<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;I always knew some day you&#8217;d come walking back through my door.&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri,  8 Aug 2008 20:33:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Gary Farber</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-68308</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Farber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Aug 2007 03:11:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-68308</guid>
		<description>Glancing at a couple of scenes again (of &lt;i&gt;Clerks II&lt;/i&gt;), let me stress that the single scene in which Dante watches Rosario Dawson try to teach him to dance, on the rooftop, is worth the price of the whole movie. I can watch that over and over and over. 

(The whole donkey sex scene is kinda missable, not that I want to, y'know, judge anyone's interests.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Glancing at a couple of scenes again (of <i>Clerks II</i>), let me stress that the single scene in which Dante watches Rosario Dawson try to teach him to dance, on the rooftop, is worth the price of the whole movie. I can watch that over and over and over. </p>
<p>(The whole donkey sex scene is kinda missable, not that I want to, y&#8217;know, judge anyone&#8217;s interests.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Farber</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-68208</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Farber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:09:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-68208</guid>
		<description>I liked &lt;i&gt;Clerks II&lt;/i&gt;, for what it's worth (although I still prefer the original title, &lt;i&gt;The Passion of The Clerks&lt;/i&gt;).  It was completely faithful to the spirit and characters of first film, without stinting on making use of Smith's far greater technical skills, and the budget and crew of a larger film that hasn't become bloated.

But I'll add another nomination for a violation of your rule, and it might surprise you, because it somewhat surprised me.  I saw &lt;i&gt;Rocky Balboa&lt;/i&gt; last night, and while I'm neither a particular fan of the earlier films, nor hostile to them, I thought this one was really quite good, and both charming and authentic, while still doing the whole boxing thing surprisingly well, in a way that went quite past any of the earlier films, including the original.  16 years since the previous one.  I'm not a boxing fan, either.  Good characters, though, and Stallone seemed to have almost reached a kind of Eastwoodian iconicity.  As I said, I was surprised to think that well of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I liked <i>Clerks II</i>, for what it&#8217;s worth (although I still prefer the original title, <i>The Passion of The Clerks</i>).  It was completely faithful to the spirit and characters of first film, without stinting on making use of Smith&#8217;s far greater technical skills, and the budget and crew of a larger film that hasn&#8217;t become bloated.</p>
<p>But I&#8217;ll add another nomination for a violation of your rule, and it might surprise you, because it somewhat surprised me.  I saw <i>Rocky Balboa</i> last night, and while I&#8217;m neither a particular fan of the earlier films, nor hostile to them, I thought this one was really quite good, and both charming and authentic, while still doing the whole boxing thing surprisingly well, in a way that went quite past any of the earlier films, including the original.  16 years since the previous one.  I&#8217;m not a boxing fan, either.  Good characters, though, and Stallone seemed to have almost reached a kind of Eastwoodian iconicity.  As I said, I was surprised to think that well of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-68075</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2007 23:06:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-68075</guid>
		<description>I haven't seen &lt;i&gt;Clerks 2&lt;/i&gt; so I can't personally vouch for how good it was. I don't think the other View Askew films figure in the equation because they're more stories told in a shared universe than direct sequels.

I suppose that I'm going to have to rely on my get-out clause, &lt;i&gt;i.e.&lt;/i&gt; that I used the phrase "rule of thumb" rather than "ironclad certainty." It's not impossible for a belated sequel to work out well, merely deeply improbable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t seen <i>Clerks 2</i> so I can&#8217;t personally vouch for how good it was. I don&#8217;t think the other View Askew films figure in the equation because they&#8217;re more stories told in a shared universe than direct sequels.</p>
<p>I suppose that I&#8217;m going to have to rely on my get-out clause, <i>i.e.</i> that I used the phrase &#8220;rule of thumb&#8221; rather than &#8220;ironclad certainty.&#8221; It&#8217;s not impossible for a belated sequel to work out well, merely deeply improbable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-68045</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2007 15:36:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-68045</guid>
		<description>What about &lt;i&gt;Clerks II&lt;/i&gt;? Definitely not dreadful; rather good, in fact, and approximately 10 years after the original. Does that count? (Or do the other ViewAskew-verse films affect the rule?)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What about <i>Clerks II</i>? Definitely not dreadful; rather good, in fact, and approximately 10 years after the original. Does that count? (Or do the other ViewAskew-verse films affect the rule?)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-67972</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:29:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-67972</guid>
		<description>I know one when I see one...

&lt;i&gt;Batman Begins&lt;/i&gt; wouldn't count IMHO, since although they're using some of the same characters the writer/producer/lead actors had changed completely from the 80s/90s Tim Burton/Joel Schumacher films.

I suppose it's a matter for debate whether you regard the Guber &#038; Peters-produced films directed by Tim Burton as being a distinct series from the pair directed by Joel Schumacher (Tim Burton had a producer credit on the third film, but from what I remember at the time it was clear he wasn't actively involved in the later films.) Either way, I don't see the Christopher Nolan film as being a sequel to the films from a decade earlier. (If anything it was a prequel to those films, at least in terms of the internal timeline.) I'd call &lt;i&gt;Batman Begins&lt;/i&gt; a new interpretation of common source material. (The same could be said of Bryan Singer's recent &lt;i&gt;Superman&lt;/i&gt; film.)

Films that are explicitly marketed as sequels, like the numerous horror episodes in the &lt;i&gt;Halloween&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;Friday the 13th&lt;/i&gt; sagas, count as a single series in my book despite a huge turnover in actors and directors. The forthcoming &lt;i&gt;Hellboy 2&lt;/i&gt; is part of a series, because the director and most of the cast are returning. The &lt;i&gt;Star Trek&lt;/i&gt; films through to &lt;i&gt;Nemesis&lt;/i&gt; were a single series, but the new one J J Abrams is working on isn't part of that series because apart from a cameo appearance by Leonard Nimoy there's no continuity of cast or creative team. The Tom Cruise &lt;i&gt;Mission: Impossible&lt;/i&gt; films are a series because again the main stars and the producer (i.e. Cruise himself) are still on board.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know one when I see one&#8230;</p>
<p><i>Batman Begins</i> wouldn&#8217;t count IMHO, since although they&#8217;re using some of the same characters the writer/producer/lead actors had changed completely from the 80s/90s Tim Burton/Joel Schumacher films.</p>
<p>I suppose it&#8217;s a matter for debate whether you regard the Guber &#038; Peters-produced films directed by Tim Burton as being a distinct series from the pair directed by Joel Schumacher (Tim Burton had a producer credit on the third film, but from what I remember at the time it was clear he wasn&#8217;t actively involved in the later films.) Either way, I don&#8217;t see the Christopher Nolan film as being a sequel to the films from a decade earlier. (If anything it was a prequel to those films, at least in terms of the internal timeline.) I&#8217;d call <i>Batman Begins</i> a new interpretation of common source material. (The same could be said of Bryan Singer&#8217;s recent <i>Superman</i> film.)</p>
<p>Films that are explicitly marketed as sequels, like the numerous horror episodes in the <i>Halloween</i> and <i>Friday the 13th</i> sagas, count as a single series in my book despite a huge turnover in actors and directors. The forthcoming <i>Hellboy 2</i> is part of a series, because the director and most of the cast are returning. The <i>Star Trek</i> films through to <i>Nemesis</i> were a single series, but the new one J J Abrams is working on isn&#8217;t part of that series because apart from a cameo appearance by Leonard Nimoy there&#8217;s no continuity of cast or creative team. The Tom Cruise <i>Mission: Impossible</i> films are a series because again the main stars and the producer (i.e. Cruise himself) are still on board.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Farber</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-67935</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Farber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:20:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2007/07/27/i-always-knew-some-day-youd-come-walking-back-through-my-door/#comment-67935</guid>
		<description>Define "film series."  For instance, does &lt;i&gt;Batman Begins&lt;/i&gt; count?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Define &#8220;film series.&#8221;  For instance, does <i>Batman Begins</i> count?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
