There are 23 messages totalling 818 lines in this issue. Topics in this special issue: 1. Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS (18) 2. Endgame DVD Info (Possible Spoilers) (4) 3. Stan on friends tonight ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 22:49:30 EST From: Lance Aldridge <GPrimeCEO@aol.com> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS Thanks, so basically it works just like on any other board. And it is not my intent to destroy this forum, but to add to its diversity. <Not that I'm going to want to discuss Endgame with you and watch you destroy yet another board/list.> ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 23:57:35 EST From: Bizarro7@aol.com Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS In a message dated 1/2/01 10:50:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, GPrimeCEO@aol.com writes: << Thanks, so basically it works just like on any other board. And it is not my intent to destroy this forum, but to add to its diversity. >> Diversity is not, by definition, obsessing on the resurrection of a single character to the point of mania; nor is it creating multiple personalities of one's self to create a self-congratulatory 'committee'. You've amply demonstrated elsewhere that the attention you seek is not the negative sort you provoke from females, in your desperate virtual 'pigtail pulling'. You need the sort dispensed by a professional in matters of emotional disturbance. Get help. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 00:49:35 EST From: "Renaissance (Karen Miller)" <RENMACWOW@aol.com> Subject: Endgame DVD Info (Possible Spoilers) Just In Case............ S P O I L E R S P A C E S * * * * * * I just took a cruise through Amazon.com, and they have the Endgame DVD available for pre-ordering for $20.99. Ship date is listed as 02.20.01. The cover of the DVD is different from the poster or the Soundtrack. Same theme, except Duncan and Connor are facing forward with their swords raised. Cool!!! They also have the VHS available for pre-order at $103.99 (sheesh). I don't know if this is old news or not, but I just now found it. The cover says: More steamy scenes, more action, all new ending............hmmm, now which ending would that be??? ~Rennie Renaissance/Karen Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die tomorrow ||/ [[[[[{}::therecanbeonlyone::>>> ||\ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 16:35:29 +0800 From: Gerry Alanguilan <gerry@alanguilan.com> Subject: Re: Endgame DVD Info (Possible Spoilers) Check out this site: http://www.dvdreview.com/movies/VaultTitle.asp?movie_id=11312 It has details on the DVD itself. It's gonna be 2 discs? Gerry ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 07:21:27 EST From: Bizarro7@aol.com Subject: Re: Endgame DVD Info (Possible Spoilers) In a message dated 1/3/01 12:50:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, RENMACWOW@aol.com writes: << The cover says: More steamy scenes, more action, all new ending............hmmm, now which ending would that be??? >> Actually, I've heard from a couple of sources that the DVD will have 2 discs, and that the theatrical release PLUS a longer version of the movie will both be on the set (along with a bunch of extra goodies). Leah CWPack ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 10:07:41 -0500 From: sbdrake <sbdrake@netsync.net> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS Ok guys I was able to get a copy of the original script of endgame and it is really different from the published one. I really wished they had used this one instead of what they did. Anyone want to discuss it. Sueamanda Keeper of the Cassandra Outline ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 11:07:04 EST From: Dotiran@aol.com Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS In a message dated 1/3/01 9:48:46 AM US Eastern Standard Time, sbdrake@netsync.net writes: << I was able to get a copy of the original script of endgame and it is really different from the published one. I really wished they had used this one instead of what they did. Anyone want to discuss it. Wellllll....ummm. It's hard to discuss what we may not have seen. Do you mean the "originial" original script of endgame [which I highly doubt any of us has seen] or one of the drafts that wound up on the internet before the movie came out [which some of us have seen and could discuss with you] or ??? What do you mean by "the published one" Do you mean the version that wound up being the movie itself on screen? Have you seen the illegal workprint version of the movie? That ending is closer to the leaked draft script, with the exception that the dialogue in the leaked script was vastly superior to the dialogue in the workprint. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 11:26:54 EST From: Susan Kirt <SUQKRT@aol.com> Subject: Re: Endgame DVD Info (Possible Spoilers) In a message dated 1/3/01 7:22:34 AM, Bizarro7@aol.com writes: >In a message dated 1/3/01 12:50:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, >RENMACWOW@aol.com writes: > ><< The cover says: > More steamy scenes, more action, all new ending............hmmm, now which > ending would that be??? >> > >Actually, I've heard from a couple of sources that the DVD will have 2 >discs, >and that the theatrical release PLUS a longer version of the movie will >both >be on the set (along with a bunch of extra goodies). > >Leah CWPack > The site REN. gave also mentioned an Easteregg (hidden goodie) and a game. Suz ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 02:44:12 -0000 From: Rita Ballantyne <kilmarnock.oradea@virginnet.co.uk> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS hope you are watching as a true Watcher. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 11:50:17 EST From: Highlandmg@aol.com Subject: Re: Stan on friends tonight Hi Just saw an ad on TV Stan 's episode is on friends tonight its on my WB channel at 7pm eastern time. Check you TV guide for time. This is not to be missed. Mary ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 03:13:27 -0000 From: Rita Ballantyne <kilmarnock.oradea@virginnet.co.uk> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS how long is it? I wonder if u could send some of it. the interesting parts. Rita ---------------------------------------------------------------- I love life and I love making the most of every moment -Eddie Irvine ----- Original Message ----- From: "sbdrake" <sbdrake@netsync.net> To: <HIGHLA-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 3:07 PM Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS > Ok guys I was able to get a copy of the original script of endgame and > it is really different from the published one. I really wished they had > used this one instead of what they did. Anyone want to discuss it. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 03:20:30 -0000 From: Rita Ballantyne <kilmarnock.oradea@virginnet.co.uk> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS Have you seen the illegal workprint > version of the movie? That ending is closer to the leaked draft script, with > the exception that the dialogue in the leaked script was vastly superior to > the dialogue in the workprint. why is it illegal? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 13:12:45 EST From: "Renaissance (Karen Miller)" <RENMACWOW@aol.com> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS In a message dated Wed, 3 Jan 2001 12:20:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, Rita Ballantyne <kilmarnock.oradea@virginnet.co.uk> writes: << Have you seen the illegal workprint > version of the movie? That ending is closer to the leaked draft script, with > the exception that the dialogue in the leaked script was vastly superior to > the dialogue in the workprint. why is it illegal? >> Mostly because it is theft of copyright material. ~Rennie ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 16:15:01 EST From: Sweetness And Light <Ethelbert@aol.com> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS Lance wrote: >Greetings to the list.=20 And greetings to you, too. > Just wanted to say hello, I'm glad I found you guys, And let me say how pleased we are to have been found. >and I'm looking forward to discussing all things Highlander, particular my >passion, Connor Macleod, and his status within the franchise. Passion is good. We haven't had any passion around here since liser divorced= =20 logan. ::counts to ten to allow numerous people to say "huh?":::: So..Endgame, eh? Join me below. I h e a r v o i c e s a n d t h e r e ' s n o o n e t h e r e That ought to be enough. I thought Endgame was a mediocre movie which contained various snippets of=20 good material. Adrian looked wonderful up on the big screen and, should,=20 IMGLO, be encouraged to get naked on screen at every possible opportunity.=20 Kase (Kale?)(He wasn't leafy)(He did leave a bad taste in my mouth, though)=20 was loud, annoying and had a regretable tendency to chew scenery. If he was=20 the biggest bad of them all, we are all safe as houses.=20 Kate/Faith was a tad cadaverous for my =A0taste but she had a few redeeming=20 qualities..not the least of which was making Duncan smile.=20 The plot...there was a plot, right? =A0I wasn't gripped by it..your mileage=20= may=20 vary. There were numerous nonsensical moments and a few canon bending (*not*= =20 breaking <eg>) moments that annoyed me.=20 As for Connor..he died. So it goes. The king is dead, long live the king. In= =20 the end there can be only one....you know the drill. Somewhere Connor, Richi= e=20 and the Ewoks are smiling around a bonfire. Sweetness&Light ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 21:27:31 -0000 From: Jette Goldie <jettegoldie@thefreeinternet.co.uk> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS ----- Original Message ----- From: Sweetness And Light <Ethelbert@aol.com> To: <HIGHLA-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:15 PM Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS oh oh - sweetness and light? that always fortells trouble on this list <g> Jette jettegoldie@thefreeinternet.co.uk http://members.tripod.com/~bosslady/fanfic.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 16:44:43 -0500 From: Sandy Fields <diamonique@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS At 04:15 PM 01/03/2001, Sweetness And Light wrote: >And greetings to you, too. Aaaccckk! She's back!!! Be afraid!!!!!! >So..Endgame, eh? Join me below. > >I > >h >e >a >r > >v >o >i >c >e >s > >a >n >d > >t >h >e >r >e >' >s > >n >o > >o >n >e > >t >h >e >r >e > >That ought to be enough. > >I thought Endgame was a mediocre movie which contained various snippets of >good material. Ya know... I never thought about it that way, but that's a very "right on" description. >Adrian looked wonderful up on the big screen and, should, >IMGLO, be encouraged to get naked on screen at every possible opportunity. And sweaty. Don't forget sweaty. <eg? >Kase (Kale?)(He wasn't leafy)(He did leave a bad taste in my mouth, though) >was loud, annoying and had a regretable tendency to chew scenery. "You're my flockkkkkkk!" >If he was the biggest bad of them all, we are all safe as houses. That's for sure. But maybe if he used his stargate and levitating powers, he might have been more of a menace. >Kate/Faith was a tad cadaverous for my taste but she had a few redeeming >qualities..not the least of which was making Duncan smile. Um... yeah. I'll just leave it at that. This is a family list, right? >The plot...there was a plot, right? I wasn't gripped by it..your mileage may >vary. There were numerous nonsensical moments and a few canon bending (*not* >breaking <eg>) moments that annoyed me. And me. Loved the Glenfinnen flashback though. >As for Connor..he died. So it goes. The king is dead, long live the king. In >the end there can be only one....you know the drill. Somewhere Connor, Richie >and the Ewoks are smiling around a bonfire. And Tessa and Rachel are dancing right along with them. It's a little more fun that way. >Sweetness&Light :::shudder::: -- Sandy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 16:50:43 EST From: Susan Kirt <SUQKRT@aol.com> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS In a message dated 1/3/01 4:45:12 PM, diamonique@earthlink.net writes: >At 04:15 PM 01/03/2001, Sweetness And Light wrote: > >>And greetings to you, too. > >Aaaccckk! She's back!!! Be afraid!!!!!! > > >>So..Endgame, eh? Join me below. >> >>I >> > Should I be very afraid? Are puns a whippable offense? Suz ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 17:09:03 EST From: Dotiran@aol.com Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS In a message dated 1/3/01 4:15:50 PM US Eastern Standard Time, Ethelbert@aol.com writes: << Kase (Kale?) er, sweetness and light [recognizable under any name *g*] try Kell ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 18:27:16 -0500 From: Sandy Fields <diamonique@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS Join me down below for some discussion: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sweetness&Light said: >There were numerous nonsensical moments and a few canon bending (*not* >breaking <eg>) moments that annoyed me. So let's talk about that canon. Fact: Methos said the sanctuary was on holy ground. Fact: Kell killed immies in the sanctuary. I don't really want to get into whether or not there are any repurcussions for doing this, but I've been mulling over how the movie could have been fixed to eliminate this holy ground problem, and I can't find a fix for it. Some have said that taking out the comment by Methos would fix the problem, but it won't. Without his comment, we're left with a place for immies to go "voluntarily" to get away from The Game. But why would they do this? If it's not Holy Ground, why would they leave themselves so defenseless? And if it *is* Holy Ground, why.... um... I guess we get into the "repercussions of killing on HG" conversation then, huh? So is this just bad writing? -- Sandy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 19:10:01 EST From: Dotiran@aol.com Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS In a message dated 1/3/01 6:38:23 PM US Eastern Standard Time, diamonique@earthlink.net writes: << So is this just bad writing? Maybe. But I do know that Gillian Horvath said she gulped when she S P O I L E R S heard Methos utter that line about Holy Ground because the original idea was NOT holyground but a fake monastery with fake monks who were trustworthy and good watchers. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 19:15:29 -0500 From: Johanne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bri=E8re?= <jojoann@videotron.ca> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS At 19:10 -0500 03/01/01, Dotiran@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 1/3/01 6:38:23 PM US Eastern Standard Time, >diamonique@earthlink.net writes: > ><< So is this just bad writing? > >Maybe. But I do know that Gillian Horvath said she gulped when she >S > >P > >O > >I > >L > >E > >R > >S > >heard Methos utter that line about Holy Ground because the original idea was >NOT holyground but a fake monastery with fake monks who were trustworthy and >good watchers. Did she not also gulped at the idea that <supposetely> <sp > sane Immortals in search of safe ground, haven, sanctuary - would hide on NOT holyground .... Moi un brin sarcastique, moi admettre ça, Johanne jojoann@videotron.ca - snow, anyone knows the colour of snow ? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 19:22:59 EST From: "Renaissance (Karen Miller)" <RENMACWOW@aol.com> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS In a message dated Wed, 3 Jan 2001 6:38:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, Sandy Fields <diamonique@earthlink.net> writes: << Join me down below for some discussion: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sweetness&Light said: >There were numerous nonsensical moments and a few canon bending (*not* >breaking <eg>) moments that annoyed me. So let's talk about that canon. Fact: Methos said the sanctuary was on holy ground. Fact: Kell killed immies in the sanctuary. I don't really want to get into whether or not there are any repurcussions for doing this, but I've been mulling over how the movie could have been fixed to eliminate this holy ground problem, and I can't find a fix for it. Some have said that taking out the comment by Methos would fix the problem, but it won't. Without his comment, we're left with a place for immies to go "voluntarily" to get away from The Game. But why would they do this? If it's not Holy Ground, why would they leave themselves so defenseless? And if it *is* Holy Ground, why.... um... I guess we get into the "repercussions of killing on HG" conversation then, huh? So is this just bad writing? -- Sandy >> One possible scenario is to say that they were not completely defensless.....they did have Watchers with automatic weapons guarding them. And I would have to believe that the group of Watchers who were babysitting the "volunteers" didn't expect a pack of immortals to come calling. Short-sighted of them, I agree, but perhaps plausible. If Sanctuary looked like holy ground, and was guarded by what looked like monks, it could have been enough to deter the occasional stray immortal who happened to sense another of his kind nearby. Of course that all went by the wayside because Kell knew exactly what was there and prepared his attack accordingly. ~Rennie ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 19:43:47 -0500 From: Sandy Fields <diamonique@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Greetings and Question about Endgame SPOILERS At 07:10 PM 01/03/01, Dotiran@aol.com wrote: ><< So is this just bad writing? > >Maybe. But I do know that Gillian Horvath said she gulped when she >S > >P > >O > >I > >L > >E > >R > >S > >heard Methos utter that line about Holy Ground because the original idea >was NOT holyground but a fake monastery with fake monks who were >trustworthy and good watchers. Yes. I heard this too. But even if they filmed it that way, it wouldn't work for me. It would take away the HG problem, but it wouldn't explain why an immie would allow himself to be put into suspended animation like that. Even though these are "good watchers", what's to stop a kimmie from coming along, killing all the watchers, and then killing all the comatose immies? Or what would stop a "bad watcher" from doing the same thing? It just doesn't work. -- Sandy ------------------------------ End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 2 Jan 2001 to 3 Jan 2001 - Special issue (#2001-3) ***************************************************************************