1 comments about The Rainbow of Desire: The Boal Method of Theatre and Therapy.

1. If you enjoy theatre theories, The Rainbow of Desire is a mentally stimulating read. If you believe that theatre has the power to change lives, it is an inspiration. As a young actor/director myself working in educational theatre, Boal's techniques are an exciting departure from standard improv "games," though not having read Boal's previous books made some of the activities described sound a bit confusing. Currently I am in the process of applying these ideas in the creation of an outreach piece, ask me in a few weeks how well it worked.

1 comments about Entertainment 101: An Industry Primer.

1. The book taught me a lot about the fascinating entertainment industry. I reccommend it to experts and novices.

5 comments about Capoeira: A Brazilian Art Form: History, Philosophy, and Practice.

1. Amazing book, absolutely amazing. It is not for the person wanting to learn how to do capoeira, but for anyone, beginner or master, who wants to read a great history and personal journey.
   It even travels into the spiritual, deeper significance of capoeira.
   GREAT BOOK.



2. This book is just an "okay" introductory text on capoeira. A major draw back is the centeral focus on capoeira regional, a better text would be "Ring of Liberation" because it more comprehensivly covers capoeira.



3. Mestre Acordeon's book has long been praised for its clear writing, for his thoughtful coverage of the history, philosophy, and artistic traditions surrounding this art-form. Other reviewers (see below) have noted that the book was among the first in English to introduce readers to these aspects of Capoeira, while also offering a glimpse into this one mestre's personal and life-long journey. Having assigned his book to students (both graduate and undergraduate alike), I have had ample opportunity to hear students' glowing reviews: most of these students had never heard of Capoeira, nor even seen it played, before having read his work. In retrospect, they (and I, too) consider this book an excellent way to delve into the topic. While there's recently been a flurry of new scholarship on Capoeira (at least 3 books in English have come out in 2005) that matches Capoeira's growing influence around the globe, Acordeon's book remains one of the best places to start one's exploration. Axe ASCAB!



4. Mestre Acordeon takes you on a journey through capoeira, sharing his experiences and inviting the reader to use his imagination.
   A truely inspirational piece from a truely inspirational master.



5. The book Capoeira: A Brazilian Art Form was not only well-written but was interesting as well. This book educates you about the history of capoeira, capoeira practitioners, and even a short summary of how Mestre Acordeon was introduced to the art of capoeira. I would highly reccomend this book to capoeiristas, as it was very helpful to me. Axé.

5 comments about Stones in His Pockets: A Play by Marie Jones with an Introduction by Mel Gussow.

1. I laughed, I cried, I covered my ears. This is such a classic piece of Irish-ness! The storyline is fanciful (unless YOU regularly have Hollywood crews arrive in your little town) but the underlying truths are not. When we saw this play performed in London, two actors played all the parts, which just added to the poignancy and hilarity. Drunks, dreamers and the depressed are all part of the Irish national psyche, and "Stones" hits on all these. This little gem of a story deserves wider acclaim.



2. This is a wonderful play, but unless you have a prodigious imagination, reading it won't be nearly as enjoyable as seeing it performed. 'Tis no small feat to move this one from the page to the stage.
   
   Plenty of laughs to earn the "comedy" label, but it wouldn't be Oirish if it was nothing but funny.



3. Reading the book was like seeing this marvelous play again. An absolute treat in every sense of the word. I now want to see the play again and experience things I didn't grasp when I first saw it. I'm going to wear the book out reading it and re-reading it. A very special book indeed.



4. This is an Irish play calling for two actors to play multiple parts. The main characters, Charlie and Jake are extras for an American film in County Kerry to shoot Quiet Valley, a rural Irish romance. In the course of the play the two actors are also Production Assistants, other extras, a couple local kids, the film's famous lead actress, and other characters. As an acting piece this would be both awe-enducing in it's complexity and thrilling in it's shifting of tone and character. The skill to perform this piece demands well worked out, detailed individualized characters. All the demands of an actor in a solo piece are here, only for two.
   
   The play itself is frequently funny, marked by a swift pace, moving toward a hopeful and unforeseen ending. I enjoyed very much the possibility of seeing or being in Stones in His Pockets, as the movement from scene to scene is immediate, and the development of relationships tight-igniting my imagination. There is also much said thematically, about Hollywood hypocrisy (i.e., authentic dialects vs. being able to understand) and inspiration, small town dreams, and "the whole disintegration of rural Ireland." This quote is from Mel Gussow in the Introduction.
   
   I would suggest reading the intro after the play, as the spirit of Stones in His Pockets is best kept to the text of the play itself. The intro is informative though. I would love to see this performed.



5. A small farming village in County Kerry, Ireland, where a new Hollywood film is being shot, serves as the setting for this hilarious and affecting comedy. Many of the local residents are working as extras for "forty smackaronies a day," including Charlie Conlon and Jake Quinn, both in their mid-thirties, through whose eyes we observe the lives of the real residents of Kerry, a world dramatically different from what is being recorded on film. For the director and crew of the film and for Caroline Giovanni, the American star, the daily takes and on-set activity are, unfortunately, the only reality. When Sean Harkin, a dream-filled, 17-year-old local boy with crushed hopes, is humiliated by the film crew, and, depressed, puts stones in his pockets and drowns himself, this wry and exuberant social commentary tackles important themes and achieves a universality and significance that are rare in comedy.
   
   Winner of the Olivier Award in 2000, this play by Marie Jones features fourteen characters played by two actors, whose role changes occur instantaneously. These include, among others, the roles of the film's star, Caroline Giovanni; Mickey Riordan, a 70-year-old local man whose only claim to fame is that he was an extra in The Quiet Man; Clem, a British Director; Jock Campbell, a Scottish security man; and Dave, a Cockney crew member. Requiring a variety of accents and quick-change artistry, this is a daunting play for all but the most ambitious director and most versatile of actors. The two actors reflect moods that range from satiric amusement at the silliness of the film industry to righteous anger at the insensitivity of the film crew, from poignant understanding of Sean's dreams to the guilt-filled helplessness of the friend who witnessed Sean's death, and from Charlie's hopeless cynicism about the possibilities of getting his own script produced to Jake's infectious optimism about "taking on the real world."
   
   As the village and the film crew come together at Sean's wake and funeral, the themes of real life vs. reel life, the importance of dreams and need to keep working for them, and the acknowledgment that genuine respect must underlie meaningful human relationships permeate the play but never intrude. This is a comedy, after all, and as Jake and Charlie come to new recognitions about themselves and think about their future lives, the audience is there with them, rooting for their success. Mary Whipple

4 comments about The Distance from Here.

1. This is a work that John Lahr (theater reviewer for The New Yorker) suggested be placed on the short list of important contemporary plays. I have to agree. It is the type of play that can and should be read again and again, each reading revealing some new aspect of story, some deeper layer of meaning, and some subtle nuance of character.
   
   The prime movers of the story are Darrell and Tim, two teenagers on the precipice of, well, falling off of it and into a void of mindless jobs, empty relationships, and violence and alcohol infused escapism. It's almost as if they see the world passing them by, but lack the desire or energy to try to keep up. But what kind of a world is it anyway? One of manufactured sensation, numbing repetition, and greeting card emotional relationships. The plot revolves around Darrell's growing belief that his girlfriend Jenn has betrayed and lied to him. His eventual response to the perceived betrayal is misguided and shocking, and will stay with you long after you've finished reading.
   
   What LaBute has managed so brilliantly is tell an intricate story with characters who are essentially inarticulate. Between the um's and whatever's he creates an America we fear is out there, perhaps even glimpse from time to time, but quickly put out of our minds. "The Distance From Here" shows us it may not be as far away as we think.



2. This is an incredible play. In this play Labute writes about the type of situations that you'd see on Jerry Springer, so this is a kind of "Labute does Jerry Springer." I may be an oddity, but I like Springer. I also like Labute, so this is a great play for the likes of me.
   
   This play isn't for everyone, but if you've ever read Labute, then you know that nothing he writes is for everyone. It probably borders on being his darkest play, with frequent use of the f, c, and n words, and has a bunch of other racial slurs in it.
   
   I've kind of been wondering about what kind of a person Labute is. Is he a kind of Stephen King-type person who writes well, but is really a weirdo, or what? In the book, Labute writes a two-page introduction that contains such humanity, care for people, and emotion, that it answered this question for me--he's is very human, but is extremely observational about the dark side of life.
   
   This is one of my top two Labute plays. Excellent job.



3. I have not seen this play performed, only read it, and what I read was excellent. Fans of Neil Labute's work will be pleased to see that he has branched out to a new demographic, straying from the upper-middle class business-man type that so commonly (although not regrettably) populate his plays and stories.
   
   Instead what we have is the story of a group of lower-class friends and family - although I hate the term, "white-trash" does come to mind. However Mr. labute does not treat them as such. Rather he presents them as down-on-their-luck folk that have simply been delt a rotten hand in life and who know in spite of their hopes that their is no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Hell, there's not even a rainbow.
   
   The story revolves around a kid named Darrel, his friends Tim and Jenn, and his family which consists of an apathetic mother, a tough-guy of a step father and a naive older-step sister. Labute focuses on the influence of family and friends and the hierarchy of the lower class - with the person who is the least affected by inevitable physical and emotional abuse ruling over them all.
   
   I myself did not grow up in a house with these people, these kinds of people, but I did know them well through school and friends. Neil Labute has captured a small, and almost completely unrecorded demographic of the american subculture and should be praised for his accuracy, honesty and unblinking earnestness in the telling of their story. Don't expect to enjoy this as you would a regular play. Chances are that most people will probably set this book down with the sense that they have just witnessed something gross and disturbing. And indeed they have. But you will be a better person because of it. This, folks, is why we read.



4. Alright. Here we go. Let me first start by saying, I LOVE Neil LaBute and his writing. He's hard, gritty, and exposes all that deep, personal stuff that our bottled up society tries so desperatly to hide. I, myself, have become inspired many times to write my own works after reading his shows. I would consider him, as well do many of my colleges, to be one of the greatest examples of a contemporary theatre playwright.
   
   But he kinda missed the boat with this one.
   
   Sure, it was a good idea. But just because it was a good idea doesn't mean it goes anywhere. Much like this play. It goes nowhere. In fact, it never starts. It's just kinda like that dumb horse that forgets to run after the gun is fired. We just see some characters enter, talk about pointless stuff, and they leave. It really doesn't pick up until the last few chapters, but even then it isn't satisfying enough to make up for the whole other eighty something pages you had to dredge through just to get to that point.
   
   And maybe that's what he wanted. Nothing characters with no depth and a serious lack of direction, making their distance from there, quite a long and arduous task, especially for characters of their caliber, or lack of it. The mere thought of any sort of positive advancement in their lives would cause any one of them to either give up a go drink a 40 or send them into a depression so deep that suicide is the only comfort. So those characters sit there, twiddling their thumbs, waiting in their static lives for something to come along a give them a Second of Pleasure (read that one, it's great!). Shoot, I bet if someone were to burp it would give them the most action they'd ever seen.
   
   So, once again, I'm sorry Neil LaBute, but this one just wasn't your best work. I, being a young playwright myself, have turned a lot of bad work. And some good stuff too. Much like a lot of his other works.
   
   I would highly recommend The Shape of Things (my personal favorite), The Mercy Seat, Seconds of Pleasure, and Bash. All are amazing testaments to the shining and shocking brilliance that is Neil LaBute.

5 comments about The Best Broadway Songs Ever (The Best Ever Series).

1. Well I ordered the book thinking that I was getting a real song book. The look inside link showed full piano accompaniment in a real musical format. The book that I received was a simplified songbook, it was only one line of notes. So make sure that very simplified is what you are looking for.



2. As a vocal performer on broadway i find this book absolutely appauling.The notes are so distorted that it is basically a different song entirely than the composer intended. I have worked broadway since 1986 { untill i went to work for disney in 1989} and i must say this book is insulting to the musicals that they are loosely based upon. Please do not be offended as this is MY opinion of this music book and others may feel differently
   sincerly,
   Jodi Benson



3. Just what I thought that it would be...Thanks for shipping it so quickly!



4. 3 times I have tried to buy the EASY PIANO version of this book and 3 times I was sent the paino-guitar-vocal version. I give up. I am done with Amazon.



5. Deffinetly not the best broadway songs ever..............i got this book because I'm a musical fanatic and play both keyboard and guitar, but the music in here was really diffecult and the songs werent that great. When you have over 50 musical soundtracks in you collection and have seen even more done in production, but still dont know some of the songs or musicals in the book you can tell its out dated. I liked the Big Book of Broadway a lot better

3 comments about Block Building for Children: Making Buildings of the World with the Ultimate Construction Toy.

1. Great book for all aspects of block building from the beginner to the advanced. My son is almost 4, wish I would have got it a couple years ago.



2. Genuine hardwood unit blocks are THE best toy for children. I have a fairly large set of them and my children, who range in age from 2-8, all sit down together (and separately) and play with them. The blocks become horse stables, airports, buildings, hotels, doll houses, highways, you name it!! And when other children come to our home, the blocks are invariably the first thing pulled out and played with.
   
   In general, I've held that open-ended toys like blocks should be open ended, that kids should be encouraged to make their own creations, not carefully recreate someone else's construction.
   
   I make an exception for Lester Walker's exceptional book. Some of his buildings are so realistic - his cathedral, roman temple, and skyscraper, for example. It is so interesting to see how he takes the basic block shapes to make such complex looking structures.
   
   Other projects in the book invite hours of play, such as his shopping mall, airport, and boat dock.
   
   I highly, highly recommend this book.



3. This is the best book on the topic of block building that I have ever seen. Black and white photographs of the beginnings and completions of interesting structures are shown, as well as carefully drawn plans for building each structure. While recommended for older children on this site, I highly recommend that it be included near every block corner in kindergarten classes. The children are able to visualize, then extend the ideas contained in the book, and have become much better block builders as a result. One very positive thing is that the book tends to attract girls to the block building area, where they carefully study the plans and cooperate to try to reproduce the structure. Since block building is known to nurture spatial sense, an important math skill, anything that encourages girls to participate in block building is highly recommended. (By the way, boys love it too!)

5 comments about The Devil And Daniel Webster.

1. This book was not what I wanted or expected. I was looking for the short story. What I got was a play.
   What I was looking for was a small booklet with just one or 2 short stories in it including "The Devil and Daniel Webster. I did not want a huge book as I was just going to use the one Benet story in my class. I returned all the copies I purchased and was satisified with the quick action taken. The next time I am looking for something I will check with Amazon again.



2. This lightweight (literally, if not figuratively) story of the hapless farmer Jabez Stone, of Cross Corners, New Hampshire, and his rescue from a cavalier deal with the devil by Daniel Webster is an entertaining, patriotic lark. Although Webster was a lawyer, the narrator tells us, and the "the biggest man...next to God...He never got to be President." Published in 1937, and with a homespun Twain-like love of freedom and the wry vigilance which watches over it, Stephen Vincent Benet's entertaining lark, set "in the border country, where Massachusetts joins Vermont and New Hampshire" is patriotic without being jingoistic or nationalistic. At the end, after the narrator informs us that devil keeps clear of Marshfield and hasn't been seen in New Hampshire he concludes: "I'm not talking about Massachusetts or Vermont."



3. A young nation, built on reason and skepticism, America doesn't have a whole lot of myths and legends. With the possible exception of Parson Weem's tales of
   young George Washington, the stories of Washington Irving, and a few tall tales like Paul Bunyan, Pecos Bill, and John Henry, the best might be found in Stephen
   Vincent Benet's Faust-influenced but distinctly American short story and screenplay, The Devil and Daniel Webster, which has also been adapted for the stage and
   turned into an opera.

   Jabez Stone of Cross Corners, New Hampshire is a man of little luck, until, with his wife and children ill and a whitlow on his own thumb, he barks :

   I vow it's enough to make a man want to sell his soul to the devill And I would, too, for two cents!

   With that, a stranger appears and Jabez makes a deal, signing it in blood, which changes his luck drastically.

   Over the next ten years, Stone prospers, becoming wealthy and an important man in politics. But with his mortgage to the stranger coming due, Jabez Stone regrets
   the deal he's made and pays a visit to his neighbor, Daniel Webster, of Mansfield, NH--the nation's greatest lawyer and New England's most revered citizen--to see
   if Mr. Webster will take him on as a client and see if there's not some way out of the deal. A lesser man might balk at the prospect of such a fight, but Daniel
   Webster has a special regard for his constituents and cheerfully assures Jabez that they'll prevail :

   For if two New Hampshiremen aren't a match for the devil, we might as well give the country back to the Indians.

   Webster's first ploy is to challenge the stranger's right to prey upon Americans :

   'Mr. Stone is an American citizen, and no American citizen may be forced into the service of a foreign prince. We fought England for that
   in ë12 and weíll fight all hell for it again!'

   'Foreign?' said the stranger. 'And who calls me a foreigner?'

   'Well, I never yet heard of the dev -- of your claiming American citizenship,' said Dan'l Webster with surprise.

   'And who with better right?' said the stranger, with one of his terrible smiles. 'When the first wrong was done to the first Indian, I was there.
   When the first slaver put out for the Congo, I stood on her deck. Am I not in your books and stories and beliefs, from the first settlements on?
   Am I not spoken of, still, in every church in New England? 'Tis true the North claims me for a Southerner, and the South for a Northerner,
   but I am neither. I am merely an honest American like yourself--and of the best descent--for, to tell the truth, Mr. Webster,
   though I don't like to boast of it, my name is older in this country than yours.'

   This prompts Webster to recourse to Stone's rights as an American :

   'Aha!' said Dan'l Webster, with the veins standing out in his forehead. 'Then I stand on the Constitution! I demand a trial for my client!'

   'The case is hardly one for an ordinary court,' said the stranger, his eyes flickering. 'And, indeed, the lateness of the hour-'

   'Let it be any court you choose, so it is an American judge and an American jury!' said Dan'l Webster in his pride.
   'Let it be the quick or the dead; I'll abide the issue!'

   And so begins a trial, presided over by Justice Hathorne, who likewise oversaw the Salem Witch Trials, with a jury made up of the likes of Walter Butler, Simon
   Girty, King Philip, Reverend John Smeet, and Morton of Merry Mount. Inevitably, even these dastards are swayed by the rhetorical power of Daniel Webster and
   Jabez is released from his contract. The stranger good-naturedly conceding :

   'Perhaps 'tis not strictly in accordance with the evidence,' he said, 'but even the damned may salute the eloquence of Mr. Webster.'

   Despite this graciousness, Daniel Webster grabs and threatens him, but then relents to his pleading. In exchange for being let go, the stranger predicts Webster's
   future for him. The stranger well knows of Webster's desire to be president one day and of his pride in his speaking ability. He warns that the dream will never come
   true and, perversely, the ambition will be thwarted by Webster's own talent :

   '[T]he last great speech you make will turn many of your own against you,' said the stranger. 'They will call you Ichabod; they will call you
   by other names. Even in New England some will say you have turned your coat and sold your country, and their voices will be loud against
   you till you die.'

   Webster takes the news surpassing well and in turn receives an assurance :

   'So it is an honest speech, it does not matter what men say,' said Dan'l Webster. Then he looked at the stranger and their glances locked.

   'One question,' he said. 'I have fought for the Union all my life. Will I see that fight won against those who would tear it apart?'

   'Not while you live,' said the stranger, grimly, 'but it will be won. And after you are dead, there are thousands who will fight for your cause,
   because of words that you spoke."

   'Why, then, you long-barreled, slab-sided, lantern-jawed, fortune-telling note shaver!' said Dan'l Webster, with a great roar of laughter,
   'be off with you to your own place before I put my mark on you! For, by the thirteen original colonies, I'd go to the Pit itself to save the Union!'

   Sure enough, Webster's great speech in favor of the Missouri Compromise in 1850 would ensure its passage but with its provision for admitting a new slave state to
   the Union would make him anathema to hardcore abolitionists and doom his presidential hopes.

   Benet helped adapt this story for the screen and it made for one of the really underrated great American films. With sterling performances by Edward Arnold as
   Webster and Walter Huston as the stranger, here called Mr. Scratch, the middle portion of the story, detailing Jabez Stone's rising fortunes and declining character,
   is greatly expanded. This is problematic because James Craig as Jabez is pretty nondescript, but Jane Darwell as his mother and Simone Simon as a sultry vixen who
   becomes the Stone's housemaid help to carry us through until the trial starts.

   One interesting aspect of Benet's tale is his refusal to let his countrymen off the hook; the Devil is obviously integral to the American experience and though Webster
   matches the Devil in the end, he too hears the siren call of Mr. Scratch. In the end though Webster is redeemed by his all consuming love of the nation :

   And they say that if you go to his grave and speak loud and clear, 'Dan'l Webster--Dan'l Webster!' the ground'll begin to shiver and the trees
   begin to shake. And after a while you'll hear a deep voice saying. 'Neighbor, how stands the Union?' Then you better answer the Union stands
   as she stood, rock-bottomed and copper-sheathed, one and indivisible, or he's liable to rear right out of the ground.

   What a worthy legend for America and for one of the greatest of her citizens.

   GRADE : A




4. Daniel Webster might be a Yankee New Englander, a politician and peddlar. This fictious short story by Stephen Benet utilizes a great American statesmen in a great legal case, albeit a fictious one. I first read this in the 8th grade for a book report. It stands out as an entertaining classic of American literature. I also recommend books by James Fennimore Cooper.



5. This book is incredibly hard to find---Amazon was, as, usual, the only place that had it for me. I was dying to read the story that sparked the movie, "Seven Brides for Seven Brothers." About seven mountain men who go down to town to git themselves thar brides! I really enjoyed Benet's style; I was completely unfamiliar with his writing previously. I also read "The Devil and Daniel Webster," included, which seems to be the most popular of his writings. It was a good tale. Interesting author, interesting writings. I'm donating my copy to the library; their Benet listings are sadly lacking! Everyone needs a little "backwoodsman" in their lives!

2 comments about The Clown Ministry Handbook.

1. Arguably, The book on clown ministry. An excellent resource on gospel clowning (it's not focusing intently on creating make-up or other "clown" activities, but rather how the clown becomes a gospel clown). An excellent resource with several skits as well as interviews with several gospel clowns across the country.



2. This book begins with the history of Christian clowning, taking you back to the Roman Empire, then brings you forward to today. Interviews and profiles with Floyd Shaffer and other "greats". Several interesting and useful skits in the end. A great investment

5 comments about Natural Born Killers: The Original Screenplay.

1. I've always wondered why people read plays but not movie scripts, and after reading "Natural Born Killers," I wonder that even more.
   This is a great script for a movie that could have been excellent if Quentin Tarantino, the script's author, had directed the movie himself. I don't know WHAT Oliver Stone was trying to do.
   The script, in case you don't know, is the story of a husband and wife with an insane past that go on a love-fuelled, almost invincible killing rampage across the country. Their crimes are senseless and random, and the media (and the public) LOVES them. It's the bizarre story of their killing sprees, their romance, their capture, and their escape, and...well, I don't want to give too much away.
   The script follows an incredibly cool format, of being mostly an hour-long TV special about the two killers, intertwined with the people making the TV special and interviewing the killers themselves, intertwined with flashbacks.
   It could have been an amazing movie, but instead we got a weird, cartoonish mess that exudes barely any of the well-developed themes, tight action, and believable characters (individuals and mobs) that Quentin Tarantino actually wrote.
   Read the script, and skip the movie--that's what I say. Read the script, and hope that maybe someday Tarantino will remake the movie himself, the right way, the way it should have been.



2. There are people who seem to either enjoy Stone's movie and hate Quentin's screenplay or vice versa. Fact is I enjoyed both. Quentin Tarantino's original screenplay for "Natural Born Killers" is far different from the nightmarish acid trap that it became once Oliver Stone got his hands on it. Stone's film is far more epic and sadistic though Quentin's version isn't exactly a day at Disney World either. Much of Quentin's work is used in the film version though the way the story is told is so completely different than it was clearly conceived. The opening diner sequence is nearly the exact same as presented in the film though this is really the only one of Mickey and Mallory's murder spree sequences that Quentin intended to include (aside from the court room murder which was "deleted" from Stone's cut). Following that, the script takes a much different approach with it being told almost entirely in a documentary style with Wayne Gale (played in the film by Robert Downey) acting as the central character. Jack Scagnetti, who was a sadistic crooked cop in Stone's "NBK", is far less brutal in this one and is not positioned as a longtime rival of the murderous couple but more as a veteran cop being sold into hauling the two killers to the asylum. While the character of Dewight McClusky (played by Tommy Lee Jones in the movie) was a character in this script as well, his role is decreased and most of his action was written for a character named Wurlitzer, who didn't make Stone's version. The majority of the first half of the filmed "Killers" was not a part of the original Tarantino story and most of the social commentary was also absent. If you're a Tarantino fan or someone who would like a different take on the "NBK" story, this is an intruiging read.



3. I rented the movie directed by Oliver Stone due to the fact that Quentin Tarantino's name was on the story credits and I knew that Oliver Stone among others had messed with his script and Tarantino had removed his name from the screenwriting credits but I wanted to see it anyways.I thought the movie sucked,I hated it.So I bought the original script to see how the movie could've been and this is a great script.There's no mention of how the cinematography should look.There's no sexually abusive sitcom father,nor indian guy.This is how the film should have been.The movie is virtually just a big TV special by Wayne Gale who was played in the movie by Robert Downey Jr. The story is amazingly different.The opening scene is the same though.The story is basically Mickey and Mallory Knox in jail while Mickey is being interviewed by Wayne Gale.That's it.Buy this script.Burn the movie.Enjoy



4. A man who has not lived a life cannot tell a real story. Tarentino's films are universally and fundamentally boring for anyone who has ever lived a real life and not just fantasized about having one. His dipictions of violence eminate from his own personal lack of sexual energy. Sadly, teenage males without girlfriends seem to like these slammed together video games that are being called brilliant, and continue to support the trash factory that generates this type of hyper garbage. It's especially sad when a true film afficienado understands the brilliance of all of the original pictures which he doggedly ripped off and claimed the scenes for his own. If one more person calls this sad, pathetic, lack of a man a genious, I will become even more sick of him. Please get a life and buy a real movie.



5. This is, quite frankly, one of the most boring scripts I have ever read. The only reason I finished it was that I was such a huge fan of the movie. It is vastly inferior to Oliver Stone's version of the film, and far from portraying the charatcters as "monsters," it portrays them as two-dimensional cartoons. There is no development for any of these characters, and there is no reason given that Mickey and Mallory would even care about each other. Their relationship isn't even really hinted at. One of the truly great things about Stone's film was the way that Mickey and Mallory were portrayed in the middle, from when they actually were married to when they were finally arrested, especially in the scene with the Indian. Tarantino's script lacks any subtlety, contrary to what another reviewer stated. What Oliver Stone created from this script was a mesmerizing film about thhe allure and addiction to violence in our culture. What Tarantino envisioned was a juvenile mishmash of unappealing characters without even a reason to exist. (What the Hell was the point of Wayne Gale's assistant having no tongue?) Anyway, I hope that Tarantino continues to move on from this very amateur script, and never tries to make his own version, as I'm sure he won't. I hope he at least realizes that this script was NOT that good.