MetamorphosisSigma wrote:
I take it that when you say "PC" you mean to say it's full of liberal environmentalist propaganda (probably true), but imagine the outcry it would have caused in the U.S. had it been released circa 2002/2003!

It's kind of nice to see that we're back to a place where someone can criticize rampant militarism, colonial ambitions, and rape of the natural world without being called a traitor   .

What I mostly suspect (because I have not actually seen the film) is the standard, off-the-rack situation where we metaphorical bad Western people just don't understand such an old and spiritual culture.

But one man, forced to live as one with nature, comes to truly understand.  

I prefer a story where there are depths of character and more complicated situations.  Conflicts seldom involve all good on one side and all bad on the other.  I like it when the moral dilemmas are more complex.

Then the characters shoot each other!

It can be done: Battlestar Galactica

Agent Cooper wrote:
So this movie is about the Chinese?

You could insert the name of just about anyone you hate in there...fat people, Aliens, Nazis, Republicans, Democrats, Israel, Muslims, Palestinians, King Leopold(Belgium), Stalin, ....

This is not a list of people or groups I hate.  I'm just moving the conversation along to its possible conclusion so we can get back to loving each other.  

Seriously, I'm going to the movie for the special effects.  But I hope there's a good story in there as well.

Roooooooooooooollll   Tide!

Go home Tebow.  They umps give you your fumble back, and you just throw an interception anyway!  

Rooooooooooolll  Tide!

Queen is in.  I nominate Iron Maiden as a big snub.

Here is a link to the inductees for anyone interested:

http://www.rockhall.com/inductees/alphabetical-list/

Public Enemy another snub.

Damn you Mike, what a time killer!  I'm supposed to be working, instead I am crossreferencing this list vs. Wikipedia pages!

Nirvana and Pearl Jam.  Maybe these guys are considered too new.  Both have multiple platinum albums, many top 5 singles and were poster bands for "grunge."

All right, all right, I will get back to work!

A recent issue of Rolling Stone magazine explained the Hall of Fame selection process.

There is a group of 200 voters (musicians, inductees and music industry people) who narrow down from a list of (as I recall...details do not really matter) 50 or so each year.  The list of 50 is nominated by a more central committee (or maybe I have it backwards?).

Doesn't matter...

What matters is that the 200 or so voters select artists based upon the quality of their work, influence upon other musicians, longevity, popularity and a number of other ephemeral qualities.  There is usually a selection of "heritage" artists and an attempt to include multiple styles of music...and also rap.  A certain number of unknown but important "side men" are also inducted...usually one per year.

Does not surprise me that KISS is not in the Hall of Fame.  They were never about the critics or the esteem of their peers.  They were about cash money...and they got it.  Their cultural influence was big.  Their musical influence, not so much.

The Moody Blues seem a more likely heritage act than some.

Rush strikes me as more accomlished, more honored and more influential than most of the acts I can think of.  If the Hall of Fame were in Canada, Rush would have been the opening act at the first induction ceremony.

FormCritic wrote:
Rush strikes me as more accomlished, more honored and more influential than most of the acts I can think of.  If the Hall of Fame were in Canada, Rush would have been the opening act at the first induction ceremony.

They do have a Canadian Music HoF, of which Rush is a member.