Originally posted by Bardock42Thats how I see it, IF the characters are original, like in Underworld.
I'd say that depends on what you want to achieve, really. As long as it is a good movie, I don't mind.
But when making a movie about an existing novel with established characters, for example, they have an obligation to the fans of the novel to stay true to the novel, or as close as possible.
Good example: Interview with the vampire
Bad Example: Harry Potter and the order of the Phoenix
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
They are both equally important to me. You tell me, did Snipes play Blade true to form?
To you, not to the character. That's my whole point.
And no, not especially.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I thought the character was a bit shallow, lacking the depth that say, Batman has.
Why even compare him to Batman? Daredevil is the closest to Batman.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Dude, I was kidding, that was my way of saying I dont know. Hence the smily.
So now you can answer, so please do.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Do you even know where Luke was conceived?
I'm asking you because I don't know, hence my asking.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Lets say Orlando Bloom was as good an actor as Ford. Can you see Bloom playing Solo?
Yes, I can, actually.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
What IF it were a white mans voice? It has NOTHING to do with the character. And Jones voice was used obviously because it suited the character, but it was not Vaders TRUE voice. Prowse was Vaders true voice.
I asked you a question, do me the respect of answering it or admit you don't want to.
"Let's take James Earl Jones out, and put David Prowse's voice in there instead. Would that work as well, or better? Simple question, I am expecting a huge dodge, but please answer.".
Answer.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
If the fans dont accept it, the movie makes no money, and thats all the movie making business is, $$$. Tell me this doesnt come into play when making a movie, go ahead, lie to me.
You are the one assuming that the whole reason and only reason for ever making a movie is for money, so you're wrong, again.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I most certainly do not. I happen to think Morgan Freeman is one of the greatest actors of our time, and Mace Windu is my fave SW character. This is the part where you pull your foot out of your mouth.
What if Mace Windu was played by a white man?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
$$$$$$$$$....Thats it.
No, not really. You're wrong. Bryan Singer dropped a surefire hit to work on Superman Returns, because he loved the character and wanted to do something good with it. Not everyone makes movies just to make money. That's like saying no musicians do it for any other reason. Clutching at straws.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Point is, despite the horrid discrepancies from the book, Mark Wahlberg played his part well, as did Danny Glover.
Fans would disagree. Now how are you gonna play your next reply? Be careful.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Or you could just tell me.
I know reading is such a hard task, isn't it?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Ones skin tone defines ones ethnicity. Easy cheesy. And no, Peters problems are open to all races.
Then why does he definitely have to be white for the character to work? If his character could totally work in every other important area, just with a black man, why is that a problem?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I just answered....point?
Now you have, it took me three attempts to get an answer.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
And a white man standing up for blacks would have had no impact?
Do you even know your own country's history? It was in spite of white oppression, you honestly believe it would have ever happened if a white man tried it? It wouldn't have. Brush up on your history.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
This is why the acting must be dead on, as must the VISUAL of the character.
Acting MUST be, visuals less so. Cyclops, as an example.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
You talking about Blade still? Milk that cow, sonny boy, milk it.
Who brought it into the debate?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
My opinion is just that, my opinion, as yours is yours, neither are more valid than the other, thats why they are opinions, not fact.
No, mine is actual fact regarding source material that characters are created from, and developed with, that I have an extensive knowledge of.
Yours is based on the movies, a two hour, usually less, depiction of characters that have been around for more than four decades or so. My opinion not only holds way more weight, but in terms of whether or not colour is inherent to their characters, it's factual. Spider-Man's colour isn't, Blade's isn't, Wolverine's isn't.
You wouldn't know, you haven't got the knowledge, so your opinion isn't anywhere near as valid.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Because.....people pay hundreds millions of dollars to see them?
Huh? He said "Why make them?" with regards to you saying "If you're going to, everything should be as close to 100% accurate as possible.", it's hardly ever this way, so what's the point of even making comic book movies, or book adaptations? You either accept they will not always be 100% accurate, hardly ever, or you keep that ridiculous notion that they will, and be the bigger fool.
-AC
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Thats how I see it, IF the characters are original, like in Underworld.But when making a movie about an existing novel with established characters, for example, they have an obligation to the fans of the novel to stay true to the novel, or as close as possible.
Good example: Interview with the vampire
Bad Example: Harry Potter and the order of the Phoenix
They don't have any obligation. They should make a good movie. Whether it is a piece for piece adaptation like Sin City or just a good, fun movie like Punisher (imo) doesn't matter...it should just be good. Otherwise I won't pay. They don't actually have an obligation to anyone, but the owner of the character.
Stan Lee, for example, gave his blessing to Daredevil, where Kingpin was black. Going so far as appearing in it.
Not to mention that there are glaring differences in the novel to the movie, regarding Interview with the Vampire. He's ok with it being as "accurate as possible", ok with them chopping a couple of hundreds of pages novel into an hour and a half of movie, but if a character has different skin tone, run to the hills.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriHow so? I am genuinely curious.To you, not to the character. That's my whole point.
And no, not especially.
Why even compare him to Batman? Daredevil is the closest to Batman.Just saying that when playing Batman, didnt he have more to work with than he did with some dragon slayer?
[b]So now you can answer, so please do.I dunno, man. Goldberg? 😂 YOU tell ME.
[b]I'm asking you because I don't know, hence my asking.Luke was conceived on Coruscant, the most racially/species diverse planet in the galaxy.
[b]Yes, I can, actually.crylaugh
[b]I asked you a question, do me the respect of answering it or admit you don't want to.I did answer, I said Jones voice was chosen because it suited the character, therefore it worked better, WHEN VADER WAS IN HIS ARMOR."Let's take James Earl Jones out, and put David Prowse's voice in there instead. Would that work as well, or better? Simple question, I am expecting a huge dodge, but please answer.".
Answer.
[b]You are the one assuming that the whole reason and only reason for ever making a movie is for money, so you're wrong, again.If not the only reason, then its the main reason. Tell me, Mr. Coppola, how am I wrong? You seem to be an expert on everything from widgets to movie making.
[b]What if Mace Windu was played by a white man?He would still be my fave Jedi. Care to know why?
[b]No, not really. You're wrong. Bryan Singer dropped a surefire hit to work on Superman Returns, because he loved the character and wanted to do something good with it. Not everyone makes movies just to make money. That's like saying no musicians do it for any other reason. Clutching at straws.Yeah, and Superman returns didnt make any money.
[b]Fans would disagree. Now how are you gonna play your next reply? Be careful.Do you wanna know why I think he played the part well, or what discrepancies there were between the book and the movie?
[b]I know reading is such a hard task, isn't it?You know, you just passed on driving your point home.
[b]Then why does he definitely have to be white for the character to work? If his character could totally work in every other important area, just with a black man, why is that a problem?He doesnt have to be white, but he was created as being white, therefore the actor should be white.
[b]Now you have, it took me three attempts to get an answer.actually it took two but whatever.
[b]Do you even know your own country's history? It was in spite of white oppression, you honestly believe it would have ever happened if a white man tried it? It wouldn't have. Brush up on your history.We'll never know, now will we? Maybe it wouldnt have worked, but then again, maybe it would have had more of an impact.
[b]Acting MUST be, visuals less so. Cyclops, as an example.Its 50/50, man.
[b]Who brought it into the debate?Well, you are the one hanging on to it for dear life.
[b]No, mine is actual fact regarding source material that characters are created from, and developed with, that I have an extensive knowledge of.Your opinion is FACT? MAN....better buy a new ladder to get on your pedestal.
[b]Yours is based on the movies, a two hour, usually less, depiction of characters that have been around for more than four decades or so. My opinion not only holds way more weight, but in terms of whether or not colour is inherent to their characters, it's factual. Spider-Man's colour isn't, Blade's isn't, Wolverine's isn't.Milk Milk Milk.........You wouldn't know, you haven't got the knowledge, so your opinion isn't anywhere near as valid.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriLeaving shit out and changing shit are like apples and oranges. Sure, for time reasons, a novel must be cropped down, some details left out.
Stan Lee, for example, gave his blessing to Daredevil, where Kingpin was black. Going so far as appearing in it.Not to mention that there are glaring differences in the novel to the movie, regarding Interview with the Vampire. He's ok with it being as "accurate as possible", ok with them chopping a couple of hundreds of pages novel into an hour and a half of movie, but if a character has different skin tone, run to the hills.
-AC
But when they take something and change it, thats what irks me.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
How so? I am genuinely curious.
You really need it explained? Blade doesn't need to be black to exist. They could rewrite the first issue tomorrow with him as a white man and it wouldn't matter to Marvel, he'd still be Blade, he'd still have fans. What's important to you does not translate to the character.
It's like music and lyrics. To some, lyrics are as important as the music itself, but a LISTENER may need the lyrics. The music does not need the lyrics to exist. Listeners decide what THEY need, now what the music needs.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Just saying that when playing Batman, didnt he have more to work with than he did with some dragon slayer?
How's that relevant?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I dunno, man. Goldberg? 😂 YOU tell ME.
No, why do you keep dodging, and then keep naming white men? You have a choice; Jason Statham or Bob Sapp to play Juggernaut?
Please stop dodging it, I've asked you about four times now.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Luke was conceived on Coruscant, the most racially/species diverse planet in the galaxy.
So there's a chance he could have not been white?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
crylaugh
What's so funny? Can't argue the point?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I did answer, I said Jones voice was chosen because it suited the character, therefore it worked better, WHEN VADER WAS IN HIS ARMOR.
That wasn't what I asked you. I simply asked you if you could replace Jones' voice with Prowse's throughout the movie, would you do so? Yes, or no? It's a simple question I've had to ask multiple times, and you're always the first to accuse of dodging, so stop doing it.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
If not the only reason, then its the main reason. Tell me, Mr. Coppola, how am I wrong? You seem to be an expert on everything from widgets to movie making.
Where did I claim such things? You're getting desperate. You claimed that is why all movies are made, I merely corrected you.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
He would still be my fave Jedi. Care to know why?
Would it be because you love the character so much?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Yeah, and Superman returns didnt make any money.
"Superman Returns grossed $200,081,192 in the United States and an estimated $191 million internationally, taking in over $391 million worldwide by the time its theatrical run officially closed on November 2, 2006. It made $21,037,277 from its June 27, 2006 and June 28, 2006 screenings and $52 million in its first weekend, a rather fair amount.".
True, it made peanuts.
Do you ever research things, or do you just spew?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Do you wanna know why I think he played the part well, or what discrepancies there were between the book and the movie?
Enlighten me.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
You know, you just passed on driving your point home.
If you can't be bothered to read the material you've got the audacity to debate me on, then you don't deserve the time.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
He doesnt have to be white, but he was created as being white, therefore the actor should be white.
In your opinion, and finally proving my ultimate point.
A character does not need to be white if their character does not hinge on it, but it's often prefered by fans. Not NEEDED. You argued it was needed, it's not needed for the character, just possibly for the viewer.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
actually it took two but whatever.
Anything to make up a post at this point, huh? Shouldn't have taken two, should have taken one.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
We'll never know, now will we? Maybe it wouldnt have worked, but then again, maybe it would have had more of an impact.
Just do your American history research, it would never have happened.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Its 50/50, man.
To you, not factually. Cyclops got it half right, did it feel half right? No, it felt like it was mostly shit, because despite looking like Cyclops, he didn't act the part.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Well, you are the one hanging on to it for dear life.
Not for dear life, just to continually remind you how unwise it is to debate me on what is and isn't a credible adaptation of material you're clueless about.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Your opinion is FACT? MAN....better buy a new ladder to get on your pedestal.
I never said my opinion was fact. I said I am proving facts, which I am. I also said, separately, that my opinion holds more weight here, and it does. You wish to propose that despite my extensive knowledge of comics, and your massive lack in that area, our opinions on that area are equal?
FACT: Spider-Man does not NEED to be white. FACT: Blade does not NEED to be black.
These are facts based on source material.
OPINION: He should be black/white. We disagree on that, that's fine, but it's simply a fact that he doesn't NEED to be, whether or not he should is entirely up for debate.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Milk Milk Milk.........
Do better.
How many Marvel comics have you read? Answer me that.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Leaving shit out and changing shit are like apples and oranges. Sure, for time reasons, a novel must be cropped down, some details left out.But when they take something and change it, thats what irks me.
It's not true or accurate then, is it?
Furthermore, Armand was entirely different looking in the movie than the book, so was Lestat.
-AC
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Comes from all races of people, all ages, from all corners of the world.You got a point to make?
Don't say something dumb and irrelevant and then act like a counter is also dumb and irrelevant.
Have you ever made a point? In any thread? You're an OTF idiot, only indulged by reasonable people out of boredom or amusement. You're not in the debate, you're just spouting bullshit and dodging.
Why did you mention the millions?
Demonstrate why it was relevant to my point.
Do you suggest that a non-live action movie can't make hundreds of millions? Have you seen Toy Story? Have you ever understood a serious post, by anyone, regarding any subject?
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriI mean his backstory, man. Where he came from. Whistler.
You really need it explained? Blade doesn't need to be black to exist. They could rewrite the first issue tomorrow with him as a white man and it wouldn't matter to Marvel, he'd still be Blade, he'd still have fans. What's important to you does not translate to the character.It's like music and lyrics. To some, lyrics are as important as the music itself, but a LISTENER may need the lyrics. The music does not need the lyrics to exist. Listeners decide what THEY need, now what the music needs.
How's that relevant?Its relevant because it shows that some roles are crap, no matter how good the actor is.
No, why do you keep dodging, and then keep naming white men? You have a choice; Jason Statham or Bob Sapp to play Juggernaut?I aint dodging, man, I genuinely cant answer that. If you insist, I say Vinny.Please stop dodging it, I've asked you about four times now.
So there's a chance he could have not been white?No, he was definitely white, both parents white, this is why Anakin and Padme are white, because thirty years ago their son was cast as white.
What's so funny? Can't argue the point?Its not worth arguing, man.
That wasn't what I asked you. I simply asked you if you could replace Jones' voice with Prowse's throughout the movie, would you do so? Yes, or no? It's a simple question I've had to ask multiple times, and you're always the first to accuse of dodging, so stop doing it.I just answered you. I said Jones voice was more suitable for the dark lord, therefore NO, I wouldnt change it. But I do think Prowses voice was better for Anakin, after his helmet was removed.
Why do I think you will accuse me of dodging again?
Where did I claim such things? You're getting desperate. You claimed that is why all movies are made, I merely corrected you.Why do you think some movie ideas are scrapped?
Would it be because you love the character so much?His background. He wasnt my fave until a while after I saw ROTS, when I read "Shatterpoint."
"Superman Returns grossed $200,081,192 in the United States and an estimated $191 million internationally, taking in over $391 million worldwide by the time its theatrical run officially closed on November 2, 2006. It made $21,037,277 from its June 27, 2006 and June 28, 2006 screenings and $52 million in its first weekend, a rather fair amount.".I took what you said as the director passing on a cash cow in order to direct a movie that would make less money.True, it made peanuts.
Do you ever research things, or do you just spew?
Enlighten me.I'll post it seperately, this post is already long enough.
If you can't be bothered to read the material you've got the audacity to debate me on, then you don't deserve the time.YOU brought up Tyler, I never argued against it. I merely asked a question as to what he looks like.
In your opinion, and finally proving my ultimate point.You just said it, preferred by fans.A character does not need to be white if their character does not hinge on it, but it's often prefered by fans. Not NEEDED. You argued it was needed, it's not needed for the character, just possibly for the viewer.
What if a black comic hero has super powers hidden in his afro? Can a white guy play the role in a movie?
Anything to make up a post at this point, huh? Shouldn't have taken two, should have taken one.Ideally.
Just do your American history research, it would never have happened.I tend to focus on the here and now.
To you, not factually. Cyclops got it half right, did it feel half right? No, it felt like it was mostly shit, because despite looking like Cyclops, he didn't act the part.I have issues with the way he died like a punk.
Not for dear life, just to continually remind you how unwise it is to debate me on what is and isn't a credible adaptation of material you're clueless about.Material I continually ask you about, but you refuse to answer.
[/b]
I never said my opinion was fact. I said I am proving facts, which I am. I also said, separately, that my opinion holds more weight here, and it does. You wish to propose that despite my extensive knowledge of comics, and your massive lack in that area, our opinions on that area are equal?This goes beyond comics, man, this goes into EVERY character created in any way shape or form, then made into a movie.
FACT: Spider-Man does not NEED to be white. FACT: Blade does not NEED to be black.FACT: If Spidey is cast black and Blade cast white, the movie (s) are NOT accurate.
OPINION: He should be black/white. We disagree on that, that's fine, but it's simply a fact that he doesn't NEED to be, whether or not he should is entirely up for debate.Yes, the character should match the physical description that fans have come to know and love. SHOULD, not NEED. Makes it easier when shit is depicted accurately.
How many Marvel comics have you read? Answer me that.Why? as I said, this goes beyond comics, but you will certainly keep it confined to comics I am sure.
It's not true or accurate then, is it?Armand, yes. Lestat, only slightly so.Furthermore, Armand was entirely different looking in the movie than the book, so was Lestat.
-AC
Originally posted by Victor Von DoomYeah, I totally suggested that an animated movie wont make money. You SO got me there.
Don't say something dumb and irrelevant and then act like a counter is also dumb and irrelevant.Have you ever made a point? In any thread? You're an OTF idiot, only indulged by reasonable people out of boredom or amusement. You're not in the debate, you're just spouting bullshit and dodging.
Why did you mention the millions?
Demonstrate why it was relevant to my point.
Do you suggest that a non-live action movie can't make hundreds of millions? Have you seen Toy Story? Have you ever understood a serious post, by anyone, regarding any subject?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I mean his backstory, man. Where he came from. Whistler.
Whistler? Never actually picked up, or read, a single Blade comic in your entire life, have you?
Again, who are you to argue how accurate a movie is to the source when you don't know the source? Are you aware Whistler has been in a grand total of zero comics? None of Blade's original story contained Whistler, he didn't even exist until 1996 when they created him for the Spider-Man animated series. So unless they've randomly changed Blade's entire backstory and put him in, he remains without a comics appearance.
Now, will you stop trying to discuss what is an accurate adaptation and what isn't?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Its relevant because it shows that some roles are crap, no matter how good the actor is.
A good actor can play a good part in a shit movie. De Niro proves that.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I aint dodging, man, I genuinely cant answer that. If you insist, I say Vinny.
Why? He doesn't look, sound, act or appear to be anything like Juggernaut. Bob Sapp has way more in common.
Skin tone? That element you say you don't pay attention to? Yeah.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
No, he was definitely white, both parents white, this is why Anakin and Padme are white, because thirty years ago their son was cast as white.
What? I didn't say he wasn't white, I asked if, due to the variation of races, there was a possiblility he could easily have been white, and he clearly could have.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Its not worth arguing, man.
Why post? You proved you have no relevant or credible opinion on the argument of comic movie adaptations being accurate.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I just answered you. I said Jones voice was more suitable for the dark lord, therefore NO, I wouldnt change it. But I do think Prowses voice was better for Anakin, after his helmet was removed.
So it was ok for a black man to play a white man's voice? Hypocrite.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Why do I think you will accuse me of dodging again?
Because you did previously, to avoid giving me such a hypocritical true answer, but you did, after multiple askings.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Why do you think some movie ideas are scrapped?
Do you insist on getting more and more irrelevant? Are you that hard up for ideas and points? You suggested it's only ever done for the money, it's not, fact.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
His background. He wasnt my fave until a while after I saw ROTS, when I read "Shatterpoint."
Excellent, so you prove my point. His background and character portrayal would matter instead of skin tone.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I took what you said as the director passing on a cash cow in order to direct a movie that would make less money.
You clearly suggested Superman Returns made no money cos it was made with the love of the character in mind first. I proved you wrong, an "I admit it." would suffice.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
YOU brought up Tyler, I never argued against it. I merely asked a question as to what he looks like.
I was curious how well your little "Must be 100% accurate." argument would hold up against one of your favourite characters who isn't 100% accurate.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
You just said it, preferred by fans.What if a black comic hero has super powers hidden in his afro? Can a white guy play the role in a movie?
Yes, preferred by "fans", not NEEDED for the character. Please don't make me explain it again. You're an adult, learn.
White men can't have afros? Why are you descending further into pathetically irrelevant statements? Do you just like to prolong things so you can feel involved?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Ideally.
It didn't because you are a dodger who will do anything to prolong his involvement in a post, then go on to a debate in future and accuse someone else of the same.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I tend to focus on the here and now.
That's why you brought up a black civil rights leader from the past? Do you ever, honestly, get tired of being shown up? Does it never occur to you to, just once, save some face and dignity?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I have issues with the way he died like a punk.
And who are you to say this isn't accurate or whatever? You wouldn't know that, you don't read comics. That's one thing I keep getting stumped on. Just who you think you are to say how accurate characters like Blade are, when you believe Whistler, a character created for the non-canonical cartoon and movie, is part of his true backstory, when he isn't even in the comics.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Material I continually ask you about, but you refuse to answer.
If you have to ask, why are you, in the first place, suggesting it's not accurate? Why not ask FIRST? It doesn't work that way if you are logical.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
FACT: If Spidey is cast black and Blade cast white, the movie (s) are NOT accurate.
To the visuals that we know of, it has no bearing on the characters, fact. Don't debate comics characters with me, RJ. Perhaps just read the non-existent Whistler appearances.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Yes, the character should match the physical description that fans have come to know and love. SHOULD, not NEED. Makes it easier when shit is depicted accurately.
It would have no bearing on what is depicted accurately though, just visually. Character is more important, and that would not suffer with a different raced character in Spider-Man or Blade's cases, fact.
If you know it's not NEEDED for the character, my very first and main point is being confirmed as true by you, so there's no need to continue.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Why? as I said, this goes beyond comics, but you will certainly keep it confined to comics I am sure.
Who brought Blade, Batman and Wolverine into this? You.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Armand, yes. Lestat, only slightly so.
So? It's still not 100% accurate to the visuals they gave fans.
Make up your mind.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Yeah, I totally suggested that an animated movie wont make money. You SO got me there.
I'll explain what he meant.
You said that movie adaptations from books or comics should be 100% accurate when compared to the source, that's almost never gonna happen, hasn't happened yet. So if you know this, he said, why even suggest live-action movies of these source materials should be made?
Your very irrelevant answer was, "Because they make money.". You do not see why this is stupid?
You really did not get anything he said.
My final request: If you must reply, do so without making reference to any comic book characters. You proved in this post that you know nothing of them, and you insist your preference for skin tone overrides factual character backstory and relevance. Reply to what's relevant, but stay away from comics, I think we can agree it's for your own good. You killed yourself with the Whistler thing.
Shall we not just part ways and leave this where it is? I see no further reason to continue. I won't ask for an admission of you being wrong, let's just save time.
-AC