You must set the ad_network_ads.txt file to be writable (check file name as well).
mash vs mash [Archive] - RonFez.net Messageboard

PDA

View Full Version : mash vs mash


patsopinion
03-05-2008, 04:28 PM
mash the tv show
vs
mash the movie


im going with tv
theres something very stoner about the editing in the movie that feels very disjointed and not concise. And i appreciate altman's hatred towards recording audio in studio after the movie(never is as cool as original audio) but the levels were all off and he admitted later that it would have been better to have multiple mics so he could level instead of capturing all audio from one source

tv was better

cougarjake13
03-05-2008, 04:45 PM
they made a movie ???

PapaBear
03-05-2008, 04:48 PM
They're almost completely different creatures. I can't pick one over the other. The main thing the series has going against it is that the last few years kinda sucked balls.

Sinestro
03-05-2008, 04:49 PM
they made a movie ???

Yeah and they showed titties I think.

cougarjake13
03-05-2008, 05:35 PM
Yeah and they showed titties I think.

damn i think i'll need to find it on thee innerwebs

Snoogans
03-05-2008, 05:37 PM
where is the all kinds of MASH sucks balls choice?

Mike Teacher
03-05-2008, 05:54 PM
they made a movie ???

Rhetorical or not i'll answer; ya

with Donald Sutherland and Elliot Gould as Hawkeye and Trapper John and improbably, Robert Duvall as Frank Burns.

As to the editing; quick cuts are almost a 70s cliche; like the freeze-cut or the freeze-wipe.

Maybe it hasnt aged well [70s movies look like, well 70s movies...] The movie was wonderfully un-PC, with a black dude called 'Spearchucker Jones' and the tone was what the original intent; surgeons who had no desire to be in the military/war dealing with the absurdity and insanity of the carnage of war by absurdity and insanity of their own. The movie was very dark; a different beast.

epo
03-05-2008, 06:20 PM
Would you say that MASH the movie compared to MASH the TV show is the perfect example of Marshall McLuhan's "Hot vs. Cool".

The Hot media takes chances, is bold and daring. MASH the movie is that in a nutshell.

The Cool media takes few chances and takes few chances. MASH the tv show is that in a nutshell.

El Mudo
03-05-2008, 06:31 PM
Rhetorical or not i'll answer; ya

with Donald Sutherland and Elliot Gould as Hawkeye and Trapper John and improbably, Robert Duvall as Frank Burns.

As to the editing; quick cuts are almost a 70s cliche; like the freeze-cut or the freeze-wipe.

Maybe it hasnt aged well [70s movies look like, well 70s movies...] The movie was wonderfully un-PC, with a black dude called 'Spearchucker Jones' and the tone was what the original intent; surgeons who had no desire to be in the military/war dealing with the absurdity and insanity of the carnage of war by absurdity and insanity of their own. The movie was very dark; a different beast.

Well they called him spearchucker cause he used to throw the Javelin in college :tongue:


That movie was so edgy for its time...it attacked all sorts of authority figures from those in the church (Duvall's hypocritical character, plus the "black capsule scene which was made to look like the last supper), and the army (the overzealous colonel in the new age hospital and whorehouse)

I loved the story of how they filmed it...they basically hid on a backlot while Fox was filiming Patton and turned it in early and waayyyyy underbudget so no one would know what kind of film they were making. There's also the story of how Elliott Gould and Donald Sutherland both went to their agents trying to get Altman fired cause they thought was nuts


Overall though, MASH the movie OWNS MASH the tv show....its no contest

mikeyboy
03-05-2008, 06:34 PM
I still love M*A*S*H the movie, warts and all.

M*A*S*H the TV show hasn't aged very well for me at all, and even looking at it in the best light, once Trapper John and Col. Blake left, it started to go downhill.

Hottub
03-05-2008, 06:34 PM
I'll go with M*A*S*H, the book first. The movie was a fair take on the novel.
The series started out more or less on course, but was diverted into something completely different. Not saying good or bad. Some of the later characters and story lines were ground-breaking.

PapaBear
03-05-2008, 06:35 PM
The Spearchucker character was actually in the series, too. But I think it was only a few episodes.

KC2OSO
03-05-2008, 06:45 PM
Agree - to different animals.
The TV show had some catchy writing in the early years. Any episode where BJ is wearing a pink shirt is a dead giveaway for suck.

Reephdweller
03-05-2008, 08:12 PM
The Spearchucker character was actually in the series, too. But I think it was only a few episodes.


That is correct, he was in six episodes in the first season and that was it.

http://imdb.com/character/ch0009471/


There was also another character named Ugly John who was also short lived on the show.

Tall_James
03-05-2008, 08:15 PM
Frank Burns Eats Worms.

KC2OSO
03-05-2008, 08:18 PM
Frank Burns Eats Worms.
Stink Fish Pot!