Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Paul Gettle <pgettle@********.NET>
Subject: Filmography [was: Re: Sick thing to do to a dead Runner.]
Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 21:40:31 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 06:23 PM 5/29/98 -0700, Renegade wrote:
>"Well, if it isn't ugly, stinking Billy Bob! Come get one in yarbles!
If
>you've got any yarbles, that is!"
>
>If you want my opinion, that choreographed fight was the pinacle of
the
>movie. If was such a contradiction, the music and choreography, and
then
>the voilence. Wow!

And this is why the FAQ recomends people quote a least a bit of the
post they're replying to. (For those of you just joining us, I believe
the movie in question is Demolition Man).

I suppose I'll have to pick up Demolition Man and watch it sometime...
In fact, I just watched Johnny Mnemonic this week, because it's a good
Shadowrun 'mood' film. The only problem I have with it is that since
much of shadowrun's cyberpunk is ripped off of the works of Gibson,
the movie is hauntingly familiar, yet jarringly discordant in some
places. (I get much the same effect when I compare the works of Anne
Rice to White Wolf's Vampire game.)

What films does everyone include on their list of Shadowrun films? The
top one on my list is the very first Die Hard movie. In fact, I put it
on during the character creation session if I'm introducing any
newbies to the game. The bad guys in Die Hard a good example of how
runners do what they do.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNW9jg82C0fERRVM5AQEu9wP/ZNIgwhmesgGsywK8tCh3iKc9cdKi7Fw+
Y/tr8KK7QlvNy1kJ+vHZYNZ6yteNtsfCMv0+kV2ibCF+MX9sasUiTgRYET9fpCFr
NrPJHMGXDFakk58qwD3QnI3yXG8fxrKo9viOc95LOWBk0hvI3rDjLhyh0F5PO5/+
PUVeecPRrY0=
=tgCl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle (pgettle@********.net)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:11455339 (RSA 1024, created 97/08/08)
625A FFF0 76DC A077 D21C 556B BB58 00AA

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.