Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!


michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the to-the-cleaners dept.

Television 470

jeepliberty writes "Was I the only one to feel like I was "taken" by the latest Spielberg mini-series? It concluded last night on the SciFi channel. It started out great. The first five episodes were excellent. Then like milk on the counter, it started going sour. My sister is a writer and after she sees a movie she always picks it apart for continuity, character development and plot. I always tell here "Get a life. It's just a movie." Well after I saw the 7th installment, I started picking up my sister's habits and began picking it apart. "Taken" seems to have taken a little bit from "Firestarter", "E.T.", "Sphere" and quite a few others."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First post? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889436)


Re:First post? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889531)

That's actually funny. Nice one.

not... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889442)

FP cause I'm phycic!

Spielberg Over the Hill? (3, Interesting)

SteweyGriffin (634046) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889443)

I can't help but feel, along with many others, that Spielberg's time to shine has come and gone.

It seems each movie gets a bit more out far-fetched and unbelievable with the years. He's even using the latest "fad" actors in his films rather than tried and true classic screensmen.

Anyone else think his time is over? I mean, A.I. was supposed to be a masterpiece, but all it was was simply two or three hours of some annoying "Sixth Sense" ghost boy trying to find his mom.

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889479)

It's importent to note, though, that Spielberg neither wrote nor directed "Taken", so it's unfair to impress any blame upon him for it's quality or lack thereof.

I realize that for years movie fans will be citing "Taken" as evidence of Spielberg's supposed senility, but all he did was stick his name on it and aquire money. "Taken" really isn't his fault.

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889532)

Um, hello. If he puts his name on it, it's his "fault." He would certainly be willing to take any credit you're willing to dish out.

Same deal with Tom Clancy putting his name on the covers of those awful Op-Center hack jobs. When you sell your own good name down the river, it's time to step aside.

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889545)

Thanks for the flame, I'll treasure it always.

As another poster in this thread noted, I doubt Spielberg even knows what "Taken" is. Had he written or directed or played any part larger than having his name on the production, I would worry about his skill, but he didn't, so I remain anticipating "Catch Me If You Can" with baited breath.

You can't pass judgement on a man's skills based on something that he used none of those skills to create.

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (1)

spazoid12 (525450) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889687)

maybe not his skills... but I agree with the idea that if you sell your name for a thing, and it sucks, then there is a big reflection on yourself.

I'll bet most people don't stop to give it a fart's second to wonder about Spielberg's true involvement. You said yourself "I doubt..." which implies a certain lack of hard fact. So, the name being attached might as well mean (in practical terms) that he wrote, directed, produced, and everything. I suppose, if he's happy collecting some name-usage royalties, or whatever. Fine, more power to him. But, without actually thinking about it, the assumption that comes most easily to mind is: "he's past his prime and producing nothing but good-looking garbage".

That's different than passing judgement. That's a quicky gut reaction- the stuff that people say at lunch and parties. The stuff that happens way more regularly than actual judgement and probably starts to affect bottom line earlier and with greater impact.

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (3, Interesting)

garcia (6573) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889480)

AI really wasn't *his* movie to begin w/. It definitly was a Kubrik film.

I am actually currently watching the Taken marathon. I don't think it is his greatest work but it is definitly good. Entertaining for sure.

I guess I will be able to draw better conclusions once it's over. Currently they are in the early 80's (1980).

I think you guys look for way too much.

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (2, Informative)

MrP- (45616) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889521)

Yeah, AI was Kubriks, and the Kubrik parts were good, its the stuff Spielberg added that made AI horrible.

As for Taken, he's just a producer, he just puts his name on stuff for the money (Yeah, like Spielberg played any real part if Tiny Toons, which is also under his name.)

Taken had something like 10 directors, doing diff episodes.

I wonder if Spielberg even knows what Taken is. Sigh.

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (2, Offtopic)

jcostom (14735) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889660)

Yeah, AI was Kubriks, and the Kubrik parts were good

It was vintage Kubrik. It would have been a better film if it had ended 30 minutes earlier. He never could end a movie!

We meet an alien race that is smart enough to figure out how to resurrect the dead, but isn't quite smart enough to figure out how to do it for more than one day. That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard.

Here's the ending I proposed: Next to last shot - aliens flying over the frozen Manhattan. Last shot - cyberboy frozen in the block of ice staring at the blue fairy. Credits. Much better ending.

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (1, Insightful)

fredrikj (629833) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889487)

Yeah, A.I. wasn't too brilliant. Minority Report, on the other hand, was awesome.

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (1)

VoidEngineer (633446) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889501)

I bet he looks at demographics data alot, and that a lot of his story telling is based on Neilson ratings and so forth. A story which a Nerd finds interesting is different than a story which a Non-Nerd finds interesting.

Well, at least he's not playing 'in-crowd' and is giving new actors chances to work with folks who've been in the industry for awhile.

But yeah, his credits will be rolling before long.

Whats wrong with steve? (5, Insightful)

Monkelectric (546685) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889528)

I saw an interview with this film school director, and he nailed on the head what's wrong with Speilberg. He said [paraphrasing], "When Steven Speilberg or George Lucas makes a movie, he wants to make a movie that will touch everybody. When Stanley Kubric makes a movie, he wants to make a movie that touches Stanley Kubric."

Which is what I think is wrong with speilberg and lucas ... They are candles who have burned too brightly for too long, and they are simply extinguishing. I'm not going to talk about "selling out" because that's cliché, but its clear they lost their passion long ago.

Re:Whats wrong with steve? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889690)

You expect us to take the opinion of some "film school director" over that of Speilberg or Lucas? When your film school director can make a movie that makes kid's eyes light up the way Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones did, then he can talk.

Until then, I'm calling his remarks a case of the green-eyed monster

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (1)

xagon7 (530399) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889591)

AI was a masterpiece..

Spielberg was almost flawless in his execution of Kubrik's ideas... the shot look just as if they had been taken striaght out of a Fubrick film, except for the "moon" baloon and the very ending. I thought it was a piece of cinematic history in another filmmaker staying true to a passed director.

Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (3, Insightful)

Courageous (228506) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889621)

Geeze, guys. Seems a bit harsh. Sure, the ending pretty much was lame, and petered out, but cut the miniseries some slack.

The acting was phenomenal, I thought. Th little girl was incredible. It was all put together fairly well, and was a class act. It doesn't have to shake the earth to qualify as good, you know.


Re:Spielberg Over the Hill? (3, Insightful)

RedWizzard (192002) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889635)

Anyone else think his time is over?
Not particularly. Certainly he has little to do with Taken - he's not a writer, director or even producer, he's an executive producer, so it's hardly fair to label this a Spielberg failure.
A.I. was supposed to be a masterpiece
No, A.I. was supposed to be Kubrick's masterpiece. He worked on it for 12 years and decided it was more suited to Spielberg. To me that sounds like Kubrick didn't think it would work and then when he died Spielberg wanted to finish it for him.

Milk on the counter? (1)

DeadMoose (518744) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889447)

Then like milk on the counter, it started going sour.

And I thought I had bad cleaning habits.

I'm just scared to see this analogy taken out to the extreme, when after a while, both the milk & Taken turn to cheese.

Re:Milk on the counter? (1)

fidget42 (538823) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889622)

both the milk & Taken turn to cheese.

Never underestimate the power of Cheese!

It hasn't aired.. (0, Offtopic)

nukey56 (455639) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889448)

...on kazaa yet!

Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889451)

Well, with all the idea's its harder and harder to be originial..

now there's them lucky ones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889454)

Now there's them lucky city folks who gets to see them channels.
Maybe one day this channel you speak of will come to my country so that I can see it.

Re:now there's them lucky ones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889605)

Give it a couple weeks. The box set will be at your local Wally-Mart, right next to the 4th season of Friends.

Take the Best Pieces..... (3, Interesting)

n3rd (111397) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889455)

...and make something better.

This has been the strategy for many things in history including Linux. A little SysV, a little BSD, and the best user contributions and you have a suberb OS.

Taking the best elements of earlier inventions and creating something new using those elements will always be around. It's a simple yet effective recipe to build a better mousetrap.

Re:Take the Best Pieces..... (1)

ihistand (170799) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889474)

Isn't it amazing how the most seemingly unrelated topic can apply to Linux?

Re:Take the Best Pieces..... (2, Funny)

borg (95568) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889491)

...and that, my friend, is the definition of an obsession.

Re:Take the Best Pieces..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889506)

that'd be true if linux was designed. unfortunately it wasn't. google for linus + design.

Re:Take the Best Pieces..... (2, Insightful)

SimplexO (537908) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889626)

Take the Best Pieces and make something better.
This has been the strategy for many things in history including Linux. A little SysV, a little BSD, and the best user contributions and you have a suberb OS.
False Dichotomy. We're talking about entertainment, not ways to solve problems. The point the article is trying to make is that you cannot make incremental updates (even on a Good Thing) in the entertainment industry. That Good Thing becomes redundant and over-used. We need something new and different, not the same old thing only incrementally better. See the matrix's bullet-time method.

i have a small cock (-1)

w4r3z_d00d (569712) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889456)

I find this difficult to masturbate to... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889470)

what with the dick and all

Here's how (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889544)

Pretend the dick is in your mouth.

They want a mass audience for a niche movie... (4, Insightful)

User 956 (568564) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889457)

Sci-Fi, it would seem, is trying to make sure everyone grabs the thread of the story and can hang on. Nice idea, is there were a linear thread to hang on to. If there is a strand of consistant storyline here, I've blinked and missed it. 'Taken' has played out so far like a series of loosely-related stories. Not bad stories, but definitley more in the anthology than series style. It's kind of like Spielberg's 80's tv outting Amazing Stories, but not quite so amazing. The look and feel are there, but things just aren't as tightly knit.

Re:They want a mass audience for a niche movie... (2)

entrylevel (559061) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889597)

Wasn't Taken basically a collection of different people's stories that was directed (and purportedly tied together) by Spielberg? If so, it's no wonder that they aired the best first and the worst last.

Stephen King is dead (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889458)


Typical (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889460)

Spielberg is a dirty fucking Jew

Spielberg is done... (2)

kakos (610660) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889461)

He has the annoying habit of taking a good story and ruining it. AI was a great short story by Brian Aldis (Toys Last All Summer Long). The movie was just awful.

Minority Report was one of my favorite Dick stories and he ruined that as well.

Taken started off promising, but ended up turning into a happy, feel-good story. Oh well.

Perhaps the key to Spielberg is to avoid the movies and read what the movie is based on.

Re:Spielberg is done... (4, Interesting)

agent oranje (169160) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889525)

Spielberg has the nasty habit of making an excellent film, and summing it all up with a sappy, amazingly unrealistic ending. If he would end his movies 20 minutes earlier, they might end on a sad note, but sometimes things end on a sad note!

Take AI, for example. As Kubrick was doing it, it was supposedly to end with little robot boy "killing" himself - leaving the audience questioning this. Think about a robot suicide to get what Kurbrick wanted. Think everyone living happily ever after to get the Speilberg version. It's like Apocalypse Now vs MASH.

Re:Spielberg is done... (2)

haggar (72771) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889539)

No, the A.I. movie was just amazing. I am sorry you feel the way you do about it, but I don't agree with you. I agree the movie is not like the Aldiss story (the title of which is, btw "Supertoys Last All Summer Long"), but it wasn't worse, it was different. It's a different type of art.

When I watched "Blade Runner" I felt transported, somewhat overpowered and amazed. More or less the same cocktail of emotions as when I read the K. Dick novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?", but not exactly, and there have been other shades as well. All in all, it was a different experience. Not lesser, just different.

Now, I don't kow how "Blade Runner" would have been if K. Dick directed it, but I guess there's a reason why he didn't make it in the movie business, while Spielberg did.

Re:Spielberg is done... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889608)

a.i. was crap plain and simple. long, boring, God what a waste of time. uninspried story of boy who wants to become real. if your buying into the oh so blantent messages of the film you need to do some research and start watching some real scifi films. no offense but when i hear someone liked a film like this I put them into the same category as adam sandler fans. ie you have horrible taste.

Like a fat man in a marathon. (3, Insightful)

Chas (5144) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889465)

I agree.

It may have come sprinting off the line, but it was gasping for breath by the end.

And the message? "The little green men don't know dick either!"


Ah well. If you think about it, it's probably impossible to keep something nice and consistently interesting and intelligent for 15 straight hours.

At least they didn't have people running around with tinfoil on their heads for the entire thing.

Re:Like a fat man in a marathon. (1)

MrP- (45616) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889505)

Actually it was 20 hours... 20 hours of my life wasted!!!

No, i'm not bitter [] .

(20 HOURS!!! WASTED!!)

Re:Like a fat man in a marathon. (2)

Courageous (228506) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889640)

"At least they didn't have people running around with tinfoil on their heads for the entire thing."

You're referring to Signs? That was the best part of that whole movie. In fact, it might have been the only good part.


And (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889467)

I want a beowulf cluster of bpus.

I actually liked it (4, Interesting)

Aztek (260107) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889468)

I watched it every night and true the first episodes were by far better. My dad even started to watch it with me on about the 6th night. I especially like how each night for the first week was a different decade each night. When it comes out on DVD (which I assume it will just like Dune did) I might actually buy it.

It would be less disappointing with no aliens... (3, Interesting)

User 956 (568564) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889498)

No, you're right. Taken isn't *bad*. But it's not really science fiction, either, which is why it's disappointing. It's a mainstream piece of entertainment that leverages the public's knowledge of the modern mythology of the space alien in order to tell the stories of a few families torn apart and brought together, sometimes all at once, by the tribulations of the 20th century. That's not a bad idea, per se. But sometimes while watching Taken you've got to wonder if it might not be better if they just took the aliens out of it altogether.

Re:It would be less disappointing with no aliens.. (1)

Aztek (260107) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889552)

Your right in that at some points i felt it was in no way a movie about aliens. But without the aliens to tie it togather they would have not had much of a power strugle story that was the crawford family.

"Taken" from other shows and movies... (1)

dclatfel (2737) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889472)

I agree with the original poster that Taken seems to have cribbed bits and pieces from all over the place. I must say, in Episode 9 - where people were seeing what they were thinking about. Well - I do believe that came from an episode of Star Trek - The Original Series. And I do think it was done better in Trek.

Also, the original poster is right on about how the first episodes were good, and how it went south in the second half. I say, just about the time Alison was conceived was where it took a dive. Of course, that's just IMHO.

Re:"Taken" from other shows and movies... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889488)

Weird, I felt the opposite. The beginning was boring and stupid, it wasn't until Allie was born that I started enjoying it..

Although, maybe its just cause of Dakota Fanning.. shes like a 30 year old in the body of a 9 year old (or whatever age she is). Shes so smart, and cute.

Can't wait till shes 18 ::cough::

Re:"Taken" from other shows and movies... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889500)

embarrased to say that i agree about that kid.

Re:"Taken" from other shows and movies... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889533)

Did you see her on Leno a few months ago? She really is mature, I usually HATE when kids are on leno, they're stupid and laugh at stupid stuff and cant talk right (I hate kids heh), but her interview was good... If you read her IMDB mini bio, it says she learned to read at 2, I still cant read :P (jk, duh, but i hate reading...)

Anyway, whatever heh

Re:"Taken" from other shows and movies... (1)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889610)

So what you are saying is the kids act just like the adult stars on Leno (they're stupid and laugh at stupid stuff and cant talk right)?

Re:"Taken" from other shows and movies... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889624)

yes. but child stars are usually even more painful to watch because they act so pretentiously precocious. and the younger they are the more annoying it is.

Re:"Taken" from other shows and movies... (2)

cybermace5 (446439) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889615)

It was actually done in The Next Generation. The same episode as the Traveler, where Wesley Crusher and the Traveler send the Enterprise bazillions of light years away, and everyone started seeing what they were thinking. It was pretty funny, especially when they guy thought he was burning up so Piccard was yelling at him to get a hold of himself. And then there was the scene where Piccard sat down to a cup of tea with his long-dead mother.

I remembered it as one of the more cheesy episodes of ST:TNG, Taken must be pretty bad.

My thoughts (1)

MrP- (45616) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889473)

I thought the first few parts were boring, it started getting better when they hit the 70s and 80s.. Then I was really interested when Allie was born. But then I knew how it would end, and I was right. I wasted 20 hours of my life for the standard sad ending.

And there were a few problems, one of which was at the end, when the army guy says to leave the parents alone (well he implies it by saying he doesnt see them, they must have escaped or something). If he cared, he should have done it sooner, it was because of him ordering his troops to get closer which caused the fighting which made the girl decide to leave in the first place.

I wasted 20 hours of my life! Bah!

Re:My thoughts (0)

slieberg (34143) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889522)

You probably waste mote time reading and replying to all these frickin whiney posts.

Re:My thoughts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889551)

True, I was thinking of posting what I told my friend yesterday...

"i wasted 20 hours of my life.. 20 hours i coulda used to sleep, go into a coma, stay home from work, masturbate, smoke crack, anything else but watch that stupid Taken miniseries, ARGH 20 HOURS"

my life is pretty pointless so wasting 20 hours isnt truly wasting anything important, but i didnt think anyone would care, but now i know i was wrong and you must care, you wasted your time to reply.

(yes, i know you're a troll)

Bad Soap Opera (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889476)

Taken was a bad soap opera. I lament the time I spent watching it.

'Tis a natural fault. (2)

flogger (524072) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889493)

Spieldburg didn't write this stuff. It isn;t going to have the cohesion that we viewers have come to expect in his finer movies. To take the "Short stories" and blend them together is a tough job. Look at what can happen [] (Ray Bradbury's Martian Chronicles) when one author tries to show a splintered vision along a unifying theme. Bradburys stuff is good,Don;t get me wrong; but taken on a whole, it doesn't rise above the individual stories. I think a lot of people were expecting Spielburg's stuff to transend the original writers' work because he looked at it and put his rubber-stamp-signature on the project.
Is "Taken" really great? Nah.
Is "Taken" worth watching? Sure.

Glory Hole Etiquette (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889502)


Well, there seems to be. Unfortunately, we couldn't find any websites or literature to research it, although a woman in Kentucky with a similar interest told us there is a site, but she never got back with us to let us know where it is. Gay websites we looked at didn't seem to address it unless we just didn't know how to navigate around one properly and adult bookstores don't seem to acknowledge their existence. All that leaves us with is personal experience, all of which comes from West Virginia.

Rest assured though, based upon some threads on the boards, there are other states that have them. They apparently also exist in public restrooms, but we've never seen any and don't know anything personally about them, only what we've heard. This piece is confined only to glory holes found in adult bookstores.


For the uninitiated, a glory hole is simply a hole in a wall separating two adjoining video booths. Glory holes can vary in size, but all serve the same basic purpose, ie. to allow a man to slip his penis through the hole from his side to the other booth.

Some are small, round holes just large enough to accommodate a penis and nothing more. In some bookstores, they can be larger, rectangular or square cut-outs big enough for a person to place his or her head through if so inclined. Why so large? While the glory hole is large enough to allow two people to engage in oral sex or masturbation, one person at a time, the larger ones allow easier access not only for the same purpose, but can also allow for anal intercourse, or vaginal intercourse if you happen to be female, or on the outside chance you meet a woman there. Not that you have to do any of this. We have to believe that while the larger holes when used for oral sex gives one person better access to the instrument of destruction, and surrounding parts poking through, they would also add to the exhibitionist and/or voyeuristic nature of the experience for both parties.


A typical video booth is small. Generally, each comes with a small wooden seat for one person or a wooden bench that can seat two people somewhat comfortably. The smaller glory hole is slightly lower than waist level for the typical man so if you're extremely short or tall, good luck being comfortable using one. The larger holes center just below the waist area, but because of their size, height isn't really a factor.

In some bookstores, rather than a completely wooden barrier separating the two booths, a glass partition, starting about chest high and opaque in color extends above the wooden wall to the ceiling. By pressing a button on your side of the wall, you are sending a signal to the person in the adjoining booth you want to be able to see him, or in rare cases, her. If the other person is agreeable, he or she can push their own button and magically the glass clears to give each person an unobstructed view of the other.


This can vary from bookstore to bookstore. When it comes to gritty, a place in Wheeling comes to mind. The movie screens in the booths are cum-splattered, the floors sticky or wet, and wadded up wet paper towels or tissue litter the floor. It's kind of weird because a mop and bucket are visible in a corner, but it doesn't look like anyone has learned how to operate these hi-tech tools at this place.

On the other hand, some are very clean. It appears to depend on the management. One place south of Parkersburg, under new management, seems almost fanatical about cleanliness. An employee seems to be constantly around with a mop, bucket and bottle of glass cleaner. Under the prior management, that was't the case.

Some places do provide a roll of paper towels which you can tear off and take in a booth with you. We suppose you should do your part and use them to clean up any mess you might make, but leave the Windex at home unless you don't want to watch a blurred porn flick. If you were interested in movies only, you probably wouldn't be in a booth with a glory hole anyway.

Also, there's nothing to prohibit you from taking your own stuff. If you think you're going to be on your knees, take a small towel or any other cleansing items, like maybe hand-wipes. It's probably just a matter of preference. The male half of this tandem doesn't worry so much about dirt and grime while the female half does.


Not all that much really. All you're paying for is the movie you choose. Still, while the cost is nominal, 25 cents to get the movie of your choice started, there is a kicker to this. You are paying to have a movie on in increments. In some places, you can get 100 seconds for a quarter and watch the timer countdown every 10 seconds, ie. 100, 90, 80, etc. down to zero. In other places, you get a digital numeral that counts down the same way, eg. 5,4,3,2,1 and finally zero. When the time runs out, the movies goes off until another quarter is dropped in the slot.

Does it matter? It can. When you get 100 seconds for a quarter it comes to $9.00 per hour if we did the math right. The point is, you know exactly what you are getting. The problem with the digital counter is you get a certain number of seconds for each count, but those don't seem to be as long. Unless you take a stopwatch, it's difficult to know what you're getting for your quarter, but it seems to be about half the time as the timed segments.

Some bookstores require that you buy tokens at 25 cents a piece, usually five dollars worth. Don't be concerned if you run out though. We haven't found a single coin mechanism that doesn't take quarters after you run out of tokens.

Does anybody really care if you have a movie running? You bet! If you go, arm yourself with a generous supply of quarters. Once inside the booth, when you drop your first quarter in the slot, a small light comes on outside of your booth.

This does two things. First, it lets other patrons know the booth is occupied so someone can go to the opposite booth adjoining it to check you out. Of course, to those without a discerning eye that can't tell the door is closed and locked, it means someone may start pulling on the door trying to get in.

Second, what it also does, is let some employee, that does have a discerning eye, know the booth is occupied but the movie isn't playing. Does he care? Yep, that's his job. You may just hear from outside, "Start dropping some quarters!" Or worse, pounding on the door telling you to "drop quarters" to "Open the door!" Worse yet, a stern command to "Open the door!" accompanied by hard knocking.

Embarrassing? Maybe, maybe not. Just pay attention to the timer, have enough quarters and keep the movies going. Movies-that's plural. You'll have a selection, depending on where you go, of 10-16 movies in almost every category imaginable. Gay male, lesbian, BDSM, interracial, strictly oral or group sex. You name the theme, they'll probably have it available. Check the wall when you first walk in. With the exception of one place, the movie selection is there for you to review along with the corresponding number so you can turn to that channel in your booth to watch the Academy Award winning movie of your choice.


Well, by asking other people or just checking out adult bookstores. In West Virginia, it seems every adult bookstore has them. One thing you can count on, the stores certainly don't advertise them. You won't see ads in the newspapers, Yellow Pages or on billboards saying, "Come Check Out Our Glory Holes." The fact is, it's as though they don't even exist.

With one exception, we haven't been to a place that doesn't have two signs up. One always warns against loitering which means get in a booth and start shoving quarters in. This doesn't seem to be enforced all that much and as long as you're walking slowly around in circles, that seems to be good enough. The second sign you'll see forbids sexual contact of any kind, or solicitation; that it will not be tolerated and subject you to being asked to leave the premises or to prosecution.

A legal thing no doubt. After all, it seems almost nonsensical to have such a sign outside a line of booths that have a little hole to the next booth, unless we have this all wrong and they are really for passing cigarettes, mints and popcorn between fellow movie goers.


The simple answer if you go is people like you! If you're first thought is only gay men hang around these places, that would be wrong. Sure, gay men will be there, but so will the bisexual and bi-curious. And, don't kid yourself, some, maybe quite a few, are certainly straight. The fact is, you'll run into all types of people. Some will be blue collar and other will appear to be businessmen. Some will be muscular, some obese and some are in between. There will be those that appear dirty and dressed kind of ratty and others that look very clean and seem overdressed. It may not always mean anything, but some men will have a wedding ring on.

Why would a straight guy go? A couple reasons probably. If you are going to be on the receiving end of oral sex from an anonymous stranger by sticking your penis through a little hole, are you really going to know if those are male or female lips on the other side. In a way, not really, although that probably denies reality. If all you see are men milling around, chances are those lips are attached just outside the oral cavity of a man. Ah, but the fantasy is still there and it plays a role. That warm little mouth could belong to your favorite actress or model if that's what you choose.

On the other hand, we have seen females hanging around. Generally, they'll be there as the other half of a male/female couple or, in some cases, with one or more other women. We recall at one place a woman, with a man, came in. She was dressed like a hooker, but wasn't. The assumption was the guy with her was her husband or significant other. Whatever he was, he was there to watch her engage in sex with other men. They chose a booth and went inside but left the door open. Before long there was a line of men waiting to take part in an oral gang bang that later turned into sexual intercourse for some of them at the suggestion of the man she was with.

Three things about this. First, it had the makings of a loving wives story on this site. Second, the management didn't seem to care, yet had to be aware because of the layout of the store. Finally, not all men frequenting glory holes are gay. In fact, the booths seemed to empty out while she was there. It certainly wasn't a gay man's paradise that day.

As an aside on the gay vs. straight or somewhere in-between issue, the male half here, getting a can of pop one time, was asked by a man if there were couples in the back and, the female half, sliding her long, slender and very obvious feminine finger through a glory hole doesn't seem to have a problem getting a response from men.

Still, if you're a single guy looking to find a gal-pal, you'd probably have a better chance at a church social. These are not places where you'll find your future wife nor are they places where you'll probably build lasting relationships.

Of course, you could run into someone you know. We wouldn't worry about it too much. They have just as much explaining to do as you do, especially if there doing research. Depending on your age, we can only imagine one thing worse; hearing a voice from the other side saying, "Hi, Dad!"(or Mom, whichever sounds worse to you)


Those damn little hunks of rubber that take away from the pleasurable experience of sex; should you use them? That's a personal decision obviously, but let's get real here. They may not be much fun, but they could save your life!

Sure, the stories written regarding glory holes never mention them, but in a story, it wouldn't be very erotic. It's like a porn movie. You want to see that hot cum squirting all over her face instead of it blowing up the end of a rubber! But, this isn't a movie or a story. This real life. Common sense should prevail.

It may also depend on what you decide to do. If you're going to masturbate someone, maybe you don't care as much. We recall one man, of several, that turned and placed his buttocks against the glory hole. It was clear what he wanted and the point was made even more clear because sticking in the crack of his butt was a packaged condom. Of course, do want to reach in there and pull it out?

While it's your choice, if you choose to use them, carry them with you. If you offer to it someone and they refuse it, so be it. They'll probably leave the booth and someone else will eventually come in. Still, through observation and talking to people, it seems the majority of people do not practice safe glory hole sex. Probably a mistake but we don't see it as our job to judge. We're not your parents and we're not your sex education teachers.


So, you've made the decision to do it, or do something. Go into the booth, put a few quarters in the slot and find a movie you might enjoy while you're waiting. If you want to be the one that gets off, unzip your pants, pull that baby out, and start stroking. Hey, that's what the movie is for and this is not a time to be shy. When the adjoining booth lights up from a movie starting, just wait. If you hear quite a few quarters dropping in the next booth, that's a good sign someone is at least interested.

If you want the other person to know you want to get off, it doesn't hurt to stand and face the hole. This will let the person know exactly what you want. While talking to the other person is fine, most everything is done by hand signals. If he wants you to stick that sucker through the hole, he'll place his finger on the hole, maybe circle it, and then withdraw it. That's your signal to put your penis through the hole. It doesn't mean however that oral sex will follow. It may be he is only willing to masturbate you.

Do you have to ejaculate? No, you can withdraw at anytime and wait for another person, or sometimes just take turns with the first person. The fact is, the other person may have no interest in oral or manual sex in any event. He may just want to watch or he may want you to watch him. In that event, don't expect a finger to come through the hole.

If, on the other hand, you want to get him off, just reverse the process. If he's interested when he sees that big old digit of yours, you'll know soon enough. What you do from there is up to you, but like you, he may not let you finish the job you've started. Don't be offended. It's not uncommon for a person to want to try several different people before going for the big one.

Like we said, people do talk to each other, but not often. You may be asked if it's okay to come in your mouth. You may be invited to join the other person or he may want to join you in your booth or, he may ask if you want to go his car or his place.

On the first one, we've done that, but that was finishing act of something that began outside in a vehicle and was prearranged. We wouldn't worry too much about accepting an invitation to join though. We haven't really run into anybody rude or crude and there is a certain safety factor in the building. The last thing management wants is a problem.

And, while we're at it, don't worry about running into Hannibal Lecter looking for a tube steak sandwich! We're not aware of anyone ever losing their precious member to a muncher. We're not saying saying it couldn't happen, just that we're not aware of any problems like that. The rudest thing we've ever witnessed, which happens often and may not be all that rude, is the guy that pokes his penis through the glory hole uninvited. You still have the safety of the wall between you and can choose to ignore or not ignore him.

Being invited outside, to a vehicle or a home, by a Jeffrey Dahmer wannabe, is quite another thing. Do it if you want, but we wouldn't. You're in a place believed to be frequented by gays and there is such a thing as gay bashing. You may not be gay, but try explaining that while you're munching on a warm creamstick for the first time in your life just to see what it's like.


There's no emotional bond with the other person. In many places, you don't even see the other person's face. It's completely anonymous and in a sense, all very mechanical. We have our own reasons for going and we suspect everybody else does too. Maybe you just want to watch or be watched. We've done both. Maybe you want to be a little more active or just want to try something new.

Who knows! The fact is, it can be fun and entertaining. That's what it's really all about. Like we said, it's doubtful you're going to make any long lasting relationships in an adult bookstore. Although, we did one time meet someone that later lead to another meeting, but we would have to say that's extremely rare. Figure out why you want to go. For us, it isn't necessarily for sexual reasons, at least not always with other people. Since you don't have to do anything, go and enjoy-we have!

So, there you have it. Probably not the most exhaustive piece that could be written on the subject, but enough to get anybody started if they make decision to give it a try.

Ending song? (2)

BWJones (18351) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889513)

O.K. folks, I heard a song by Emmylou Harris that I have never heard before on Thursdays episode of Taken. It also played on Fridays episode and I have never heard this song before. It was titled "Just before it gets dark". Can anyone tell me where to find this song and what album it is on? I must know.

Re:Ending song? (3, Funny)

neurostar (578917) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889656)

Can anyone tell me where to find this song and what album it is on?

Yes, I would be happy to help.

You can find it on the internet. The album is titled KaZaA.

I don't watch TV (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889526)

You insensitive clod!

Agree w/Author -- Taken Away and Dropped On Mars (4, Informative)

Jutral (558241) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889529)

I too was "taken" in by the first five episodes of the series. It created an interesting and exciting storyline about events that might, or might not have, happened in our past. Adding the Spielberg touch, he was able to draw the audience into a spellbinding story that made us wonder what was to come next.

After the weekend though, it felt as if Spielberg decided to take a nap and let one of his assistants take over. The story became uninteresting with two supposed "lovers"--ages apart--running around teetering from being "bad guys" to "good guys" to just plain "weird guys."

While the first five were good--the sixth, eighth, ninth, and tenth were manageable--the seventh episode was the killer. In the seventh episode we watched the inside of a room and the outside of a building for an hour and a half as we learned as little as possible about the rest of the story. Watching the preview on the eight episode was more interesting than the two hours of the seventh.

While I am critical about the last few episodes I feel that overall it was worth twenty hours (two per evening) to watch this mini-series event. Not only was it interesting--to a point--seeing twenty hours of rather "quality" programming in two weeks is hard to do with the shows on television. If you have the time, check out the reruns this weekend on the Sci-Fi channel (at least the first five).

Sick of reviewers, critics, skeptics, guides, etc. (5, Insightful)

SteweyGriffin (634046) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889530)

Movies serve one purpose -- to entertain. In fact, all entities can generally be classified into one category based on one primary function that they perform. For example, computers are designed to perform fast calculations. Movies are made to entertain. Actors and actresses appear in movies to pay for living expenses, whereas they appear on Broadway and live theatre productions to hone their acting skills. Writers' purpose is to organize a lot of information into coherent articles and papers. Constructions workers build things. Engineers design things. It's really that simple.

It's often been said that there are only two things that should be used to rate a movie on its entertainment merits.

1) Does the story take you somewhere?
2) Do you care about the outcome?

That's it. That is essentially what Spielberg and every other movie creator's goal is. They want to entertain and captivate audiences, but if that's going to happen they have to address those two crucial questions.

It's not that Spielberg isn't a master, it's just that he's forgetting the whole purpose. His movies have become too cold and outsider feeling; audiences are subsequently being turned off to his stories these days because, time and time again, they don't feel taken back or captivated, and they don't have an emotional tie-in to what happens in the plotline.

I think popular films of the current day can learn a lot from the anime sub-genre of filmography. It's about interesting characters that people care about, and stories they grow to love and understand. The basic simplicities of life.

Anime is not child pornography, it's not tentacle rape, it's not insert_whatever_typical_complaint_here -- it's just captivating, wonderful film. And it's new, it's fresh, it's fascinating, it's an art form.

Spielberg no longer is these things. He's old hat, washed up, boring, dull, tantric, mundane, and irrelevant any more. He turns great Kubrick, Dickens, and Shakespeare stories into a cold abbreviated plot with characters no one cares about and actors that aren't the most skilled craftsmen in their field.

I used to love Steve, I really did. But lately it's almost as though he's just doing movies to occupy his time. I no longer leave Spielberg movies at the theatre with my mouth open and dripping. I leave with a gritty taste in my mouth and thoughts of less-than-his-best wander throughout my head.

I miss the old Spielberg, and I'm sure you do too. Perhaps a petition is appropriate. Let's just say "Steve, get back to basics. We love you and respect you, but you're abondoning your true fans and are losing out on wonderful films as a result."

Well, that's just my two cents. Like I said, I'm not a critic, and I'm not putting him down.

Re:Sick of reviewers, critics, skeptics, guides, e (1)

tomlord (473109) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889630)

> 1) Does the story take you somewhere?

It certainly did: for about 3/4 of the series. What the heck are these aliens up to? How will society be impacted? What does it all _mean_?

> 2) Do you care about the outcome?

Sure: but that's where the series falls apart. It has a stupid, hopelessly vague answer to the "what the heck are these aliens up to" question. It's ending is designed to say "no impact on society at all". Nothing happened and every character (and the audience) who expressed concern over these events over the 40-some years of the plot is shown to have wasted their time.

I suppose the failure to emerge of clear, thoughtful pictures of what these aliens were all about is supposed to leave me with the imaginative freedom to Wonder in Awe at the Big Imponderables but this rehashed Close Encounters ending -- well, been there, done that, and it only took around 20 minutes last time.

Firestarter? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889535)

"Taken" seems to have taken a little bit from "Firestarter"

I'm the trouble starter, fuckin' instigator.
I'm the fear addicted, danger illustrated.

I'm a firestarter, twisted firestarter.
You're the firestarter, twisted firestarter.
I'm a firestarter, twisted firestarter.

I'm the bitch you hated, filth infatuated.
Yeah. I'm the pain you tasted, fell intoxicated.

I'm a firestarter, twisted firestarter.
You're the firestarter, twisted

I'm the self inflicted, mind detonator.
Yeah. I'm the one infected, twisted

I'm a firestarter, twisted firestarter.
You're the firestarter, twisted firestarter.
I'm a firestarter, twisted firestarter...
starter... starter... starter...

Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889536)

"News for Nerds. Stuff that matters."

This is hardly news. Or stuff that matters. Why beat a dead horse?

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889554)

"News for Nerds. Stuff that matters."

This is hardly news. Or stuff that matters. Why beat a dead horse?

I just love beating this dead horse! []

I Downloaded Taken (1, Flamebait)

puppetman (131489) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889542)

from alt.binaries.multimedia.scifi.

I had high hopes.

I couldn't stand it. Stopped at the 60 minute mark, and deleted it. I couldn't believe how slow it was. Slow is an understatement. It was painful.

It doesn't help that Michael Moriarty was in it. He was great in Law & Order, but has been taken by the drink (he was charged with assaulting his common-law wife, and has been ordered to have no contact with women while drinking).

I don't like a lot of smarm, I don't like alot of romance, and I just don't understand why they keep trying to peddle sci-fi to the mainstream. The compromise between sci-fi and mainstream always sucks.

Re:I Downloaded Taken (2)

nagora (177841) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889556)

The compromise between sci-fi and mainstream always sucks.

Yep, the science is the first thing to go followed by any attempt at having characters act intelligent, followed by any expectation that the audience will.


Spielberg Did Not Write This (5, Insightful)

loggia (309962) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889546)

Steven Spielberg did not write this. Leslie Bohem is the driving force behind the project - Steven Spielberg is the "brand," if you will.

I think it was a fine series. The writing was often subtle and thoughtful - a rarity on television these days.

Speilberg, the artist the never was (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889548)

Pity Steven, constantly riddled with the knowledge that his movies, while financially successful, are really no more than pop picks of the week.

He picked up AI as an homage to Kubrick (so he said), and succeeded only in showing the world that he will never ascend beyond the Indiana Jones adventure flick.

As for Taken, I thought it ended quite poorly. The only bright spot I saw was the littlegirl, whos actiing ability seemed to shine through the drivel lines she was forced to deliver.

I am still trying to figure out exactly why the little girl, who was supposedly the SUCCESSFUL culmniation of the breeding project (as opposed to her father), was in the end unableto control her powers. I mean, if she risked dying by using her abilities how the hell is she a success? And if she's the most powerful telekinetic imaginable why the HELL doesn't she just fly herentire family to a lovely Pacific atoll for a nice vaction?

Very stupid ending, amazingly convenient, horribly sappy.


The name is not "Taken"... (1, Funny)

mad44 (516192) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889560)

The name of the series is:
"Steven Spielberg Presents Taken"

At least that's what they kept on telling on TV :)

The Blair Witch girl cried so much... (4, Funny)

tbmaddux (145207) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889562)

... I was waiting for snot to come out of her nose again.

Re:The Blair Witch girl cried so much... (1)

A Gremlin In Kremlin (634248) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889641)

Heather Donahue is in this series? Oh yeah :)


Re:The Blair Witch girl cried so much... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889677)

Unfortunately, I was as well..

and Max Headroom borking a witch hunter? WTF??

Better article/review (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889563)

Frank White, employee of "Newage SciFi" magazine, put a more in-depth review of Spielberg's "Taken" episodes. In depth reviews including Art Bell, George Noory, and Whitley Streiber: alien phenomenon consultants.

They are archived duplicates of the articles themselves in .JPG format. Don't ask why... Frank White's archived article is available here [] .

Over the Hill? ... An Opinion (5, Insightful)

carb (611951) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889564)

I mean, when people look at Spielberg's "bad" movies, the first thing that comes up is A.I., which should be taken with a grain of salt seeing as this film was developed largely by Kubrick.

Aside from that, what really sparks you as bad? Minority Report? For all of its plot discontinuities (did I spell that right?), I think that the consensus is positive - it was an enjoyable sci-fi film with good performances all around, albeit with a few cheesy moments. Let's look at his films of the late-90's. Amistad - never saw it, but heard good things. Saving Private Ryan - do I really need to go into this, it was hands down my pick for Best Picture in 1997 (Grr ... Shakespeare in Love?) At this point I'll mention his involvement with Band of Brothers. A little bit earlier, Schindler's List, another classic.

TV is a new avenue for Spielberg - don't count him out yet. Over the past few years, I think his good work outweighs his bad work.

Re:Over the Hill? ... An Opinion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889623)

big spoilers for those that haven't watched AI..

A.I. certainly was developed largely by Kubrick, but he couldn't think of a good way to end it. Spielberg was the one that came up with the oh-so-touching "artificial intelligences from the future rescue old crappy AI boy and make his dreams come true thanks to some stupid psuedosciencey thing where they can bring people back to life, but for only one day, and they can only do it once because that's just the way it is" crappiness that AI calls an ending. The movie would have been just FINE if they'd ended the movie with him underwater with the blue fairy. Not a masterpiece, perhaps, but not the smelly, steaming pile of crap that the movie turned out to be.

My personal experience with Spielberg films (2)

SteweyGriffin (634046) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889568)

Let me guess, Steven, you picked out yet another (originally) interesting film with a "crank" that I'm expected to turn and turn until OOP! big shock, a jack pops out and you laugh and the audience laughs and the dog laughs and I die a little inside


Taken was a terrible waste of time and potential (1)

Siguy (634325) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889570)

Taken was simply awful.
The beginning had potential, but wasn't really excellent as others have stated. The beginning would've been excellent if the series had actually built on it. Instead it just ran around in circles. Nothing actually happened. It was a 20 hour miniseries about aliens and there were about 5 minutes featuring aliens. And nothing whatsoever was added to what scifi has already said about aliens. It was just derivative and uninteresting and definitely could've been improved by a shorter running time.

I wrote up a more elaborate and swear-filled review at my blog [] , if you'll excuse the flagrant self-promotion.

S..L..O..W.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889574)

It was slow. There were a couple of hours of good stuff very loosely packed into 20 hours of air time. In the first couple of episodes I found that I could turn it on, watch for 10 minutes, wander away for 10 minutes, and return to find that I hadn't missed anything interesting. In the last few episodes I could watch 10 minutes and leave for a half an hour and not missing anything. I'd like to see a fan edit of it down to maybe 2 hours or so. I'd probably watch it without wandering away.

B*O*Y*C*O*T*T (2)

MacAndrew (463832) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889583)

Not that anyone including SciFi or /. cares, but I refuse to watch this show after they murdered you-know-what. Opting for the Spielberg name was doubtlessly hoped to be a free ride, though I doubt Spielberg comes cheap. I'm still skeptical of SciFi's editorial decisions. (These are the guys who broadcast double helpings of John Edward, after all.)

Not that I think I'm missing much. IMHO Spielberg's stuff has been pretty bad for a while. Here [] is a DVD'd list of his film work -- how many titles have you seen, and how many have you liked? There are a number of notable turkeys. I know many people love him, but when I hear "Hollywood" as a put-down for something thought glib and slick and insincere, I immediately think "Spielberg."

So that's two strikes against the show. And, as we all know, even if we miss a show and later regret it, the reruns will hound us for years if the thing was halfway good, or even if not. I laugh now to think how I once meticulously archived Star Trek: TNG episodes (I confess that was a major reason I bought the VCR). I had no idea how popular the show would be!

Second System Effect ?! (1)

SamuraiiProgrammer (150280) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889587)

This is hardly Spielbergs second film, but I
just think there was too much of it. There are
parts that are very skillfull, but the story
doesn't need 20 hours to be told.

That's why I thought of the 2nd system effect.
The series is bloated and includes practically
one of everything. If "Taken" had been much
shorter forcing the viewer to imagine the parts
that couldn't be told, it might have been tighter,
tenser and better.

I Liked When the Visitors Turn Out to Be Lizards (5, Funny)

loggia (309962) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889594)

Oh, wait, that was "V."

Better article from Frank White. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889603)

Frank White, employee of "Newage SciFi" magazine, put a more in-depth review of Spielberg's "Taken" episodes. In depth reviews including Art Bell, George Noory, and Whitley Streiber: alien phenomenon consultants.

They are archived duplicates of the articles themselves, in .JPG format. Don't ask why...I too think LaTex is better for publishing... Frank White's archived article is available here [] .

I passed by it several times, on someone else's TV (1)

timothy (36799) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889604)

... and thought it made school seem a little less boring by comparison.

Slow-moving, dull. At least that's the impression I got by seeing about 15 minutes apiece of several episodes. Time wasted.


Re:I passed by it several times, on someone else's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889643)

What do you know about scifi? Rather than answer, mod me down to flamebait with your infinite spank-ray. You haven't even graduated college yet; just a sorority slut. If you haven't noticed, Speilberg portrays the military as correct as possible: brutal and arrogant. Who do you think has killed more people in movies, the United StatesArmy or Steven Spielberg?

Timothy, go back and play with tinkertoys with your mom [] .

blah (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889609)

keep you lame ass family problems to yourself, and find a real NEWS article. Thanx - I already have a TV guide.

IN SOVIET RUSSIA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889611)

Micheal not always 'taken' it up the ass!

Over-Hyped (2)

SkewlD00d (314017) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889620)

It was so hyped I didn't even bother tuning in. Sci-Fi needs to get their act together and show good stuff again, like Lexx season 4.

oh please! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889634)

Yeah, this is flamebait, but I seriously feel sorry for anyone that thinks Shitberg is good for anything other than a nose picker.

Reports of his "Death" are greatly exaggerated (4, Interesting)

coloth (630330) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889637)

I'm a little surprised about all this Spielberg-bashing.

Are people saying that an older, highly acclaimed director with a lot of clout and past success can't make good movies? Look at Robert Altman.

Spielberg is 56 years old. He could be making movies for another 30 years, and who knows what he'll choose to do?!

At the moment, from what I gather, he is trying to ensure the profitability and stability of the brand new major studio he created, the first in many, many years. He seems to be having some success, especially in animated features, against the company that invented the genre.

Hollywood is nothing if not a breeding ground for surprises. We all know Minority Report could have been better--it wasn't the masterwork that Bladerunner was--but you have to give him credit for putting his considerable resources into a less-than-forgiving proposition.

If what we're talking about boils down to the difference between Minority Report and Bladerunner, then I think it's something both very small and very large. A little bit of inspiration goes a long way, you might say. Maybe the theme of Constitutional erosion wasn't as inspirational to him as the Holocaust or D-Day had been, but I have no doubt that he'll be truly inspired again, whether it's next year or in ten years.

More "Taken" to come? (1)

dei3oe (558708) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889638)

I think the mini-series ending was left open in hopes of having a "Taken II". At the end of the series, the girl Ali is taken, and says she will return. So in my opinion, I think they will come out with a sequel.

The Worst Part!!! TollHouse cookies (1)

Binarybrain (253017) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889651)

The shameless shameless repeated plugs for TollHouse cookies was disgraceful.

Sergent: Stand down men
Alien: Would you like some TollHouse Cookies
Soldier: Mom?
Alien: I baked you some Tollhouse cookies

That is the worst plug in the history of TV. An alien offering someone TollHouse cookies. And on top of that they did it repeatedly through the show. I figure they thought they would get people hooked the first so many eposides and then brake out the product placements. No forgivness

I thought the first eposides were great but this last one was awful.

christopher hart (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4889652)

christopher hart loves to suck on the cock of hot twinks in tampa

surprised? (1)

ironfroggy (262096) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889662)

I wasn't. Spielburg has really lost something in alot of his recent projects. Just look at the low quality (comparitively) of AI (especially compared to if Kubrick had finished it), Minority Report, JP 3, and the horrible defacing of E.T.

Although, I am quite interested in seeing how his new "Catch Me If You Can" will be. It looks good.

Blaring mistake... (1)

spammeister (586331) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889668)

Funny how when Ali blows up the truck in ep 8? that it does indeed cath on fire, but the next morning the tires seem to be perfectly intact...Last time I checked rubber tires (no matter how "steel-belted" they were) not only melted/oozed, they exploded. So to see all 4 tires in perfectly good shape leads to me believe that the people involved are extremely lazy (possibly) or the fact they wern't allow to burn tires due to the enviromental "hazard" it would make. Even though they coudl have faked it and stripped the tires or something. I'm sorry SciFi, next time try getting a series for the series and not for "the name". (Glad I dont' pay for this crapola!)

Simpsons Did It (2)

emptybody (12341) | more than 11 years ago | (#4889688)

SSIA. ;)

G'bye Karma :(
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>