BlackChampagne.com -- No longer new; improvement also in question.

BlackChampagne Home Buy Crap! I get 5%. Direct donations to cover hosting expenses are also accepted. Site Information --What is Black Champagne? --Cast of Characters & Things --Your First Time. --Design Notes --Quote of the Day Archive --Phrase of the Moment Archive --Site Feedback --Contact/Copyright Info Blog Archives --Blogger Archives: June 2005- --Old Monthly Archives: Jan 2002-May 2005 Reviews Section Movie Reviews (153) Ten Most Recent Film Reviews: --Infernal Affairs -- 5.5 --The Protector/Tom Yum Goong -- 6 --The Limey -- 8 --The Descent -- 6 --Oldboy -- 9.5 --Shaolin Deadly Kicks -- 7 --Mission Impossible III -- 7.5 --V for Vendetta -- 8.5 --Ghost in the Shell 2 -- 8 --Night Watch -- 7.5 Book Reviews (76) Five Most Recent Book Reviews: --Cat People -- 4 --Attack Poodles -- 5 --Caught Stealing -- 6 --The Dirt, by Motley Crue -- 7.5 --Harry Potter #6 -- 7 Photos Section --Flux Photos --Pet Photos (7 pages) --Home Decor Photos --Plant Photos --Vacation Photos (12 pages) Articles See all 234 articles here. Fiction Original horror and fantasy short stories. Mail Bags Index Page Features --Links --Slang: Internet --Slang: Dirty --Slang: Wankisms --Slang: Sex Acts --Slang: Fulldeckisms --Hot or Not? --Truths in Advertising Band Name Ratings (350 Rock Bands Listed) FAQ -- Feedback A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- Q -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W -- X -- Y -- Z Hellgate: London --The Unofficial HGL Site --The Hellgate Wiki Diablo II --The Unofficial Site --Flux's Decahedron --Middle Earth Mod
	BlackChampagne -- no longer new; improvement also in question.: Congrats to Ebert Friday, June 24, 2005 Congrats to Ebert Maybe I should do a semi-daily links post, with quick pointers to all of the interesting articles I've seen, rather than not posting anything about most of them, and posting too much about the few I do post about? Anyway, congrats to the best film critic in America, Roger Ebert, who just got his own star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. I made fun of it recently when they gave one to DJ and variety show host Ryan Seacrest, but having one is still a mark of distinction, and Ebert certainly deserves his. And given that there are 2287 other stars there, it's pretty clear that quite a few people do not. HOLLYWOOD -- For four decades, Roger Ebert's reviews have turned countless actors and filmmakers into stars. On Thursday, Hollywood returned the favor -- dedicating the 2,288th star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame to the Chicago Sun-Times' legendary film critic. The occasion also marked another "first'' for Ebert, the nation's first Pulitzer Prize-winning film critic. According to the event's major-domo, Johnny Grant (known as the honorary "mayor of Hollywood"), Ebert's star is the first ever given to a critic. "There are plenty of others out here with stars who have been criticized, but Roger's our first official critic," quipped Grant, joking that in the future, movie fans will now have the chance "to walk all over Roger" if they disagree with one of his reviews. ... "When we are born, we are placed into a specific box, in a certain space and time," Ebert said. In his opinion, film is the one art form that most easily enables people to escape their own reality, "imagining what it is to live somebody else's life -- to be a different gender, live in a different time, to live in a different economic class. "It is a truly liberalizing experience and makes people broader-minded as film makes it possible for them not to be just stuck being [themselves] day after day." That being said, what's up with giving, like, every single movie a 3-star score lately? Okay, not every movie, but it seems like he's getting more generous by the year, and being too understanding by scoring every film as it would be received by its target audience. It's okay, Roger, condemn some stuff for sucking. I loved his 1-star review of The Perfect Man, and didn't even bother to read several of his recent 3-star reviews of films I had no interest in. His The Longest Yard review, 3-star of course, was an interesting read though, just for the way he talked himself out of, and then back into, giving it that score. Even though, with reflection, he realized said rating was wildly too high for the latest piece of shit someone scraped off of Adam Sandler's poseur boot. Posted by: Flux # 2:15 AM Comments: How come there are over 2000 stars? Are they all in a straight line down one street, or do they go around the block or what? I thought there were only like 50-100 of them and it was really prestigeous to get one. But 2000? I bet you'd have a lot of trouble trying to name even 100 stars/directors that are alive today, yet alone 2000, and conceivably all of the ones you do name could potentially have a star down there. Although obviously the stars have been going for years and lots of dead people have them, but it's still a rediculous number. #: 1:05 PM posted by Anonymous I blogged about that a bit back on April 22nd. To quote from an article I quoted then: "The requirements to get a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame are simple: You've got to accumulate a body of achievement over a period of some longevity (described, generously, as at least five years) with at least some measurable contribution to the community. Throw in a $15,000 nomination fee and a star could be yours as well." The official site has more info and maps and such; the stars cover a few blocks, and aren't just in a straight line, they go all the way around several blocks and down other major streets, and no more than like 1 in 10 is someone actually world famous. Lots are producers and studio executives and such, since getting one seems to be largely about insider connections. There's still some prestige to it, but it's not exactly a Noble Prize. #: 4:24 AM posted by Flux Forgot the link: http://www.hollywoodchamber.net/php/wofstars.php #: 4:24 AM posted by Flux Post a Comment << Home Archives May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2012

Archives