanted to remake his childhood favorite of FLASH GORDON but couldn't get the rights and so had to create STAR WARS instead, Jackson was in a position to actually get the chance to do his childhood favorite, KING KONG. I don't think many of us with filmmaker aspiration (such as myself) could resist the temptation to remake one of our childhood favorites, so I can't fault him for that, particularly since I have every confidence hewould do a great job. Plus, since I believe that the original *has* in fact been fading from public consciousness over the years, list so many classics of the '30s and '40s,I was very glad he got the opportunity to turn the spotlight on it again. For him to invest his own personal funds in the remastering of the originalKONG onto DVD is certainly not something he had to do -- or somethingthat most would have done. I believe he did it out of respect and fondness for the original -- and to help insure that his new version wouldn't become "the only Kong" that young people knew. I think it is also a way for him to publicly say "Hey, the original will always be great, no matter what I do with this modern version." I can't help but respect all ofthat. As for his new version, all we can do is wait another 3 weeks and see for ourselves. I'm betting it will be flamin' fantastic. -- JR - Original Message - From: Tom A. Pennock To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 12:08 Subject: Re: [MOPO] the original KONG is on the loose ! (film at eleven... I alsolike Peter Jackson as a directorand the "Rings" trilogy but I wish that he would choose a "new" project instead of a remake. It was well made in 1933 and the original have a lot of charm to it. All I can see is that Peter Jackson will use CGI which was not available in 1933. CGI does not make a good movie. A good story (screenplay) does. SoIMHOI think a remake is unnecessary.We have the 1933 version whichalways will be the best version. Even with no CGI. --Tom Pennock Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
[MOPO] REMAKES
For what it's worth, a couple of people I know have seen a not quite complete version of this film by Jackson, and they were both mightily impressed. Who knows...There are cases in film history where a remake was as good as the original. Think of MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH Two Hitchcock versions, both quite different, both classics Renoir's 1937 LA BETE HUMAINE became Fritz Lang's HUMAN DESIRE (1954), Again, two great films. John Stahl's IMITATION OF LIFE of 1934 is remade by Douglas Sirk in 1959. Personally, I prefer the earlier version, but they are both clearly great in very different ways. And, oddly, Howard Hawks makes RIO BRAVO in 1959, then basically remakes it as EL DORADO in 1967. On the other hand, we have Hitchcock's PSYCHO remade by Gus Vant Sant, awful! And then there was Ross Hunter's ghastly musical remake in 1973 of LOST HORIZON, which featured such great singing talents as Peter Finch, Liv Ullman, and George Kennedy. What are your favorite and least favorite movie remakes? Walter Reuben Walter Reuben, Inc. 500 North Harper Avenue Los Angeles CA 90048 USA Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (323) 651 3313 www.walterfilm.com - Original Message - From: JR To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 8:55 PM Subject: Re: [MOPO] the original KONG is on the loose ! (film at eleven... All the surveys I've seen (plus random sampling of my own among my son's friends) indicate that most "young people" (who at this point are anyone under 30 as far as I'm concerned... what an ironic turnaround... but I digress...). Anyway, it seems most "young people" really won't watch old black and white movies, even if the old fogies keep telling them they are classics and they don't know what they're missing. Such is youth. Besides, since the only place the original KONG has played on TV in decades is Turner Movie Classics, there's a good chance that even a lot of those who might watch a film in black and white haven't had the opportunity. I doubt that TMC reaches more than 30 million households in the U.S. (if that). It is a premium "add-on" channel that a lot of people don't get, even if they have cable, believe it or not. Like a lot of people, at first I was surprised that Jackson didn't take his new found wealth and power and strike out with a completely original screenplay -- but, unlikeGeorge Lucas,who really wanted to remake his childhood favorite of FLASH GORDON but couldn't get the rights and so had to create STAR WARS instead, Jackson was in a position to actually get the chance to do his childhood favorite, KING KONG. I don't think many of us with filmmaker aspiration (such as myself) could resist the temptation to remake one of our childhood favorites, so I can't fault him for that, particularly since I have every confidence hewould do a great job. Plus, since I believe that the original *has* in fact been fading from public consciousness over the years, list so many classics of the '30s and '40s,I was very glad he got the opportunity to turn the spotlight on it again. For him to invest his own personal funds in the remastering of the originalKONG onto DVD is certainly not something he had to do -- or somethingthat most would have done. I believe he did it out of respect and fondness for the original -- and to help insure that his new version wouldn't become "the only Kong" that young people knew. I think it is also a way for him to publicly say "Hey, the original will always be great, no matter what I do with this modern version." I can't help but respect all ofthat. As for his new version, all we can do is wait another 3 weeks and see for ourselves. I'm betting it will be flamin' fantastic. -- JR - Original Message - From: Tom A. Pennock To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 12:08 Subject: Re: [MOPO] the original KONG is on the loose ! (film at eleven... I alsolike Peter Jackson as a directorand the "Rings" trilogy but I wish that he would choose a "new" project instead of a remake. It was well made in 1933 and the original have a lot of charm to it. All I can see is that Peter Jackson will use CGI which was not available in 1933. CGI does not make a good movie. A good story (screenplay) does. SoIMHOI think a remake is unnecessary.We have the 1933 version whichalways will be the best version. Even with no CGI. --Tom Pennock Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo
Re: [MOPO] REMAKES
It's always good to hear Walter's take on things. I've known him for a long time, and he put outthe most erudite film poster catalog ever - his first one - and I still own my copy of it.Some films present opportunity for a remake, with room for a twist of tone or plot. Others however are not so much sacred cows as just films that were just right for the moment theywere made, and have lived on in our collective memory simultaneously "classic" and "modern."Do we EVER want a remake of:THE WIZARD OF OZ?GONE WITH THE WIND?CITIZEN KANE?RIVER KWAI?BRINGING UP BABY?A CLOCKWORK ORANGE?ANNIE HALL?THE THREE STOOGES GO AROUND THE WORLD IN A DAZE?HELEN OF TROY? Oops, I forgot, they remade that already.Kirby McDanielOn Nov 22, 2005, at 12:27 AM, Walter Reuben wrote:For what it's worth, a couple of people I know have seen a not quite complete version of this film by Jackson, and they were both mightily impressed. Who knows...There are cases in film history where a remake was as good as the original.Think ofMAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH Two Hitchcock versions, both quite different, both classicsRenoir's 1937 LA BETE HUMAINE became Fritz Lang's HUMAN DESIRE (1954), Again, two great films.John Stahl's IMITATION OF LIFE of 1934 is remade by Douglas Sirk in 1959. Personally, I prefer the earlier version, but they are both clearly great in very different ways.And, oddly, Howard Hawks makes RIO BRAVO in 1959, then basically remakes it as EL DORADO in 1967. On the other hand, we haveHitchcock's PSYCHO remade by Gus Vant Sant, awful!And then there was Ross Hunter's ghastly musical remake in 1973 of LOST HORIZON, which featured such great singing talents as Peter Finch, Liv Ullman, and George Kennedy.What are your favorite and least favorite movie remakes?Walter ReubenWalter Reuben, Inc.500 North Harper AvenueLos Angeles CA 90048 USAEmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED](323) 651 3313www.walterfilm.com- Original Message -From: JRTo: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUSent: Monday, November 21, 2005 8:55 PMSubject: Re: [MOPO] the original KONG is on the loose ! (film at eleven...All the surveys I've seen (plus random sampling of my own among my son's friends) indicate that most "young people" (who at this point are anyone under 30 as far as I'm concerned... what an ironic turnaround... but I digress...). Anyway, it seems most "young people" really won't watch old black and white movies, even if the old fogies keep telling them they are classics and they don't know what they're missing. Such is youth. Besides, since the only place the original KONG has played on TV in decades is Turner Movie Classics, there's a good chance that even a lot of those who might watch a film in black and white haven't had the opportunity. I doubt that TMC reaches more than 30 million households in the U.S. (if that). It is a premium "add-on" channel that a lot of people don't get, even if they have cable, believe it or not. Like a lot of people, at first I was surprised that Jackson didn't take his new found wealth and power and strike out with a completely original screenplay -- but, unlike George Lucas, who really wanted to remake his childhood favorite of FLASH GORDON but couldn't get the rights and so had to create STAR WARS instead, Jackson was in a position to actually get the chance to do his childhood favorite, KING KONG. I don't think many of us with filmmaker aspiration (such as myself) could resist the temptation to remake one of our childhood favorites, so I can't fault him for that, particularly since I have every confidence he would do a great job. Plus, since I believe that the original *has* in fact been fading from public consciousness over the years, list so many classics of the '30s and '40s, I was very glad he got the opportunity to turn the spotlight on it again. For him to invest his own personal funds in the remastering of the original KONG onto DVD is certainly not something he had to do -- or something that most would have done. I believe he did it out of respect and fondness for the original -- and to help insure that his new version wouldn't become "the only Kong" that young people knew. I think it is also a way for him to publicly say "Hey, the original will always be great, no matter what I do with this modern version." I can't help but respect all of that. As for his new version, all we can do is wait another 3 weeks and see for ourselves. I'm betting it will be flamin' fantastic. -- JR - Original Message -From: Tom A. PennockTo: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUSent: Monday, November 21, 2005 12:08Subject: Re: [MOPO] the original KONG is on the loose ! (film at eleven...I also like Peter Jackson as a director and the "Rings" trilogy but I wish that he would choose a "new" project instead of a remake. It was well made in 1933 and the original have a lot of charm to it. All I can see is that Peter Jackson will use CGI which was not available in 1933. CGI does not make a good movie. A good story (screenplay) does. So IMHO I think a
Re: [MOPO] REMAKES
Remakes have always been a part of Hollywood.. with some even better than the original versions.. Do you guys like William Gillette's version or Sherlock Holmes or Basil Rathbone's ?? How many other actors have played the famous detective?? How about Tarzan ?? There were a number of good Tarzan flicks w/ Lex Barker.. all are the same stories as the Wesimullers used at different times. Wizard of Oz.. this movie was made before after the Garland classic and of the Bond movies.. how many stories did Fleming write that were adapted 2, even 3 times? The reality is that with the exception of when we get something new - like Terminator, Star Wars, Usual Suspects, Matrix, Crying Game, Shawshank, Hudsucker Proxy, Devil's Rejects.. there is a reality that most films are of a repertoire of maybe 20-30 storylines. I loved the Front Page as done by Billy Wilder with Lemmon-Matthau.. It is however a remake of a 1931 film with Pat O'Brien that is quite good and it was also remade as His Girl Friday with Cary Grant and Ros Russell in a superb version. The thing about King Kong being remade to old time fans is we hate to see someone mess with our girlfriend so to speak. We despised the 1976 version because A) we hated the man in a monkey suit B) we all thought Jessica Lange couldn't act ((boy were we wrong about that one!)) C) it just wasn't our idea of a good film. But I didnt gripe when King Kong met Godzilla! I thought that was cool. If Jackson does a good version of Kong.. we may all love it. If he doesn't.. we'll hate it, and guess what.. for the next generation there will be yet another remake of the film. Kirby is right that some films just cannot be remade because of the time they were made in. How anyone could ever remake Citizen Kane would be a feat of Herculean proportions (I wonder if Rupert Murdoch could be satirized instead of W.R. Hearst?), but remaking Gone With the Wind would be another matter and the only reason it isnt being done right now is that period films arent as popular with the public today as they were in the 30's-40's when the story wasn't so old to much of the population who had family members who may have remembered the time vividly. I'd say it is more likely to be updated as a sci-fi film! I have no doubt many of our sacred cows that have not yet been remade will be.. Casablanca will be updated, Double Indemnity will be as well, , Metropolis could easily be remade today. It's a matter of taste I know... But sacred cows... well there is a time in life when they aren't so sacred, and that's usually when the next generation comes around. It isn't history to them. It's something they have no connection to like we did wehn we were kids (for the over 40's). History today is more throw-away then a candy wrapper in our world now. That's the sad comment.. as for Kong.. I hope it's a really good film .. cause I'm gonna see it!! Rich At 10:47 PM 11/21/05, you wrote: It's always good to hear Walter's take on things. I've known him for a long time, and he put out the most erudite film poster catalog ever - his first one - and I still own my copy of it. Some films present opportunity for a remake, with room for a twist of tone or plot. Others however are not so much sacred cows as just films that were just right for the moment they were made, and have lived on in our collective memory simultaneously classic and modern. Do we EVER want a remake of: THE WIZARD OF OZ? GONE WITH THE WIND? CITIZEN KANE? RIVER KWAI? BRINGING UP BABY? A CLOCKWORK ORANGE? ANNIE HALL? THE THREE STOOGES GO AROUND THE WORLD IN A DAZE? HELEN OF TROY? Oops, I forgot, they remade that already. Kirby McDaniel On Nov 22, 2005, at 12:27 AM, Walter Reuben wrote: For what it's worth, a couple of people I know have seen a not quite complete version of this film by Jackson, and they were both mightily impressed. Who knows...There are cases in film history where a remake was as good as the original. Think of MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH Two Hitchcock versions, both quite different, both classics Renoir's 1937 LA BETE HUMAINE became Fritz Lang's HUMAN DESIRE (1954), Again, two great films. John Stahl's IMITATION OF LIFE of 1934 is remade by Douglas Sirk in 1959. Personally, I prefer the earlier version, but they are both clearly great in very different ways. And, oddly, Howard Hawks makes RIO BRAVO in 1959, then basically remakes it as EL DORADO in 1967. On the other hand, we have Hitchcock's PSYCHO remade by Gus Vant Sant, awful! And then there was Ross Hunter's ghastly musical remake in 1973 of LOST HORIZON, which featured such great singing talents as Peter Finch, Liv Ullman, and George Kennedy. What are your favorite and least favorite movie remakes? Walter Reuben Walter Reuben, Inc. 500 North Harper Avenue Los Angeles CA 90048 USA Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] (323) 651 3313 www.walterfilm.com - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]JR To:
Re: [MOPO] REMAKES
I also forgot.. to go further the Front Page was also adapted twice for 1945 1948 TV audiences, and then it was made into the hilarious Kathleen Turner film Switching Channels.. that would make a total of 6 versions or 1 original 5 remakes and it was a hit play before .. I can't take issue with any of the 4 versions I have seen but would every film version just be a remake of the play??? Rich=== Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
