Sorry to quote myself but I don’t think I was too clear. If you mean that he wrote the story for himself and just planned to delete when done, I disagree. Mostly because I read the story first. It was written in the first person. Since we are reading it it obviously couldn’t have been deleted. And I don’t remember any suggestion that it was deleted. But its been a long time.
Sorry, but that’s not an error.
You can put out an oil lamp by lowering the wick below the top of the burner.
Huh? I wasn’t trying to be harsh, or funny. He turns off the computer with out saving the story for the same reason none of them reported that they’d found the body or collected the reward. What happened was a private thing between the four of them, not to be shared with other people. As I recall (it’s been a while since I’ve seen the movie) the narrator explicitly states this a few minutes before the final scene, explaining why they didn’t collect the reward. Thirty years later, the reasoning still applies. He doesn’t save the story, because he’s never going to share the story: he wrote it for himself, to remember and reexperience the events of that summer, but the purpose was in the writing, not in the story. Having finished it, he doesn’t need to keep a copy of it, and simply turns off the computer and walks away.
Loach, I haven’t read the story, I’m just talking about the movie. Although I’d argue that the fact that you’re reading the story is not proof that the story you read was ever written. I mean, obviously it was written, in the real world, but in terms of the story being told, it’s possible to write a story (even in the first person) that couldn’t possibly ever be told to anyone else within the context of the world created by the story. For example, John Hawkes’ Travesty is a monologue given by a man in the process of driving his sports car into a brick wall at upwards of a hundred miles an hour. It’s impossible for anyone not in the car to ever hear the monologue, and it’s impossible for anyone in the car to survive the end of the story. You’re reading it because it’s a work of fiction, but the fiction of the work maintains that it’s impossible for you to read it. But that’s a hijack; I haven’t read King’s original short story, so I don’t know (and very much doubt) that he intended anything that ambitious with it. But I do think that, as far as the movie goes, it’s the most compelling and poignant interpretation to the movie’s end.
Although, the idea of the writer walking out the door to play with his kids, and then suddenly shouting, “FUCK! I forgot to hit ‘Save!’” is pretty compelling, too. 
I kind of figured he did that on purpose so he could “relive” those moments of his life when he typed the story out again.
Marc
Especially if he’s so upset he grabs an axe and starts chasing them through a hedge maze.
In Shaka Zulu, there’s a scene at the beginning where a British officer has an audience with King George IV. The candles in the room are unmistakeably electric. Was this done for fire-safety reasons? It’s not like real candles are expensive.
I can imagine it being for continuity. If it’s a complicated scene, they might shoot the conversation out of sequence and it make take the whole day, though the conversation itself might be only a few minutes of screen time. Candles will burn down and when the scene is edited together, viewers might get distracted by how the candles are constantly changing length.
I thought you meant that he should’ve turned it off because it was a terrible story. My bad.
Aren’t most of the people associated with the story dead or moved on by the time he writes it, though?
Except he wrote the story precisely because River Phoenix’s character had been killed in a fight recently. The story was in honor of his friend and to show that 12 year olds (as his kid is) will always have friendships like that.
Neither of these observations alters my premise. I’m not arguing he deleted the story to protect anyone’s privacy but his own, and the inspiration for writing the story doesn’t translate into a necessity for sharing the story.
HBO’s Rome.
The Battle of Pharsalus.
We get some confusing imagery, an art deco shot of a falling eagle standard, and Caesar sitting down on a cot and saying, “I won” (or something like that.)
Dammit…would it have killed the budget to show the damn battle? Just take some from wardrobe, for Og’s sake.
Perhaps this is an homage to the mimed tennis match in the movie Blow Up, which was a much-discussed scene around the time that Lady in Cement was filmed.
Yup, I’ve done it myself. I don’t know if it’s recommended/best/whatever, but it’s definitely possible.
As for Memoirs of a Geisha, there was some casting controversy as yes, three major roles went to well-known Chinese actresses. I’m not sure about how well Gong Li (Red Sorghum, Raise the Red Lantern, Farewell My Concubine) and Zhang Ziyi (Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon [the younger female role], Hero) speak English, but Michelle Yeoh - ethnic Chinese, born in Malaysia - was schooled for years in England, and speaks fluent English with barely any accent. Most Americans are familiar with her in Tomorrow Never Dies or Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon.
In the original Star Wars they never refer to units of currency, not even in a cosmopolitan spaceport, and when Owen Lars pays the jawas for the droids, he’s clearly play-acting.
Yeah…I kind of feel you…but they did go all out for the battles in the early episodes. I was kind of thinking, “Ummm” but I could sort of understand that maybe they didn’t want to (due to money, time, etc.) film yet another huge battle sequence.
60,000-80,000 extras, all precisely coordinated on the field? Yes, yes it would :p.
In “The Front Page” the actor doing the typing is just pushing the same two keys over and over on the typewriter. I suppose that typing was not a skill that most actors had at the time.
It’s only a problem if you turn the knob too far. The wick loses contact with the adjusting gear and turning the knob does nothing. Then you have to take the burner off the fuel reservoir and push the wick up while turning the knob, which usually means both hands covered in lamp oil and soot. Not fun, been that done there.
Also, you can lower the wick until there’s just the tiniest blue flame left. It’s barely visible and uses very little fuel. If you need light during the night you don’t have to fumble around trying to relight the lamp in the dark, you just raise the wick.
Given that I was doing that in an era of flashlights and lighters, it’s not too far fetched to think it would have been the period way of dealing with an oil lamp at night.
CMC +fnord!
Gotta love this place, thread about movies becomes thread about oil lamps. Nitpicking the nitpickery of a nitpick!
Well, this isn’t exactly the same scenario the OP presents, but falls along the same lines.
In the movie Fled starring Baldwin Brother C. and Lawrence Fishbourne, there are about 300 shortcuts. This is really no more than horrible writing and directing, but it’s also a direct insult to any filmgoer.
There is one scene where Baldwin and Larry are chained together (the premise is they have escaped from prison) and as they run they are jerking each other around. So Baldwin stops them and pulls a harmonica out of his shirt and explains to Larry that an old friend of his named Titus taught him how everything in the world revolves around rythmn, so they need to get in rythmn with each other. He starts playing the harmonica and they start stomping their feet in time and then they run off again.
Another scene involves the detective who is chasing them (played by Will Patton) driving along with some other detectives. He suddenly orders the caravan to stop and drive off the road into the woods. The scene cuts to a cliff beside a rushing river. Larry and Baldwin run out onto the cliff and are greeted by the caravan of cars that magically show up on that cliff. We don’t know how Patton knew to turn right there or how those cars got through the woods, but there it is.
Man I hated that movie.
Rome did a lot of that.
When things were building up to the “Friends, Romans, Countrymen” moment, I was anticipating how they’d handle that. Maybe Shakespeare made the speech more momentous than it actually was in history, but I thought that they’d give it a run.
Nothing. As I recall, he was ascending a stage, and next scene, he’s emperor.