Actually, no, I'm asking you to define your notion of cliche because I believe you are confused on the issue.

You say that the letter is a cliche, staros' decision not to follow Talls order is a cliche. You say that some of the dialogue is cliched.

But I counter - You are citing individual events within the film here, not the narrative as whole, not the form, the structure, you are not examining the context with which these events occur, their connecting to the overall purpose of the work. As for the relativistic dialogue, I have said much about this already to which you have not responsed. Thus you are not really commenting on the film at all.

By contrast, Ryan works to a set of clear Hollyood cliches. There is action at the beginning and end, a contrived plot that gives the film a more thrilling, easily comprehensible quality and a "satisfying" violent climax. Moral questions are raised within the film, then answered with an easy "pay our respects" conclusion. It subscribes to conventional notions of the character "arc", central heros with problems they must "overcome", a bad guy with all the personality of a brick. The film is grounded on cliche, it's form is a cliche, it's purpose and message a cliche. You see the difference here?

I mean, sure, this discussion is going on a bit, but you havent gone halfway towards backing up any of your points yet.

[This message has been edited by maha vishnu (edited 05-31-2000).]