<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Bayflicks.net</title>
	<link>http://bayflicks.net</link>
	<description>Lincoln Spector's guide to revival houses, independent theaters, film festivals, and everything cinema in the San Francisco Bay Area</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 00:22:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>Comment on Iron Man by Elijah</title>
		<link>http://bayflicks.net/iron-man#comment-13114</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 May 2008 20:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bayflicks.net/iron-man#comment-13114</guid>
					<description>Fun fact: For those who know the comics, there are hints as to the affiliation of the &quot;Very Bad People With Accents in Afghanistan,&quot; and that affiliation is decidedly non-Muslim-extremist, and more in the realm of &quot;world-conquering supervillain.&quot; (Remember the Genghis Khan speech.)

A fun little Easter Egg for those of us who've read the comics. I assume this will be followed up in the sequel (which has already been greenlit!).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fun fact: For those who know the comics, there are hints as to the affiliation of the &#8220;Very Bad People With Accents in Afghanistan,&#8221; and that affiliation is decidedly non-Muslim-extremist, and more in the realm of &#8220;world-conquering supervillain.&#8221; (Remember the Genghis Khan speech.)</p>
<p>A fun little Easter Egg for those of us who&#8217;ve read the comics. I assume this will be followed up in the sequel (which has already been greenlit!).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on United Artists at the Castro by webmaster</title>
		<link>http://bayflicks.net/united-artists-at-the-castro#comment-10982</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 18:48:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bayflicks.net/united-artists-at-the-castro#comment-10982</guid>
					<description>When I first examined the schedule (online, not the print one), I assumed they were all official. Then I noticed that the ones that said &quot;UNITED ARTISTS 90TH ANNIVERSARY FILM FESTIVAL&quot; had a blue background, while the others were white. So I decided that the ones with white background were &quot;unofficial.&quot;

Checking the site again today (http://www.castrotheatre.com/p-list.html), I see that all of the UA programs have blue backgrounds. It all appears to be a web site design error.

In retrospect, I should have fact-checked this with my Castro press contacts before posting. I think I'll rectify that now and make them aware of the post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When I first examined the schedule (online, not the print one), I assumed they were all official. Then I noticed that the ones that said &#8220;UNITED ARTISTS 90TH ANNIVERSARY FILM FESTIVAL&#8221; had a blue background, while the others were white. So I decided that the ones with white background were &#8220;unofficial.&#8221;</p>
<p>Checking the site again today (http://www.castrotheatre.com/p-list.html), I see that all of the UA programs have blue backgrounds. It all appears to be a web site design error.</p>
<p>In retrospect, I should have fact-checked this with my Castro press contacts before posting. I think I&#8217;ll rectify that now and make them aware of the post.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on United Artists at the Castro by Brian</title>
		<link>http://bayflicks.net/united-artists-at-the-castro#comment-10972</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 08:02:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bayflicks.net/united-artists-at-the-castro#comment-10972</guid>
					<description>I think they're all &quot;official&quot;.  On the printed calendar, only ten of the days in the series say &quot;UNITED ARTISTS 90TH ANNIVERSARY FILM FESTIVAL&quot; in the box for that day.  But each of those ten fall the day after some non-United Artists programming at the theatre; the seven double-bills without the tag all follow a UA program.  I think the tag is for clarity's sake, not to mark some of the programs as more official than others. 

I agree with your last paragraph.  I'm jealous of other cities that are getting &lt;i&gt;Broken Blossoms&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;Way Down East&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;Steamboat Bill, Jr.&lt;/i&gt; among the selections.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think they&#8217;re all &#8220;official&#8221;.  On the printed calendar, only ten of the days in the series say &#8220;UNITED ARTISTS 90TH ANNIVERSARY FILM FESTIVAL&#8221; in the box for that day.  But each of those ten fall the day after some non-United Artists programming at the theatre; the seven double-bills without the tag all follow a UA program.  I think the tag is for clarity&#8217;s sake, not to mark some of the programs as more official than others. </p>
<p>I agree with your last paragraph.  I&#8217;m jealous of other cities that are getting <i>Broken Blossoms</i>, <i>Way Down East</i> and <i>Steamboat Bill, Jr.</i> among the selections.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on I’m Back! by carl</title>
		<link>http://bayflicks.net/i%e2%80%99m-back#comment-10971</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 07:46:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bayflicks.net/i%e2%80%99m-back#comment-10971</guid>
					<description>lincoln,

we've added a calendar feature, much like your old one, to the film on film foundation site.  might be worth a mention in the blog?

www.filmonfilm.org/filmcalendar/

carl</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>lincoln,</p>
<p>we&#8217;ve added a calendar feature, much like your old one, to the film on film foundation site.  might be worth a mention in the blog?</p>
<p><a href='http://www.filmonfilm.org/filmcalendar/' rel='nofollow'>www.filmonfilm.org/filmcalendar/</a></p>
<p>carl
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Romulus, My Father by Elijah</title>
		<link>http://bayflicks.net/romulus-my-father#comment-9072</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:02:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bayflicks.net/romulus-my-father#comment-9072</guid>
					<description>Can we also point out here the disturbing trend of family dramas with titles that make me expect big, action-packed historical epics?

The Barbarian Invasions; The Savages; Romulus, My Father... what the hell is going on here?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can we also point out here the disturbing trend of family dramas with titles that make me expect big, action-packed historical epics?</p>
<p>The Barbarian Invasions; The Savages; Romulus, My Father&#8230; what the hell is going on here?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Non-Western Westerns Coming to SFMOMA by Brian</title>
		<link>http://bayflicks.net/non-western-westerns-coming-to-sfmoma#comment-8664</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 22:06:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bayflicks.net/non-western-westerns-coming-to-sfmoma#comment-8664</guid>
					<description>&lt;i&gt;Sholay&lt;/i&gt; is really about as close to a Western as one can get for a Bollywood film.  &lt;i&gt;Exiled&lt;/i&gt; is a less literal choice- its more a display of Western stylistic influences than genre conventions.  I'm excited for another chance to see &lt;i&gt;El Topo&lt;i&gt;, and my first shot at a Rocha film.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Sholay</i> is really about as close to a Western as one can get for a Bollywood film.  <i>Exiled</i> is a less literal choice- its more a display of Western stylistic influences than genre conventions.  I&#8217;m excited for another chance to see <i>El Topo<i>, and my first shot at a Rocha film.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Oscars Away from Home by anonymous</title>
		<link>http://bayflicks.net/oscars-away-from-home#comment-8443</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:31:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bayflicks.net/oscars-away-from-home#comment-8443</guid>
					<description>Geoff Bolt is amazing!! I can't believe I missed an opportunity to see him again : (  When will you get back in the public eye, Geoff? We need your comic relief!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Geoff Bolt is amazing!! I can&#8217;t believe I missed an opportunity to see him again : (  When will you get back in the public eye, Geoff? We need your comic relief!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on New Pacific Film Archive Schedule by Brian</title>
		<link>http://bayflicks.net/new-pacific-film-archive-schedule#comment-6785</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2008 06:16:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bayflicks.net/new-pacific-film-archive-schedule#comment-6785</guid>
					<description>I think the Medieval series the way it is; the fact that [i]the Seventh Seal[/i] is such a recent repeat performance might be a legitimate complaint, but presumably it was a success last time around, and given Bergman's recent death it's appropriate to get another chance to see it.  

All of the films from this series I've seen so far take an approach of &quot;recreating&quot; more than &quot;reimagining&quot; the Medieval era.  I think [i]Adventures of Robin Hood[/i] would be a bit out of place.

But I have noticed since Susan Oxtoby took the reigns at the PFA that there has been somewhat less of an emphasis on Hollywood filmmaking (though the jazz series and the Hayakawa films are good selections).  Maybe it's because more of these films are coming out on DVD, or maybe it's just my imagination.  But it seems to come at a time when the Castro is doing less in the way of programming lesser-known films from the Golden Age of Hollywood as well, which leaves the Stanford as the only venue to expose audiences to Hollywood films they haven't heard of before on a regular basis. 

Maybe there can be a sequel to &quot;the Medieval Remake&quot; featuring American films, like the Curtiz and Dwan [i]Robin Hood[/i] films, [i]Ivanhoe[/i], [i]El Cid[/i], etc...

PS I can't find an e-mail address for you here on this site (maybe I'm not looking hard enough) but there's something I'd like to ask.  My e-mail is boingdiddleypop, and my e-mail provider rhymes with wahoo.  If you have a moment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the Medieval series the way it is; the fact that [i]the Seventh Seal[/i] is such a recent repeat performance might be a legitimate complaint, but presumably it was a success last time around, and given Bergman&#8217;s recent death it&#8217;s appropriate to get another chance to see it.  </p>
<p>All of the films from this series I&#8217;ve seen so far take an approach of &#8220;recreating&#8221; more than &#8220;reimagining&#8221; the Medieval era.  I think [i]Adventures of Robin Hood[/i] would be a bit out of place.</p>
<p>But I have noticed since Susan Oxtoby took the reigns at the PFA that there has been somewhat less of an emphasis on Hollywood filmmaking (though the jazz series and the Hayakawa films are good selections).  Maybe it&#8217;s because more of these films are coming out on DVD, or maybe it&#8217;s just my imagination.  But it seems to come at a time when the Castro is doing less in the way of programming lesser-known films from the Golden Age of Hollywood as well, which leaves the Stanford as the only venue to expose audiences to Hollywood films they haven&#8217;t heard of before on a regular basis. </p>
<p>Maybe there can be a sequel to &#8220;the Medieval Remake&#8221; featuring American films, like the Curtiz and Dwan [i]Robin Hood[/i] films, [i]Ivanhoe[/i], [i]El Cid[/i], etc&#8230;</p>
<p>PS I can&#8217;t find an e-mail address for you here on this site (maybe I&#8217;m not looking hard enough) but there&#8217;s something I&#8217;d like to ask.  My e-mail is boingdiddleypop, and my e-mail provider rhymes with wahoo.  If you have a moment.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Top Ten Preparation&#8211;Part I by webmaster</title>
		<link>http://bayflicks.net/top-ten-preparation-part-i#comment-6427</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 03:13:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bayflicks.net/top-ten-preparation-part-i#comment-6427</guid>
					<description>Focusing on the &quot;theatrical run&quot; serves another purpose: It makes it more likely that you will get to see the movie. Many of these films are still in theaters, and the others are either available on DVD or will be soon.

And don't underestimate the importance of narrowing the field. When you're trying to get the list of best films down to ten, anything that narrows the field is good.


Lincoln</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Focusing on the &#8220;theatrical run&#8221; serves another purpose: It makes it more likely that you will get to see the movie. Many of these films are still in theaters, and the others are either available on DVD or will be soon.</p>
<p>And don&#8217;t underestimate the importance of narrowing the field. When you&#8217;re trying to get the list of best films down to ten, anything that narrows the field is good.</p>
<p>Lincoln
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Top Ten Preparation&#8211;Part I by carl</title>
		<link>http://bayflicks.net/top-ten-preparation-part-i#comment-6324</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:45:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://bayflicks.net/top-ten-preparation-part-i#comment-6324</guid>
					<description>this definition of &quot;theatrical run&quot; serves two purposes: in a competition, it (somewhat arbitrarily) narrows the field and increases the likelihood that voters will have seen a good number of the eligible films, and it focusses attention on those mainstream, industry-sanctioned films that are most likely to have had such a run.

since your list is presumably not part of any larger competition, the first purpose has no relevance.  and the second purpose seems opposed to the indie slant of bayflicks.

why not make a more inclusive list, particularly as, per the following blog entry, you aren't making a festival-only list to complement this one?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this definition of &#8220;theatrical run&#8221; serves two purposes: in a competition, it (somewhat arbitrarily) narrows the field and increases the likelihood that voters will have seen a good number of the eligible films, and it focusses attention on those mainstream, industry-sanctioned films that are most likely to have had such a run.</p>
<p>since your list is presumably not part of any larger competition, the first purpose has no relevance.  and the second purpose seems opposed to the indie slant of bayflicks.</p>
<p>why not make a more inclusive list, particularly as, per the following blog entry, you aren&#8217;t making a festival-only list to complement this one?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
