No one comedian has had more influence on my life than Bill Murray, both personally and professionally. I have seen many of the movies that Bill Murray starred in the 1980's, such as Caddyshack, Stripes and Ghostbusters, a minimum of 50 times apiece, probably a lot more. Much of the way I crack jokes, the way I move my face to emphasize something and even the way I walk can be traced back to the genius that is he, the fifth of the Murray children.
The films I mentioned above are known to Murrayphiles...
Ever consider posting spoiler alerts? Especially when the film won't be released for a week in 99% of the US?
nope
Rhetorical question. Since the lead-ins to the interviews read more like high school diary entries than something intended for a public audience, I doubt that he ever considered the courtesy of spoiler alerts.
Ever consider posting spoiler alerts? Especially when the film won't be released for a week in 99% of the US?
nope
Rhetorical question. Since the lead-ins to the interviews read more like high school diary entries than something intended for a public audience, I doubt that he ever considered the courtesy of spoiler alerts.
Keith said:
Doing a good interview isn't as easy as it seems, and Daniel does more interviews than just about anybody. Give him a break.
I don't understand this defense. "He's underqualified, but at least he's overextended" ???
No. I think just like everyone else, he has his strengths and weaknesses. He's a good interviewer, and extremely knowledgeable in his subject matter. However, he has always needed an editor. That doesn't make him a bad interviewer, though.
Jeez folks, not to minimize DRE's work, but it's a celebrity interview, not War & Peace. Calm down and enjoy it for what it is.
That said, I think it's a testament to Bill Murray's acting ability that he regularly works with great actors and always winds up being the best reason to watch.
I'm completely baffled by DRE. By which I mean I don't understand how he has managed to maintain a career as a writer, as an interviewer. His college-level-journalism and often directionless questions are as frustrating as his careless plot spoiling.
It's true that SG does not aspire, nor need, to be some bastion of literary or journalistic acclaim but as the list of SG interviewees continues to grow, and the names on that list become of increasing note, one would expect opportunity to be -well, wasted. Certainly this is only one person's opinion, my opinion, and certainly I've been wrong before and will be again. Perhaps it is, in fact, a testament to DRE's perceived abilities as interviewer and writer, and not simply the rising popularity of SG, that causes the list of names to grow and impress. Still, I can't help but feel as though a vast majority of SG's members could best DRE in interviewing the likes of Bill Murray, John Sayles, or Queen Latifa.
There's nothing wrong with raising the bar.
-m
[Edited on Dec 21, 2004 by tofu]
15
xk3zofrenik
San Juan, PR
November 2004
DEC 20, 2004 08:34 AM
Great interview. I liked how you asked about his different eras, and the question about the teachings from Del Close, that was awesome.
Any chance of getting Wes Anderson?
-X
I didn't read the fine print before, but DRE is AndersWollack. For further perspective on his integrity, check out how he went through the 'comments' history segment on my profile and posted what in my view are zottable insults in "reply" to my posts on 2 threads (i.e., "you're a homo" and "you're a judgemental prick"). Of course, being DRE, zotting was never in the cards...
tofu said:
I'm completely baffled by DRE. By which I mean I don't understand how he has managed to maintain a career as a writer, as an interviewer. His college-level-journalism, often directionless questions are as frustrating as his careless plot spoiling.
It’s true that SG does not aspire, nor need, to be some bastion of literary or journalistic acclaim but as list of SG interviewees continues to grow, and the names on that list become of increasing note, one would expect opportunity to be –well, wasted. Certain this is only one person’s opinion, my opinion, and certainly I’ve been wrong before and will be again. Perhaps it is, in fact, a testament to DRE’s perceived abilities as interviewer and writer, and not simply the rising popularity of SG, that causes the list of names to grow and to impress. Still, I can’t help but feel as though a vast majority of SG’s members could best DRE in interviewing the likes of Bill Murray, John Sayles, or Queen Latifa.
There’s nothing wrong with raising the bar.
-m
i am not defending myself
I will try to be mature about this.
many of these interviews are roundtables. i try to make it flow as much as possible.
i don't work with an editor, maybe i will in the future but at this point it's not happening.
tofu please feel free to set yourself or other members or SGs with interviews with everyone you mentioned, i'm not being facetitious. i would welcome other people to do stuff for SG.
I personally don't read celebrity interviews with if they are promoting a movie i want to see but havent yet. thats just me, i'm a bit OCD about that.
if anyone wants to post nasty things, please do it on the boards or in my journal, i think it would be better. but you dont have to, just a suggestion
Also I would defy anyone to pick five RANDOM people i've interviewed and find better FREE content on the internet. Magazines are a different story. when i say free i mean sites you don't have to sign up for or pay for.
hey anatomist1. why would saying those things you mentioned get anyone zotted? i just don't like you
"1. Do not, EVER, personally insult someone, even if they did it to you first. Attack ideas, not people. You can be removed from the community if you are observed doing this by a moderator. "
I am actually a bit skeptical about the naivite you appear to be displaying. Whether you like me or not is of little interest to anyone here, including me. If you have something substantive to say about something I've said, let's hear it. Otherwise, keep it to yourself or tell your friends about it, but don't publish it.
How you can think that hunting through someone's comment history and vandalizing threads they have visted with variations on "I don't like you" is a legitimate way for an adult to behave, much less a supposedly professional journalist, is frankly amazing to me.
anatomist1 said:
"1. Do not, EVER, personally insult someone, even if they did it to you first. Attack ideas, not people. You can be removed from the community if you are observed doing this by a moderator. "
I am actually a bit skeptical about the naivite you appear to be displaying. Whether you like me or not is of little interest to anyone here, including me. If you have something substantive to say about something I've said, let's hear it. Otherwise, keep it to yourself or tell your friends about it, but don't publish it.
How you can think that hunting through someone's comment history and vandalizing threads they have visted with variations on "I don't like you" is a legitimate way for an adult to behave, much less a supposedly professional journalist, is frankly amazing to me.
i apologize publicly for those immature posts.
i never claimed to be anything but me. i don't care about proving anything to you. i just don't like you
tofu said:
I'm completely baffled by DRE. By which I mean I don't understand how he has managed to maintain a career as a writer, as an interviewer. His college-level-journalism, often directionless questions are as frustrating as his careless plot spoiling.
It's true that SG does not aspire, nor need, to be some bastion of literary or journalistic acclaim but as list of SG interviewees continues to grow, and the names on that list become of increasing note, one would expect opportunity to be -well, wasted. Certain this is only one person's opinion, my opinion, and certainly I've been wrong before and will be again. Perhaps it is, in fact, a testament to DRE's perceived abilities as interviewer and writer, and not simply the rising popularity of SG, that causes the list of names to grow and to impress. Still, I can't help but feel as though a vast majority of SG's members could best DRE in interviewing the likes of Bill Murray, John Sayles, or Queen Latifa.
There's nothing wrong with raising the bar.
-m
One thing you're forgetting is that DRE gets these interviews for SG. By himself. I'm sure it's easier now that the site is higher profile, but there is [or was] no SG interview office. It's just DRE setting these things up himself. It's not easy. You try getting in touch with Bill Murray and getting him to agree to an interview for [what is perceived as] a goth porn site.
tofu said:
I'm completely baffled by DRE. By which I mean I don't understand how he has managed to maintain a career as a writer, as an interviewer. His college-level-journalism, often directionless questions are as frustrating as his careless plot spoiling.
It’s true that SG does not aspire, nor need, to be some bastion of literary or journalistic acclaim but as list of SG interviewees continues to grow, and the names on that list become of increasing note, one would expect opportunity to be –well, wasted. Certain this is only one person’s opinion, my opinion, and certainly I’ve been wrong before and will be again. Perhaps it is, in fact, a testament to DRE’s perceived abilities as interviewer and writer, and not simply the rising popularity of SG, that causes the list of names to grow and to impress. Still, I can’t help but feel as though a vast majority of SG’s members could best DRE in interviewing the likes of Bill Murray, John Sayles, or Queen Latifa.
There’s nothing wrong with raising the bar.
-m
One thing you're forgetting is that DRE gets these interviews for SG. By himself. I'm sure it's easier now that the site is higher profile, but there is [or was] no SG interview office. It's just DRE setting these things up himself. It's not easy. You try getting in touch with Bill Murray and getting him to agree to an interview for [what is perceived as] a goth porn site.
IPOD
RADIO
Missy
SUICIDEGIRL
California, USA
DEC 20, 2004 06:00 AM