Conference bookie::movies

    Hi,
    
    I saw this one last week.  It was a good movie but in my opinion,
    it was not a "great" movie.  I did like Sigourney and Holly together.
    Harry Connick Jr. is -a- serial killer, but not -the- serial killer.
    Sigourney plays a psychiatrist whos specialty is serial killers.
    Holly is the cop assigned to catch the latest serial killer and her
    partner is the one who played Bridget Fonda's boyfriend in Point of No
    Return.  
    
    I thought there was good suspense, but still nothing that isn't pretty
    obvious.  Thankfully, they didn't show anyone actually getting killed
    (well, except for two woman but they didn't show enough to be too
    disturbing).
    
    If you are paying attention at all, you will know who the killer is
    and Holly played her character awful perky for going after a sicko.
    Sigourney was good as always.
    
    RS

    
    	Bridget's boyfriend was Dermot Mulroney, who also played the
    	lead criminal in "Career Opportunities", which also starred
    	Jennifer Connelly.
    
    	Why doesn't that sound right?
    

    re: .1
    
    They didn't show anyone being killed, except for two women?  But it
    wasn't disturbing?  Why?  Because they're women and don't count as
    real people?
    
    Would it have been disturbing if two men were killed?
    
    That attitude is pretty disturbing.

    
    	RE: BELLOWS
    
    	I believe Roberta would have been more upset, had that been the
    	case.
    

>    They didn't show anyone being killed, except for two women?  But it
>    wasn't disturbing?  Why?  Because they're women and don't count as
>    real people?
>    
>    Would it have been disturbing if two men were killed?
>    
>    That attitude is pretty disturbing.

this note is just too funny... wake up on the wrong side of the bed???

/scott

    
    	I think ::BELLOWS woke up on the wrong size of 1950.
    

    Bellows,
    
    I really find it a pain in the a** to have to explain things to
    people like yourself.  What I meant by not disturbing was that
    they didn't show major gory details of a murder in progress.  All
    they showed was the man approaching the woman and then flashed to
    the cops showing up at the crime scene.  I found that to be a bit
    better than sitting through torture scenes.  Obviously the story
    is about a serial killer so I expected people to get killed but
    I am a bit squeamish to actually watch the actors play it out.
    By the way, the killer attacked both men and woman.  And now that
    I think about it, they also showed him killing a few male cops, but
    again, it went quick and wasn't too gory for me.
    
    If you couldn't understand that is what I meant by disturbing then
    I think you have a way bigger problem than I do.
    
    RS

    RS - I undestood you!  Thanks for letting me know the movie is not all
    gore 100% of the time.  It looke like it would be from the trailers. 
    So far, everyone says Seven is more gore.
    
    Lkp

    lOU
    
    try John Wayne Bobbit "UNCUT"
    romantic comedy
    
    ***** out of five
    
    mh

    
    	Hmmm, I point out to you that SEIBERTR is a woman, and that's
    	something for you to scorn?
    
    	Don't you think SHE would be more upset that the only graphic
    	violence shown was against women?  No?
    

    
    
    
    this movie was excellent!!
    
    Harry..you are a sick puppy in this movie!! very well acted!!!
    The violence that we saw was more psycholgically affecting than visual.
    
    Chris
    :)

    
    Saw this last night and enjoyed it, as an earlier note said, if you pay
    attention, you'll spot the killer.  My girlfriend and I both turned to
    each other and said "that's him" at exactly the same moment, and that
    was before he'd actually been revealed.
    
    I was a bit concerned about a plot hole that never got resolved, more
    details after FF
    
    
    
    Spoily thang
    
    
    
    After the interview via computer with Harry Connick's character, they
    realise that the killer is going to be met at the denver meat co. and
    set up a stakeout accordingly.  What happened to it? 
    
    And what the hell is the difference between "secretor" and
    "non-secretor" sperm?
    
    
    
    I.

    re .13
    
    
    "Secretor" and "non-secretor".  (I don't think this is a spoiler,
    really)
    
    
    I took it to mean, well, "secretor" had been put in wherever it was
    found, um, naturally, while "non-secretor" was sort of placed there
    with more artificial means.  On the other hand, this explaination looks
    weird, even to me.  :)
    
    
    Just guessing,
    
    
    kim

I'm pretty sure its similar to, for instance, blood type or Rh factor - a
detectable variation in a bodily fluid used by detectives to rule out suspects
who don't match that variation. Blood type, of course, has other uses besides
forensic ones - it helps identify compatible blood donors. I don't know if the
same is true for whatever it is that some men secrete in semen.

The "secretor" stuff was also used in Presumed Innocent - at least in the book,
I forget if it was used in the movie...
							Richie

    
    Re the last two.
    
    
    That's what I thought.  But how did they know it was "secretor" and
    "non-secretor" - did they ask it?
    
    
    I.

    re .16  Must be some sort of uh, secretion test one can do.  ::Shrug:: 
    I'm not a forensic scientist, I just like to pretend sometime. :)
    
    
    kim

    
    Any secretors out there care to comment?
    
    
    I.