The Structure of the Movie and Film Editing

[Ministering angel]

No I would not.  No insult intended.  I just need to practice my pitch, I guess. oops. 

Practice your what? I didn't quite catch that.
It's a relief to piss anywhere.
Goodnight, Dick.

[CANSTANDIT]

When did this thread turn into a bad nightclub act??

[Ministering angel]

Bout the time that S&I turned into ABS&I.

[Sandy]

I think the upshot of Lance's most recent post here was that since the pissing in the sink scene is absent in the movie, this thread is not the appropriate place to discuss it. Maybe "Were They Gay?", S&I, Character of Ennis D. Mar.

[Lance]

Thank you, Sandy; at least sOmebody got the point. I think I'm going to have to go back to the advice from my old sig line, ''To hell with subtlety.''
Tsk, and they wonder why I'm harsh.

[Sandy]

They don't know the Legend of the Lancinator. He of the iron fist in the titanium glove. 

[Lance]

They don't know the Legend of the Lancinator. He of the iron fist in the titanium glove. 

Harsher than that, titanium fist in stainless steel glove. I'm thinkin I didn't have enough chromium in the alloy of that last glove; it rusted a bit. Got a new one now.

[garyd]

Thank you, Sandy; at least sOmebody got the point. I think I'm going to have to go back to the advice from my old sig line, ''To hell with subtlety.''
Tsk, and they wonder why I'm harsh.

Hucklebee and Bellomy:  ''Huzzah, they are back.  Let's tear down the wall".

El Gallo:  'No leave the wall.  Always leave the wall" 

"deep in December it's nice to remember the fires of September that made us mellow."

[Lance]

I've repeatedly tried the mellow thing on two different message boards. Doesn't seem to work very well; the members take advantage and multiply the wanderings into a chaotic mess where the thread is totally lost. I just closed a thread an hour ago on the other board where I work, and on another thread issued a reminder to those who had ignored the site owner/admin's warning that he would close the thread if they persisted in not discussing the topic.

Ahem. Back on topic, please.

[CANSTANDIT]

I think the upshot of Lance's most recent post here was that since the pissing in the sink scene is absent in the movie, this thread is not the appropriate place to discuss it. Maybe "Were They Gay?", S&I, Character of Ennis D. Mar.

Amazingly, I actually figured that out myself!!! note the slowing down of the OT postings, outside of some 'fun'. And we can have fun sometimes, can't we??

[Lance]

Slowing down, but still going on for half a page.. or a page... or more, just isn't good enough; the subject gets lost and ignored. These are not chat threads. But we do have chat threads; please chat on them.

The thread had already wandered off into symbolism&imagery, among other things, at least as early as page 32.

This topic is about film structure and editing, not interpretation of content for its own sake; there are already other threads for that.

Back on topic, please. I will delete offtopic posts after this present post.

[Ministering angel]

I think the upshot of Lance's most recent post here was that since the pissing in the sink scene is absent in the movie, this thread is not the appropriate place to discuss it. Maybe "Were They Gay?", S&I, Character of Ennis D. Mar.

No t wishing to piss anybody off or anything - this is a genuine question.
The original subject was re. Diana Ossana's comment that virtually every line in the story was reproduced somehow in the film. That seemed to be a subject that could be considered appropriate to this thread. After a few suggestions were made I included the one about pissing in the sink. Neither the scene nor the line appears, as has been noted, but I suggested there was a representation of it in the three sink scenes, one of which was a direct transposition from the story.
So, my question - is the original subject - the inclusion of virtually every line - a suitable subject for this thread? If not, where would you mods suggest it go?

[Sandy]

Are you sure she wasn't referring to the screenplay?

We've both seen the movie innumerable times, and I cannot bring myself to believe that Jack's carping in the bar, "Can't please my old man. no way," is functionally equivalent to the toilet training scene.

[Lance]

I think the upshot of Lance's most recent post here was that since the pissing in the sink scene is absent in the movie, this thread is not the appropriate place to discuss it. Maybe "Were They Gay?", S&I, Character of Ennis D. Mar.

No t wishing to piss anybody off or anything - this is a genuine question.
The original subject was re. Diana Ossana's comment that virtually every line in the story was reproduced somehow in the film. That seemed to be a subject that could be considered appropriate to this thread. After a few suggestions were made I included the one about pissing in the sink. Neither the scene nor the line appears, as has been noted, but I suggested there was a representation of it in the three sink scenes, one of which was a direct transposition from the story.
So, my question - is the original subject - the inclusion of virtually every line - a suitable subject for this thread? If not, where would you mods suggest it go?

The following is the original subject [the starter post of this thread]:

''There has been much discussion about how this movie is structured. Many have pointed out that there definitely seems to be three acts to the movie. Others have made note of the many parallels within the movie. This is the thread to discuss anything to do with the way in which the movie is structured.''

It is about the movie structure. This thread is not about the book, nor parallels that the movie has with the book, nor how the story in the movie differs from the story in the book. The thread is not for discussing from a different viewpoint the same things already seen on several other threads, but is about a different subject altogether, the mechanics of how the story is told in the movie, not what is told nor the interpretation of what is told.

[Lance]

...After a few suggestions were made I included the one about pissing in the sink. Neither the scene nor the line appears, as has been noted, but I suggested there was a representation of it in the three sink scenes, one of which was a direct transposition from the story.
So, my question - is the original subject - the inclusion of virtually every line - a suitable subject for this thread? If not, where would you mods suggest it go?

For the thesis that nearly every line of the book is in the movie: ^Film vs. Book^

As for the theory that the pissing-in-the-sink scene is represented in the movie by three other scenes [none of which involve pissing or an equivalent], ''virtually every'' does not = ''every''. It sounds more like you're trying to say that these other scenes stand in symbolically, through the mechanic of parallelism, for the pissing scene, and represent something other than their direct selves [washing dishes, etc]. So it seems likely that the theory belongs in ^Symbolism & Imagery^. It does not relate directly to movie structure nor scene parallels that take place within the movie.