reddsun1

aha, I was going to post some new pics I found of the Miura concept, but you beat me to it, A7. Hear Hear! Nicely done! I'm liking that Camaro concept. The 3/4 angle view of the Challenger does it justice, too. Although from other angles, the Dodge just feels a little too "upright" or tall, for some reason. It's gonna be a big motha too, w/that 116" wheelbase, this one may suffer from weight issues compared to the Mustang, like the orginal Mopars did. I'd LOVE to see ver. of it go into racing head to head with the 'Stangs and Porsches, Maybe in GrandAm or SWC, if/when it goes into production. But the guys at Dodge better understand: it had better be able to walk the walk, if they're gonna take on the 'Stang on the showroom floor--it can't just look the part, it's got to be a solid performer, and more than just in a straight line. Yup, it's definitely a good time to be alive and a musclecar fan... I'm LOVING that Miura, but it looks oddly like the Pantera as much as it does it's namesake Lambo. Maybe that owes to the nature of the design layout; mid-engine, long snout, short rear deck--there's only so much you can do within those parameters, and there's bound to be inherent similarities?

YOu are talking the remake right? The original is funny, car chasing and crashing campy gold. I used to watch the original all the time with my dad, though what they do that poor Shelby mustang is a crime. Funny thing is that car still runs. 357984[/snapback] I suppose it depends on the individual's definition of "classic." In the case of GI60S, no one would [or should] argue that the original is not a b-movie lover's cheese-fest--the plot, the acting, etc--yeah, we know it's pretty "bad" going in...but the chase! Whoa Nelly! That's what's considered classic, I think. It could arguably be considered one of the forerunner's of the current trend in movies for over-the-top-blow-you-through-the back-of-your-seat action scenes. Hell, the first time I saw that chase scene, I felt like I needed a cigarette afterwards...and I don't smoke. Shelby? In the original? What Shelby? That's a Mach I, power courtesy of a 351W. Holy crap! I thought you guys were just b/s'ing earlier--James Stewart really did fly missions in WWII? Whoa, that's fuggin' cool, and quite deserving of respect. Certainly an understated hero--while he had some gritty "world-weary" roles, he never seemed to play any tough guys, who wore it on their sleeves, so to speak.

I think even the actors who were in the film agreed it was kinda "bleh," even when it was new. The plot was kinda "huh," somewhat disjointed--but for anyone professing to be a "car guy" it's ALL about the car chase scene. Yeah, there may be better-filmed or edited chase scenes to come along since then, but it's arguably still a benchmark film for "guy movies." One for the "mantle" of great car-guy movies, along with LeMans, Ronin, French Connection [i STILL wanna see that one], Gone in 60 Seconds [original], etc., etc...but yes; it is a "classic" that, other than the big chase, is kind of a pisser of a movie. As for the earlier mention of John Wayne's deficiencies as an actor, I'd have to say "but au contraire." One mustn't forget--John Wayne didn't really act, per se--he just played himself, i.e. John Wayne as a cowboy, John Wayne as fighter pilot, John Wayne as soldier, etc., etc. How this schtick actually worked with audiences--and for so many years--is still one of the mysteries of cinema. Definitely a "man's man," hearkening from a different era in pop culture.

Captain America (1991)--is there a new ver. due for '07? They Live--"I have come here to kick ass, and chew bubble gum. And I'm all out of bubble gum." Stroker Ace--I love the outtakes at the end of those movies w/Reynolds, D. Deluise et. al. from the 80's Message From Space--Cheesy SW rip-off, but Vic Morrow kicked arse! pretty much any of the Doug McClure classics

Looks like Audi and Team Joest are about ready to [possibly] begin a new, second era of dominance in world sports car racing with the unveiling of the R10? Powered by a twin-turbo V-12 diesel, this car will make some pretty astounding numbers [for a race engine]. Output will be north of 650hp and [here's the stunning one] 1100Nm of torque [that's 810+ ft/lbs! what a hp/torque ratio! in a race motor!] According to one source: "The engine's power and the high torque are available to the driver practically from idling speed - a speciality of diesel technology, to which the Audi drivers must now become accustomed. The usable power band lies between 3000 and 5000 revs per minute. Unfamiliar to the driver at this early stage, is the low noise level and, unique for a racing engine, the smooth running V12 TDI power unit. At high speeds the powerful 650 hp engine can not be heard from the Audi R10 prototype's "open" cockpit while there is also hardly any vibration. On the outside, the modern twelve-cylinder produces a faint, but sonorous sound that quite possibly nobody would identify as a diesel power unit at first. The new R10 can only be recognised acoustically as a diesel-powered sportscar during the warming-up process or in the pit lane. There are no visual signs that a diesel power unit is at work in the back of the R10. It goes without saying that the V12 TDI is equipped with a pair of diesel particle filters for the 24 Hours of Le Mans. Flashes of flame from the exhaust, which are created by unburned petrol in spark-ignition engines, are not seen coming from the R10." I was already surprised at how quiet the R8's--and the Caddy's--were when I saw them race. This should be something to behold, I'm sure. Given the choice of power, and Team Joest's impressive record, I'd expect nick names like "Freight Train" and the like to start being coined in the pitlanes in reference to this potential juggernaut of a race car. LOL, don't be surprised to see a flurry of incensed Frenchmen hurriedly "revising" the ACO rulebooks for 2007 if the R10 indeed proves too dominant a force come next year...

LOL, I'm game for that scenario. I've already got some wheels. Now, I just need to wrangle up some black paint, a sawed-off street howitzer, some MFP decals and me bronze badges. Oh and of course, a 6-71 blower and some way to switch it on and off. Oh, and a dynamite boobytrap for the gas tank....actually, I was thinking of doing the boobytrap thing anyway. If I can't have it, no one can! mwa ha ha ha ha! Two days ago I saw a rig that'll haul that tankah o' yours. You wanna get outta heah....talk to me.

Yup, although the original ver. of KK was just released on DVD, I'd count on the studios negotiating [if they haven't already] the necessary rights et. al. to ensure they'll be able to release it AGAIN, to coincide/package with the new version's pending release, thereby doubling their profits. Expect a "King Kong definitive edition" release or some crap like that, with all three versions in a box set; "...see both the original 1933 release, the 1976 remake starring Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange, AND the smash-hit of 2005, plus up to 6 hours of deleted scenes, director's and cast commentaries and interviews from Peter Jackson's blockbuster remake..." ad nauseum. I'd bet on it...

Well, it's been said somewhere "let cooler heads prevail..." After some time to mull over what I'd seen, I won't give the new King Kong two thumbs down like I originally intended. One thumb up. It's definitely a movie you'll have to mull over for a bit, or see a couple of times; you know, to let it grow on you, to appreciate just what Jackson was trying to do with this one. JELEINEN: you were right in your orignal post before--making Kong just an overgrown silverback gorilla does kinda suck. I too, think I like him better when he was as described in the myth "neither man nor beast," when he was more "monstrous." But hey, that served a different purpose then, when that was all we were meant to see him as. Not so, this time out. --The film score: seemed to struggle to set the mood for certain scenes in some places, and just seemed a bit "intrusive" in others. I did like the song by Norah Jones though--she has a beautiful, velvety smooth voice, plus she's a da-n good lookin' woman too. --the Natives of Skull Island: my initial reaction--and I imagine most viewers' as well--when seeing them was like "what. the. fu--?!" Savage is an understatement. But then I took them into context with the "big picture" Jackson creates for us with the visual cues throughout the jungle settings, with the ancient ruins and all. These are a people vanquished, the last remnants of what was surely a great and vastly advanced culture. Just what would a peoples be reduced to if they were driven to the very edge of their world? a rocky, practically inhospitable crag of the island, kept away from all they knew of their former selves for dozens, if not hundreds of years? Yup, such savagery does seem a likely outcome if people are literally forced out of their own civilization. And yes, this ver. does try to address the issue of the wall's inadequacies as a defence, as brought up earlier. [this isn't really a spoiler: if you've seen the trailers you've seen how Kong circumvents this with his leap onto the wall] This wall is at least on the edge of a giant chasm, or "moat" if you will, which would explain how the monsters don't just climb over. --the whole woman and ape thing: my initial knee-jerk reaction to Anne Darrow's loyalty to Kong was a bit damning. If anything, there isn't anything "romantic" about it per se, but there's a definite bond between them. I just have to remember the different social standards of the day for this movie, compared to those of 1930's America. This film [and even the '76 ver. for that matter] has definitely got the whole "animal rights" undertones at work. Kong's characterization has taken a 180 turn compared to his original screen depiction. In the original, Kong is the "beast," the monster, period. Hey, we all know how it's got to end; but he's much more of the "good guy" this go 'round. I don't think we're meant to see Kong as a monster in this ver. but more so as simply an animal, misunderstood by a flawed humanity. It was man who was really the monster in Jackson's King Kong. So by the time Kong takes on the planes at the end, the audience is pretty much rooting for him. I guess that's why Jackson makes a small concession to our sentiments and let's him take out more than one plane this time [the effects for that battle, the plane crashes were outstanding; gruesome, when you think of what happens to those poor bas---ds in the cockpits]. It could arguably be said that the new version of King Kong is NOT a monster movie [in the traditional sense]. Kind of a shame really; in spite of all the vitality and life that modern filmmaking technology has given this version, this Kong can't really be considered a "movie monster" worthy of comparison to the greats, but rather just an animal. And oh yeah: Peter Jackson's a hack. Funny how--at least at the show I was in--the scenes that were most suspense laden and got the most audible response from the audience, the "oohs" and "ahh's," [the final part of the dino fight, between Kong and the last remaining Rex; the cliff scene, when Kong's pulling an escaping Anne & Jack back up on the vine] were the ones he just "Memorex'd" from the '33 original.

Well, I went ahead and made a leap of faith; just got back from seeing King Kong. Verdict? Meh--glad I only paid $5 bucks to see it. Spoilers contained below, beware! The plus side: --There were some cool places where Jackson threw in little homages to the original film. Like using the overture and tribal theme music from the original movie for Denham's NY premiere. --Check out the squadron that the fighter planes are in at the end; kinda cute. --Certain camera angles worked very well; like those where Anne's on the ladder on the Empire State. Some of those shots made me queezy--vertigo sufferers beware! --There was a lot of beautiful detail and depth given to Skull Island that was appreciated. Certain details, like the ancient ruins [the ancient road, etc.] added a lot of back story just by being there. --The special effects: in a lot of places, they were just great. The T-Rexs were sa-weet! The minus side: --Kong was a runt! I felt a little cheated; "why, you're barely bigger than Mighty Joe Young!" --The special effects: yes, I know that's a bit contradictary. But in some places, they were just way overdone; gave the impression that they were trying so hard to wham-pow-sock it to the audience visually, they just went overboard with it. Gee-whiz, a good action scene doesn't have to automatically=sensory overload, guys. --The dino-fight: sorry, but I just can't meet you halfway on this one, Jackson. The ORIGINAL '33 T-rex battle was more suspensful and believable to me. --The dino stampede: oh fercrissakes! The laws of probability/physics/just plain common sense kinda took a back seat for this one. While the cinematography was good in that it felt quite "kinetic" [for lack of a better description], by the time it was over, I was thinking "allright, not nary one of them muh fuh's ought to be alive after this sh-t." --The insect ravine: by this point, I'm like "oh for fu--'s sake! I've seen episodes of GI Joe more fuggin believable than this!" It just defies logic--even fantasy/movie logic. --Carl Denham: As dry and wooden as his delivery was, I like the ORIGINAL Denham much better. Jack Black just seemed a bit too goofy/immature for me. That, plus in this ver. Denham's just a snivelling, self-serving worm. --The whole "romance" thing: this "Titanic-only-with-a-monkey" vibe I was getting just got a little too wierd for me. I can go with the forced-dependence-to-survive-grows-into-a-sense-of-attachment; but it got just wierd. But to give credit whre it's due--I think the monkey's performance was better than Leo Decrappio's acting! I could go on, but what's the point. I'll only say: Mr. Jackson, your monkey is only HALF the ape the original Kong was....in more ways than one.

Ah yes, the institution of marriage is a beautiful thing.....if you don't mind being institutionalized. Congratulations.

I think the biggest, yet unseen impact of the Cayman will be the fact that it could conceivably provide an "entry-level" Porsche, making the brand even more broadly accessible. It offers the potential for performance nearly equal to that of the 911, but for thousands [about 12K] less. As far as which design layout is better? The argument on that one could go on and on. It is hard to argue with the overwhelming success of the 911 design, in all its successive generations in endurance/sports car racing. It's been the company's "bread and butter," i.e. competition ready-cars made available to private customers, for decades. Even Dodge is copying the business model--to a degree--making the Viper Comp. Coupe available for sale to the public. They've definitely been doing something right over the years. I think Porsche and Toyota are pretty much the only carmakers operating in the black. The big question--and I guess only time will tell--will be whether they'll end up stepping on their own di--s by trying to continue expanding their product lines; any of the execs at Ford or GM ought to be able to tell them about how a corporation that continues to swell and expand eventually runs the danger of collapsing in on itself. SUV's? 4-door sedans? Is Ferdie rolling in his grave? Good point on the Challenger. I hadn't considered that when it does come to market, it probably will be at $30K and UP. If they can bring an entry-level 6-cyl model to market at $19-$22K, they'll be doing pretty good [heck, you can get a 390hp Magnum 360 for about $4000; buy a 6-banger then slap in a crate motor]. Now if they can just make it a little lower--those designs don't sit well with today's prevailing philosophy of taller, more erect designing. The da-n thing's nearly as tall as that mini-van in the pics!

These are reputed to be spy pics of the upcoming Dodge Challenger concept, due to make it's debut in January. Hoo-wah!! I like it!! Built on a shortened ver. of the Charger platform [116" w'base vs. Charger's 120"]. I WANT ONE! And with Dodge releasing a plethora of kicka$$ crate motors as well, the possibilities for a new generation of hot rodders--or the current one, wanting to relive old times--are seemingly limitless. Only one concern: don't know if it's in the details, like the super wide tailpipes or what; but it looks a bit narrow. Make it about 2"-3" wider, then you'll be cookin' with a blowtorch, baby! I know what it is now. It's too tall, that's what it is. Looks like the designers sought to capture the same "look" of the original's high fenderlines and rear "hips." But they should have taken into account the vast difference in sizes of respective wheelwells--the modern version's being much larger, to accomodate what looks like big honking 20" or so wheels/tires. Should have kept the car's "waistline" down low--makes the sides and doors on this ver. look really tall.

I'm kinda leaning towards not liking the Mustang. The wheel and tire package is straight up whack. Looks too gaudy [the DUmB treatment strikes again!], and probably rides like sh-t. I'm sure Mustang/Ford afficianados will cry heresy.

Aw man, favorite moments? There's so many to choose from. Was it Bustin' Loose, when he smooth talks the group of clansmen to push that busload of kids out of the mud? Or maybe Which Way Is Up, when he played the corrupt preacher who gets run over by the tour bus "...man! flatter than 2-day old beer!" Or Silver Streak, when he has to help G. Wilder dress up and be "black" to get out of the train station. The critics may have cut it no slack, but Harlem Nights was a funny movie: --"Shug, I want you to make love to me all night long." --"Can't we jus' do it, real hard for like, 30 minutes, then go to sleep?" One of my favorites will always be Greased Lightning... Yeah, he did set himself on fire, while freebasing coke. Some of his best comedic material came from dealing with those personal issues. "man, when you run down the street on fire, people get the fu-- outta your way!" Jo Jo Dancer, Your Life Is Calling is pretty much a loosly based autobiographical film, and is very good. Gives a lot of insight into what shaped him into the man he was. Truly one of the great comedic minds, he opened a lot of doors for a lot of comics who would come later.

Well, considering his battle with MS, and his steadily failing health, it doesn't come as a real surprise or shock per se. But it's still a bummer to hear that groundbreaking "blue" comic Richard Pryor has finally left us. !$#%! Apparently, he suffered a heart attack this morning, "he did not suffer, he went quickly and at the end there was a smile on his face..." according to wife Jennifer Pryor.

Hey, anybody cast a vote for The A-Team yet? I just love they way most of their plans involved high-explosives by the crateful, assault rifles, smashing and blowing stuff up--yet, none of the badguys actually get killed; they just get sent running with their tails between their legs...serves 'em right! I love it when a plan comes together... Throughout most of my childhood, I never quite got the gag in the opening credits with Faceman and the Cylon [i had forgotten all about D. Benedict's previous role on BSG at the time].

Anyway, looking at the wall, doesn't seem like its a wall which Kong can't climb over. He can climb the damn Empire State using one arm anyway... Yeah, a T-Rex bite should be awesome. But a punch from the arm of a 50 foot gorilla should pack enough whallop to mush the innards of even a T-Rex..... logically. 351079[/snapback] well yeah, you've got a point on both counts. I gotta learn to stop overanalyzing. It's like a big ball of yarn; if you keep pickin' and pulling at the loose threads, pretty soon the whole thing just comes unraveled. Gotta stop picking at loose threads. Just let go, and allow myself to indulge in the fantasy/story, even for just a little while.

Holy crap, isn't Lorenzo Lamas like, 60 or something by now? I vaguely remember that show. I thought Fraggle Rock was early to mid 80's? And shown on HBO? Good Times? Offensive? No, not offensive. True, time has NOT been kind to that show, and J.J. was definitely a goofball; but if anything, I'm sure a show like that would never get on the air today, as it's nowhere near narcissistic or dysfunctional enough to be seen as entertaining by today's audeinces. If anything, I'd think people would accuse it of being too "goodie-two-shoes." I admire the show for its underlying theme: family sticking together, and always doing right, in spite of your circumstances [instead of doing wrong and claiming its because of your circumstances]. I like how James and his family are always looking/striving to someday get out of the ghetto, to do better for themselves and make their lives better. Unlike nowadays the way folks try to claim something for "ghetto fabulous." I swear, whenever I hear artists/stars claim something's "ghetto fabulous" I wish someone would punch them dead in the mouf. There ain't a godd--n thing "fabulous" about the ghetto. If they'd bother to understand a little more about the history of that word, where it comes from and its context, they wouldn't spout iganant sh-t like that...it's almost like disrespect. I want my Agent ONE box set!

At first I thought there was very little hype surrounding the upcoming Kong movie [but that could be a good thing; there's too much "behind the scenes" stuff surrounding films these days--spoils the magic, in a sense]. But I see they've cranked up the hype machine quite a few notches in the past couple of weeks. But the more previews I see, the more misgivings I'm beginning to have. I think I'm going to join the same camp as Graham: I think I'm going to end up [still] preferring the '33 original. The only problem with our modern-day system of movie previews and PR campaigning is: if you've seen the film trailer, it's safe to say you've already seen the best the film's got to offer; you've already seen the money-shots, so to speak. I've only had two major sticking points with the Kong movies--both the original and the '70's remake. They didn't exactly spoil the movies for me, but they've always lingered there in the back of my mind whenever I've watched them, sort of like "hey, this don't add up." That was: 1. The Wall: okay we have this giant, mysterious wall, built to keep out some ancient and terrible foe. It's so ancient, not even the natives have clear memories as to who built it. But they know what it's for; it's to keep them safe from the monsters that rule the island on the other side. They dare not venture into the realm of the "terrible King" on the other side. So why, oh why in the blue hell would somebody put a DOOR in it BIG ENOUGH FOR THE BIG FU--ER TO GET THROUGH?! [yeah yeah, I know--cause the director wanted it that way, plus it makes for a pivotal plot point when the big ape comes lookin for "his" dame] 2. The Natives: IIRC, doesn't this story take place somewhere in the Pacific? So, if anything, shouldn't the natives of Skull island have been Pacific Islanders instead of tribal Africans, like maybe Samoan or Hawaiian, since that's who generally populates that particular region of the world? I mean, if I made a movie about exploring a fantasy world hidden somewhere in the North Pole, I'd want the natives/locals to look like they're Eskimoe/Aleutian, not like they're Arabian, or Greek, or something. [again, I know it owes to practical issues, like being able to cast enough extras, who's available when you're shooting, etc.] I don't know if I'm going to like how the T-Rex fight goes either. Okay, if it were just one that Kong were fighting, I'd work with ya; but two T-Rex's? I only say this cause I've seen a clip where they've basically got the big ape from both sides, and one proceeds to clamp down on his arm something fierce. Sure, Kong's got the advantage of his arms [there's that whole opposable thumb thing he's got working for him] and dexterity, but I'm thinking these things have got to be like pit bulls--once one bites you, there's no letting go, game over. I saw a show where scientists and engineers built a mock-up T-Rex head [gotta love that Discovery Channel] and tested its bite; first on a side of pork, then on a hapless Mini Cooper. I don't know how they extrapolated the estimate for bite strength [8000 lbs/sq in], but it tore a hunk of ribs/meat out of that pork like you or I would tear a sheet of paper. The hydraulically operated skull then made quite a mess of the Cooper too. I'm just saying: that's a tough act to follow. One of those bas---ds could conceivably tear Kong a new a---hole. And then some. I still wanna see the fight though. I'm willing to give it a chance.

Whoa, I gotta come back and check the threads more often. I didn't realize my comments caused a furor. Bitching? I wouldn't say so. I've not even bought a comic in over 10 yrs, so I'll be the first to admit I'd hardly have room to speak with any "authority" on the characters--a lot's changed since I was actively reading them, I'm sure. I realize I have a choice as to whether I support these films, i.e. not paying the $6 or so bucks at the theaters. And I'm sure I'll exercise the same choice with this one that I did with the previous ones--no thanks, I'll wait for cable. Whether I can stand to watch more than 15 minutes of this one will, like the others, depend on how much I think it sucks. I know Stan Lee, Marvel and whoever else had a hand in their production aren't out trolling this msg board--or any other for that matter--looking for moviegoers' opinions on how to improve their product. Bearing that in mind, if I don't like it, I don't have to watch it. If I think it's worth avoiding and it might benefit a friend by saying so, that's what I'll do. Continuously accepting less-than-good product tends to lower expectations, I'd say. But hey, as long as Hollywood knows they can count on legions of saps willing to part with their dough without expecting much in the way of good story/entertainment in return, I'm sure they'll keep churning out the crap. They could give a rat's arse if I think they could/should do better, and I'm fine with that. They just won't get my money, that's all. If anything, I thought I was sharing my opinions amongst other like-minded Macross-loving sci-fi fans, whose thoughts and comments on various topics I find entertaining and enjoy partaking of [for the most part]. That is what forums are for, aren't they? Or am I missing something? We can still do that here, can't we? It's called expressing one's opinion. That's what I'm doing. SO YOU DEAL WITH IT.

OMG, is that a plastic muscle suit? LMAOROTF!!! Let's face it--there really is no way to bring a character like Juggernaut to the live-action big screen, at least convincingly. And no, making him a CG character won't solve the problem, either--refer to the crap-fest that was "The Hulk" for irrefutable evidence to this. Please refer any and all rebuttals to this plain and obvious truth to that brick wall over there... I've never really been a fan of the X-films. Just didn't like most of the casting choices. As much as I like her, and as bootylicious as Halle "make-me-feel-good" Barry is, I just don't buy her as Storm. Didn't like what they did with Wolverine, either. Jackman was okay I guess, but isn't he 6'+? Even with my limited exposure to the comics, I think they still left a lot to be desired with his fleshing-out on film. His rough-edged toughness--he is the best there is at what he does--was reduced to just another celluloid schtick of one-liners and cliched machismo turned up ad-nauseum. I liked Prof. Xavier though. Thought Sabretooth's characterization/casting choice in the movie sucked. oh yeah--the film ver. of Magneto's helmet makes him look like a dork. Hey wait a minute, I take that back about Wolvie. They straight up made him a beeyatch! IIRC, he spent a good deal of the first film getting his arse handed to him--by a dame! who's only special ability is changing shape?

oh, it's the "smiling Mach 5" again. Yup, it's definitely an, er, interesting design. I swear that "face" that the grille/headlights seems to make is kinda creepy...

I don't think the key Japanese planners [Yamamoto in particular] ever had any notions of invading mainland USA. IIRC, his plans were based around eliminating the US Navy as a threat to Japanese expansion in the Pacific, no more. I don't think the Japanese had any desire for war with America in particular [at least, before the military extremists took power with their "8 corners of the world under one roof" doctrine]; they just realized that their plans of expansion and procuring oil [yes, the war in the Pacific was primarily about OIL] and industrial raw materials would inevitably put them at odds with the US, the other big kid on the block in the Pacific. The military leaders decided they would take the initiative and eliminate the US before they could stop their plans of expansion, thus calling on Yamamoto to make plans for combatting/eliminating the US Navy. Bear in mind, Yamamoto was educated in America [was it Harvard?], so he had some familiarity of American culture and its industrial capabilities; he knew Japan couldn't match the USA's military/industrial production capacities in a long, drawn out conflict. If memory serves correct, when he was asked of his opinion on Japan's military prospects--well before Pearl Harbor--he said something to the effect [and I paraphrase] "I can assure we will run amok for 6 months to a year, but I can make no guarantees after that..." As far as prospects of Japan's winning/prolonging the war if they'd shifted some priorities in weapons deployment? Doubtful. Remember, even before the Battle of Midway, US code breakers had deciphered the Japanese military codes, hence Yamamoto's plans unfolding at Midway. They'd pretty much know all their major moves anyway. Yamamoto's strategy hinged on the element of surprise, and luring the US carriers into a decisive trap at Midway. He had no contingencies for the US knowing that the fleet in the Aleutians was a decoy, the US carriers already being on hand at Midway, etc., etc. Oh yeah, I'd like to see them refurbish the Yamato and launch it into space at the end of the movie, too.

Could it have been one of the Unique Performance cars? In addition to the "Elanors," they're now building "continuation" GT-350's with Shelby's blessing, and I know they like to display their offerings at some of the larger vintage racing events. The guys at those events are pretty much a prime consumer base; lots of disposable income and a love for outrageous, overpowered toys. Hey, what am I saying? Like the old addage goes: "you can never have too much horsepower!"

True enough, the stress levels aren't going to be nearly what an airframe might see. I'm actually thinking well beyond practical terms--beyond most of our lifetimes. One of those "what if" questions. Just wondering if say 50 or more years from now, long after we're all dead and gone--if we haven't managed to blow ourselves and the planet up in the meantime--after the car's seen lots of miles of cruising, and some trips to the autocross and the drag strip, some rich schmoe drops a gazillion clams on a [then] vintage Corvette Z06, takes it to a track day event or something, only to have the suspension uprights snap off after a few hard laps, or the whole front clip torque-twists off the car in a suitably violent and unexpected fashion, or something ridiculous like that.... Not like it'd be remotely possible. But still, wouldn't that be a real kick in the nuts?