"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[ps3andlovinit]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

lol, I’m glad I googled that phrase, as I had no idea the guy got transferred to Real.
http://www.theimproper.com/Template_...ArticleId=3635

I wonder how the Man U. supporters are handling that?
Sounds good for the Arsenal though.

They are thinking $150m will buy them significant upgrades at every other position

[cjamescook]

Originally Posted by horseflesh

The headline of one of the tabloid papers this morning was;
"RONALDO SPENDS A NIGHT IN PARIS"

Or, as we say in the land of Star Trek:
"To Boldly Go Where Many Men Have Been Before"

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

In fact many corporations actually pay NO Federal income tax

Some of that is misleading because many small corporations funnel their profit to their owner(s) who then pay personal income tax.

And bigger ones send out some of that "profit" as dividends, so you'd again be looking at personal income.

What is evil is the concept of a corporation paying taxes on profit, and then the owner of what is left getting taxed again.

Ultimately the best system leads to the money getting in the hands of PEOPLE who then pay taxes on it. Otherwise the government is simply taxing away jobs and wealth creation.

Gary

[Bill Hunt]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Ah, but have you received compensation without being directly asked to espouse a particular point of view? Get any discs for free? Get into any parties? Ever get free hardware? Did a group of studios supporting one format over another ever throw you a birthday party in Vegas?

Once again, this falls into the category of: People are clearly going to think whatever they want to think. Yes, we get review discs. Like every other professional disc reviewer on the planet. Yes, occasionally we get hardware to demo. Again, like many other professional reviewers. Yes, we got advertising from all sides. As does every professional magazine and publication. Yes, a number of Blu-ray studios threw The Bits and HTF a 10th birthday party, because we've had a long relationship with them going back to the beginning of DVD. No, we were not asked, nor were we implicitly encouraged, to spout a particular point of view. Nor did any of these things impact our point of view during the HD format war. Jeff's right about HTF - they were about as far into the HD-DVD camp as they could be, and remained so. And I would have said what I said about Blu-ray regardless of any of the above, because I'm principled and this is what I believe, and that's the editorial policy I set.

Regarding said party: Unlike other many other sites/groups during the format war (AICN, MANY online discussion groups), The Bits was very up front about EVERY interaction we had with these camps. We even mentioned the party in public on the site. My staff, which had been fighting for DVD since the very beginning (and from which all these studios benefitted), deserved a moment of recognition like that for all their hard work, and it gave a group of our readers who were on hand the chance to see Blu-ray themselves and make up their own minds. That very same weekend, the HD-DVD camp gave those same readers free HD-DVD players and discs. So we made sure that our staff and readers got to experience BOTH sides. I should also point out that, at the party in question, there were those that didn't want to let Microsoft's Kevin Collins attend. I went out personally to the check-in table and brought him in with us - Kevin had been with our group the entire week, and I wasn't going to let him be kept out. I STILL consider Kevin a friend to this day.

I know for a fact a number of other sites and newsgroups that were radically pro HD-DVD who were spiffed and partied and paid by Microsoft and their lobbyists pretty seriously. None of that was ever disclosed when suddenly they became the biggest HD-DVD fans in the world. I said Blu-ray was likely going to win from the very beginning based on my expertise, and nothing I saw during the format war changed that opinion, though I remained open to the other side for a very long time. Ultimately, my opinion was proved correct. And our readers, who were smart enough to accept that opinion as reliable, were certainly glad they did the day after Warner dropped HD-DVD and Toshiba finally killed the format.

Like it or not, Jeff's right. There is a BIG difference between what we did and what lobbyists do. We sleep very comfortably at night, knowing that we maintained our principles and advised our readers to the best of our abilities, and did so correctly.

But as I've come to learn in 12 years of doing what I do, no matter what you do and say, whenever you speak opinion in public and no matter how expert, about 30% of those who see and hear it are going to think (for whatever their reasons) that you're an *******, biased, paid off, a shill or what have you. I've seen people, no matter how expert, called an idiot online. The guy who invented the color blue could go online, point to something blue and say, "Hey, that's blue" and 30% of the people reading would tell him he must be a moron. Of course they would never actually say that to his face, but online people feel free to say whatever they want. I've come to call it the "70/30 Rule" and it's never failed me in the entire time I've been running The Bits.

The bottom line seems to be: If some guy online doesn't hate your guts in some forum somewhere, you're probably not doing your job.

[Bobby Henderson]

Is there is a run down of what shots in The International were filmed on 65mm?

I watched a rental Blu-ray of The International. Certain exterior shots, like the outside of the Volkswagon HQ building and the interior lobby look 65mm sourced. The level of detail and "solid" look of the color seem to give it away. The "making of" featurette showed a Arri 765 in use in at least a couple locations, including that lobby.

The 35mm photography was also pretty impressive. Overall this Blu-ray has a lot of fine details on display -which is appropriate with various types of architecture figuring big in the production design.

It's just too bad the crew couldn't film the entire movie in 65mm.

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by cjamescook

BTW, what's the weight difference between a handheld (non-tripod) 35mm steadicam camera and it's 65 mm cousin?

My guess is that there would be a significant difference, as much due the format size as due to the development of newer lightweight 35mm cameras vs. old, frozen-in-time 65mm cameras.

65mm equipment has not been "frozen in time."

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by cjamescook

Or, as we say in the land of Star Trek:
"To Boldly Go Where Many Men Have Been Before"

I'm sorry, were you talking about the playmates again?

*Zing!*

By the way, this was genuis on so many levels:
http://www.offthepost.info/2009/06/a...as-miss-world/

The Albanian/Albino pun is pretty priceless as well...

[sharkshark]

Hey, Bill! You may not remember me, I mailed you a Zizou hat when you made a request for one (I got a couple as schwag from a Disney event), and in exchange you very kindly sent me your book. Nice to hear from you!

Well said above, but hopefully you'll take the point I was making - often, one person's shill is another's cheerleader. If Amir (as an example) was a shill or lobbyist with a (nefarious, to some) agenda, certainly the same can be said about many others on this side of the fence. The issue isn't whether or not he worked for MS and had a certain point of view, it's whether or not it was possible for his comments to be taken with any form of objectivity. Some continue to claim everything he wrote was obfuscation and propaganda, and bring up his name =years= later to make their points that the 'bad' side lost the battle. In the end I think I learned quite a bit from Amir, but I never forgot what point of view he was championing. (I've mentioned it above somewhere, but when I met him in person the first thing we agreed upon was that if BD lived up to its potential that the best HD-DVD could hope for was coexistence and eventual domination.)

But Amir's just a salient example, the point remains that some would claim that HD-DVD had only shills and cunning spokepeople and BD had only grassroots supporters or helpful studio reps. That's on face value a rediculous claim. I'm making the additional claim is that sometimes, ironically, you can learn quite a bit from what the shills are (or are not!) saying. Bias, triabalism, call it what you will, whatever keeps people from being open minded and respectful is counter-rhetorical.

Taking another tact, the owners of this forum must maintain a certain level of respect/deference to the subject matter at hand, else (naturally) they'll lose the support of these very individuals. So, at times, it seems that in providing the goal of creating a community of fans that share a similar passion, it itstead devolves into a form of zealotry, immediately chastising thoughts counter to the party line, banning individuals with the temerity to question, say, a review that tried to justify a technical error (leaving out a right surround signal) on aesthetic grounds, and the removal for a time of this individual.

Your site is different, naturally. You didn't go in with a particular point of view, and made very specific (and compelling) arguments about your format preference, responding strongly after comments made by poor Harry at AICN (a site I have written for). I certainly didn't agree with all of your conclusions, but it's hard to take seriously a claim that you were being paid or hustled to make the claims that you did. That, naturally, didn't stop some (idiots) from saying these very things, as you well know. When the message doesn't meet with expectations, people often question not the argument, but the motivations of the messanger.


The =appearance= of bias or profiteering, for some, calls these things into question. My not-so-subtle noodge about the party was to show Jeff that such things can be blown out of proportion and misconstrued, especially if one has a counter agenda that they have to uphold.

You've no doubt seen the same kind of wild extrapolations about other garbage, from VC1/AVC arguments, bitrate wars, studio boycotts and so on, all as a home theatre format battle became, for many, a team sport, us vs. them, blah blah blah.

Take Bill your recent review of the Trek TV show:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/review...ews041709.html

What's more, I've done A/B comparisons of the video quality here and on the previous HD-DVD release, and the added bandwidth of BD and extra disc space (which allows for less compression to be used) makes a clear difference. Take a look at the clouds on the shots of the Enterprise arriving in a planet's orbit at the start of The Man Trap - the HD-DVD clouds exhibit noticeable artifacting that's barely visible on Blu-ray (if at all).

Hey, I'm not saying the BD isn't better (heck, it's the version I prefer, for many of the reasons you cite, most specifically the HD versions of the original effects). I appreciate tremendously that you've pointed to specific elements that can be dispasionately analysed for oneself to determine if, in this case, the new version trumps the old (and, naturally, =in motion=, not just sceen cap worship... Hi, Penton! )

However, it remains somewhat suspect that the reasons for these perceived differences are the "added bandwith" and "disc space", or, at least, it's not immediately evident that this is the sole or even salient reason that the "blu" discs are better-er than the "red". Could it not also point to, say, improvements in the compression algorythms over the intervening time?

Why not simply say that it's better for these reasons without the conjecture as to why it's better - I take it, as is often said in this thread, that you don't have access to viewing the master, and while you're more connected that almost any other reviewing this stuff, I assume you don't have specific information about whether these are the specific variable changes that resulted in the effect you have witnessed. It seems, at least that you've gone from objective analysis to conjecture seamlessly within the same review, using the rhetoric of format superiority to make a claim about PQ.

As someone who tried to remain open to all points of view during the darkest days of format war rediculousness, I felt that at times certain points of view (player compatibility issues, profile changes, etc.) were underrepresented at the 'Bits for the sake (noble, of course) of supporting BD over not just its HD competitor, but the prevailing SD format as well. After all, one may have thought, if we're going to nitpick the eventual heir, they'll be too damaged to take over from the established ruling format. Take that as respectful criticism, certainly up for debate/discussion on another thread, and never implying that your point of view was in any way explicitly bought by one side or another.

Yet, again, that wasn't my point above. Call me naive (or better yet, Canadian) - I just was gently prodding Jeff about his arguments regarding journalistic objectivity, and I think in the end we're all pretty much in agreement over this whole question of respecting opposing points of view, provided those opposing sides are presented as carefully, intelligently, and respecfully as the points you yourself are making. Hell, if the opposite side's just going to be an idiot, spouting clear pablum, then, sure, ignore away...

Originally Posted by Bill Hunt

Once again, this falls into the category of: People are clearly going to think whatever they want to think. Yes, we get review discs. Like every other professional disc reviewer on the planet. Yes, occasionally we get hardware to demo. Again, like many other professional reviewers. Yes, we got advertising from all sides. As does every professional magazine and publication. Yes, a number of Blu-ray studios threw The Bits and HTF a 10th birthday party, because we've had a long relationship with them going back to the beginning of DVD. No, we were not asked, nor were we implicitly encouraged, to spout a particular point of view. Nor did any of these things impact our point of view during the HD format war. Jeff's right about HTF - they were about as far into the HD-DVD camp as they could be, and remained so. And I would have said what I said about Blu-ray regardless of any of the above, because I'm principled and this is what I believe, and that's the editorial policy I set.

Regarding said party: Unlike other many other sites/groups during the format war (AICN, MANY online discussion groups), The Bits was very up front about EVERY interaction we had with these camps. We even mentioned the party in public on the site. My staff, which had been fighting for DVD since the very beginning (and from which all these studios benefitted), deserved a moment of recognition like that for all their hard work, and it gave a group of our readers who were on hand the chance to see Blu-ray themselves and make up their own minds. That very same weekend, the HD-DVD camp gave those same readers free HD-DVD players and discs. So we made sure that our staff and readers got to experience BOTH sides. I should also point out that, at the party in question, there were those that didn't want to let Microsoft's Kevin Collins attend. I went out personally to the check-in table and brought him in with us - Kevin had been with our group the entire week, and I wasn't going to let him be kept out. I STILL consider Kevin a friend to this day.

I know for a fact a number of other sites and newsgroups that were radically pro HD-DVD who were spiffed and partied and paid by Microsoft and their lobbyists pretty seriously. None of that was ever disclosed when suddenly they became the biggest HD-DVD fans in the world. I said Blu-ray was likely going to win from the very beginning based on my expertise, and nothing I saw during the format war changed that opinion, though I remained open to the other side for a very long time. Ultimately, my opinion was proved correct. And our readers, who were smart enough to accept that opinion as reliable, were certainly glad they did the day after Warner dropped HD-DVD and Toshiba finally killed the format.

Like it or not, Jeff's right. There is a BIG difference between what we did and what lobbyists do. We sleep very comfortably at night, knowing that we maintained our principles and advised our readers to the best of our abilities, and did so correctly.

But as I've come to learn in 12 years of doing what I do, no matter what you do and say, whenever you speak opinion in public and no matter how expert, about 30% of those who see and hear it are going to think (for whatever their reasons) that you're an *******, biased, paid off, a shill or what have you. I've seen people, no matter how expert, called an idiot online. The guy who invented the color blue could go online, point to something blue and say, "Hey, that's blue" and 30% of the people reading would tell him he must be a moron. Of course they would never actually say that to his face, but online people feel free to say whatever they want. I've come to call it the "70/30 Rule" and it's never failed me in the entire time I've been running The Bits.

The bottom line seems to be: If some guy online doesn't hate your guts in some forum somewhere, you're probably not doing your job.

[Jeff Kleist]

However, it remains somewhat suspect that the reasons for these perceived differences are the "added bandwith" and "disc space", or, at least, it's not immediately evident that this is the sole or even salient reason that the "blu" discs are better-er than the "red". Could it not also point to, say, improvements in the compression algorythms over the intervening time?

It's certainly possible that that's a factor

The big advantage of Blu-ray is that the headroom is there when you need it. ST:TOS floats for the most part under 20mbps, 15-17 is probably a good number to use as a baseline (when there isn't any branching FX going on of course). The show is fairly static in nature, so 15-17 is probably all that's really needed to capture what's going on

When you get complicated FX shots, especially stuff that's "busy" like a moving starfield or going to warp with a lot of little elements to track, that's when Blu-ray could have an advantage (as well as having the headroom and capacity to carry the branched stuff. I don't think they ever really got branching to work on HD DVD, they didn't have the bandwidth headroom to make it truely seamless)

Yet, again, that wasn't my point above. Call me naive (or better yet, Canadian) - I just was gently prodding Jeff about his arguments regarding journalistic objectivity

Well, in the case of the person I was referring to, they're a paid mouthpiece. Would you trust Bill Gates to write a n unbiased piece about Microsoft? Would you trust their PR agency to? That's why you don't trust lobbyists, whatever their affiliations or mission statements to give you the facts about anything. Even if it's the Lobby for the Hugging of Cute Fluffy Puppies, I'd still insist on seeing them in person to verify they're cute, fluffy or even huggable

[sharkshark]

...we are so very close to agreement... My point is that just because Bill Gates says something about the future of computing, being a Mac guy/Jobs acolyte doesn't mean you should knee-jerk ignore what he has to say. Being suspect of paid employees for whatever organization and the utopian desire for them to remain objective and honest is one thing, calling one side "lobbyists" and the other "valued insiders" is simply disengenuous in my opinion.

And no, to be absolutely explicit, I -ain't- talking about Penton. While I can only assume Penton makes -some- money from his studio, I'm also assuming they're not paying him explicitly to write to us nutbars. If they did, would that change anything about what he wrote about the history of certain film productions? Frankly, his studio connections give those posts -more- weight, not less, whatever his arrangement is.

I'm certainly not going to lump him in as a "lobyist" for this or that cause, though I certainly know he's got a (well researched, well reasoned) point of view that nonetheless is shaped (note: I'm =NOT= saying dictated) by his current position. Despite his weird fetish for 2 wheeled powered bicycle racing, his provactive contributions to the format debate should have been, in my opinion, taken seriously even by those who hold opposing points of view regarding how HD shiny discs should be produced, spec'd, designed, etc. I think the same could be argued even for those you've labeled lobbyist.

Back to Gates, being locked into one point of view ("I'm a Mac!", "I'm a PC!") is actually counterproductive for those trying to remain open to the positive and negative elements of different paradigms, often overemphasising differences over similarities for the sake of elevating one over an other. It's when your team membership supercedes any attempt at objectivity that one runs into trouble. Equally, as I said above, this is not to say let any dumbass comment hold equal weight. We can be sensitive to those that are shills while still finding something interesting and compelling in well reasoned arguments that can radically be different than our own.

Agree?

K, I'm done.

Thanks Penton in advance for letting me blather again in your thread about this stuff, it's just something I seem to give a damn about...

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris

65mm equipment has not been "frozen in time."

Despite the lack of Hollywood feature films produced in 65mm, Arri and Panavision both introduced new 65mm cameras in the late 1980s and early 1990s (the Arri 765 and Panavision Super Panaflex) and further refined those camera models. Those camera systems are just as advanced as their 35mm counterparts.

Didn't Mitchell bring out a new 65mm camera in the late 1980's? I thought I saw something about that in American Cinematographer back then.

If I remember correctly, the Arri 765 was put to use in Spiderman 2 for capturing a good amount of effects plate footage of the Chicago "L" subway trains.

[Alan Gordon]

I've been careful to stay out of the recent conversations... but I did want to comment on a couple of comments:

Originally Posted by sharkshark

often, one person's shill is another's cheerleader. If Amir (as an example) was a shill or lobbyist with a (nefarious, to some) agenda, certainly the same can be said about many others on this side of the fence. The issue isn't whether or not he worked for MS and had a certain point of view, it's whether or not it was possible for his comments to be taken with any form of objectivity. Some continue to claim everything he wrote was obfuscation and propaganda, and bring up his name =years= later to make their points that the 'bad' side lost the battle. In the end I think I learned quite a bit from Amir, but I never forgot what point of view he was championing. (I've mentioned it above somewhere, but when I met him in person the first thing we agreed upon was that if BD lived up to its potential that the best HD-DVD could hope for was coexistence and eventual domination.)

I don't think anybody would try to say that EVERYTHING Amir has said is "propaganda", or that he was incapable of being a "nice guy." The problem is that when you speak enough "propaganda," it gets difficult to discern what's propaganda, and what isn't.

I learned some things from Amir, but I've seen (or heard of) instances online where his behavior was out of line. I've seen him say something negative about the Blu-ray camp, only to be proven wrong a month or two later. I've seen him say, or hint at something good about HD DVD, only to be proven wrong a month or two later. I've seen him called out on some of the things he has said... only to backpeddle, and state that what he said was taken out of context.

On the other hand, the Blu-ray "Insiders" told things which, time and again, proved to be something you could take to the bank, and aside from an instance where Max lost his temper (understandble as it was), and a brief instance in the Insider's thread involving Penton-Man and a Blu-ray leather jacket, they've pretty much always kept their dignity during the war.

No, there is nothing wrong with "toeing the company line," but you tell enough propaganda, and it becomes harder to believe you when you're telling the truth... which was one of the problems with Amir (as well as some behavior he exhibited).

Originally Posted by sharkshark

But Amir's just a salient example, the point remains that some would claim that HD-DVD had only shills and cunning spokepeople and BD had only grassroots supporters or helpful studio reps. That's on face value a rediculous claim. I'm making the additional claim is that sometimes, ironically, you can learn quite a bit from what the shills are (or are not!) saying. Bias, triabalism, call it what you will, whatever keeps people from being open minded and respectful is counter-rhetorical.

Two different people can look at an article (or point of view) of facts. One person's going to see it as fact. The second person's going to see it as a bunch of lies, a biased view, or a shill writing a slanted article.

Two different people can look at an article (or point of view) of propaganda (lies). One person's going to see it as a bunch of lies, a biased view, or a shill writing a slanted article. The second person's going to see it as fact.

I know two people. Both of them have their "issues":

One of them has NO REDEEMING QUALITIES. For all intents and purposes, they are also a crook, and should be in prison (literally!). To put it bluntly, if you're a religious person, this person will be getting to know the devil very well sometime in the future.

One of them has many issues. They may also be a crook, and some people think THEY should be in prison. To put it bluntly, if you're a religous person, this person will probably be getting to know the devil very well sometime in the future as well. HOWEVER, this person has MANY redeeming qualities.

I know two other people that I'm going to bring up here. Both decent people for all intents and purposes. One of them can't stand BOTH of the people mentioned above, and ONE of them seems to think a LOT of the guy with NO REDEEMING QUALITIES, but can't stand the guy with SOME redeeming qualities.

My point? Opinions are opinions. They're personal, sometimes they come from wisdom, sometimes they come from personal experience, sometimes they come from fellow peers that have rubbed off, sometimes they come from ignorance. More often than not, regardless of where they came from, or how valid they are, people like to have their opinions backed up... and often seek it to validate their own opinions.

Most people claim to be open-minded, but there are limits to that, and sometimes, that has to be respected whether or not we agree with that (BTW, I'm not referring to anybody here on this board, but people in general).

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Taking another tact, the owners of this forum must maintain a certain level of respect/deference to the subject matter at hand, else (naturally) they'll lose the support of these very individuals. So, at times, it seems that in providing the goal of creating a community of fans that share a similar passion, it itstead devolves into a form of zealotry, immediately chastising thoughts counter to the party line

I disagreed with MULTIPLE decisions made by MULTIPLE message boards I've been associated with in my time.... but the only message board I've ever seen do as you say above was AVSForum's HD Media section during the format war... as it was INCREDIBLY tough to be a Blu-ray fan on that board for a period of time.

~Alan

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris

65mm equipment has not been "frozen in time."

I would like to add a link to the discussion for a very lightweight 65mm camera based on a 35mm ARRI design that can also be used to shoot 5/65:

http://www.in70mm.com/news/2009/mkbk...mera/index.htm

17.5lbs should be adequately light under most if not all circumstances and it could be argued that it means one excuse less for not shooting certain scenes in 65mm.

[Doctorossi]

Hey, Penton... I'm waiting for your 'all clear' to gab about the race.

[Objectivity]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Well, in the case of the person I was referring to, they're a paid mouthpiece. Would you trust Bill Gates to write a n unbiased piece about Microsoft? Would you trust their PR agency to? That's why you don't trust lobbyists, whatever their affiliations or mission statements to give you the facts about anything. Even if it's the Lobby for the Hugging of Cute Fluffy Puppies, I'd still insist on seeing them in person to verify they're cute, fluffy or even huggable

Using your logic above, anything said by anyone who is paid by the company they're espousing should immediately be disregarded, simply because they're being paid.

Just because someone is paid doesn't mean they're untrustworthy. I think anything that Bill Gates writes about Microsoft (using your example) is worth reading, because of who he is and because he's an expert on the subject.

Does that mean every word he says should be taken as gospel? No. But it doesn't mean every word should be disregarded as well, just because he's well paid.

As someone once famously said, "Trust, but verify."

Facts can be proven. You can take what Bill Gates said, or the economist that started this, and do the research yourself.

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by Objectivity

Using your logic above, anything said by anyone who is paid by the company they're espousing should immediately be disregarded, simply because they're being paid.

No, I use their post history for that. Works rather well.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Hey, Penton... I'm waiting for your 'all clear' to gab about the race.

My prediction was correct. 106 all around. A real season is upon us.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Bill Hunt

But as I've come to learn in 12 years of doing what I do, no matter what you do and say, whenever you speak opinion in public and no matter how expert, about 30% of those who see and hear it are going to think (for whatever their reasons) that you're an *******, biased, paid off, a shill or what have you. I've seen people, no matter how expert, called an idiot online.

Bill, it still happens to this day, just using different wording……
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=431

^ Here we have Stacey being referred to as an “alleged expert” and you being essentially characterized as a gullible idiot by implication.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

There would have to be a reeaaaaly good reason. SoCal really starts to wear on me after about 2 weeks, personal taste.

I love the things that can be done in LA, I just don't want to live there

Well, if you’re in L.A. at the end of July, you should check this out as you may find something that tickles your fancy and pick it up on the cheap. I know they’ve got Batman stuff as well as a lot of chandeliers from Titanic (Bill, you may want to nab one for Sarah)……….

http://www.dailynews.com/search/ci_1....dailynews.com

[Penton-Man]

shark, what the hell did you do, write a War and Peace novel here.
I'm just going to skim that sucker.