There are 3 messages totalling 105 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. wedding bells? (3) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 12:00:21 -1000 From: Nina Davis <macwestie@hawaii.rr.com> Subject: wedding bells? I heard a totally unsubstantiated rumor that AP recently got married. Truth? Blatant hoax? Latest free publicity stunt by DPP? Nina (any fresh news on The Source?) (anyone still care?) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 22:41:13 -0000 From: John Mosby - Laptop <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: wedding bells? Not true. I don't think he'd have had the time recently, anyway. The Source is being re-edited. Maybe not as bad as it sounds as it could well mean that Lionsgate are actually putting some more money into it for extra oomph to the FX etc. I still stand by the fact that what I saw being shot in Lithuania looked fantastic, but despite being the ra-ra guy for positivity, I now have no reason to beleive that the film will now be out anytime soon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina Davis" <macwestie@hawaii.rr.com> To: <HIGHLA-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 10:00 PM Subject: [HL] wedding bells? >I heard a totally unsubstantiated rumor that AP recently got married. > Truth? Blatant hoax? Latest free publicity stunt by DPP? > > Nina (any fresh news on The Source?) (anyone still care?) > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 21:03:53 -0500 From: Wendy <jjswbt@cox.net> Subject: Re: wedding bells? Nina asks: > >I heard a totally unsubstantiated rumor that AP recently got married. > > Truth? Blatant hoax? Latest free publicity stunt by DPP? John reports; > Not true. I don't think he'd have had the time recently, anyway. How much time does it take? 5 minutes and judge/JP/shaman of choice...... >>(any fresh news on The Source?) (anyone still care?) > The Source is being re-edited. I guess they decided that 103 minutes was too long and are going for 87 instead. > Maybe not as bad as it sounds <snicker> > as it could well mean that Lionsgate are actually putting some more money > into it for extra oomph to the FX etc. Yeah, that's what was wrong with it....cheap FX. Never mind the crappy plot. > I still stand by the fact that what I saw being > shot in Lithuania looked fantastic, Fantastic raw footage destined to be spliced together into an incoherent mess. > but despite being the ra-ra guy for positivity, Which is what we love about you <eg> >I now have no reason to beleive that the film > will now be out anytime soon. And to think they use to produce 48 minutes of really good work every 7-10 days...... Wendy ( Come one guys.)(Slap something together and release it.)(You can always put out a Director's Cut later.)(You know you will anyway.) ------------------------------ End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 26 Jan 2007 to 4 Feb 2007 (#2007-11) *************************************************************