| |
Main
Date: 28 Dec 2006 21:18:22
From: Tom Keats
Subject: bikes in the movies
|
I recently watched Arabesque on TCM. I was amused by
the implausible scene where Prof Pollock (portrayed
by Gregory Peck,) totally goofed on some sort of truth
serum and tumbled by his waylayers out of a moving vehicle
onto a busy freeway, finds a loose bicycle and proceeds to
ride it, lane-splitting and going the wrong way.
(Sophia Loren looked like a high-maintenance hooker.)
cheers,
Tom
--
"It's an aesthetic sojourn in the milieu ..."
-- The Pompous Mr. Rogers
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
|
| |
Date: 31 Dec 2006 09:19:04
From:
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> You and I know what sentiment is at work: people want a comfortable
> bike, and assume that full suspension equates to comfort. What they
> don't understand is that they're sacrificing an enormous amount of
> pedaling efficiency to get that comfort, not to mention the weight.
And an enormous amount of reliability is sacrificed as well
on a bike with cheap suspension.
There are trade-offs at work and advantages for most types of
bicycles, but I think many people misunderstand the trade-offs.
They see comfort (and, I suspect, technological advancement)
in heavy bikes with bad suspension. They install 8-foot-wide
seats and drop them all the way into the seat tube. Just
riding a few miles must be quite difficult with that set-up.
These people have virtually no chance of becoming life-long
bicyclists unless someone helps them out of their 'comfort
bike' black hole early on.
The bike industry could be shooting itself in the foot--
by willfully outfitting a good portion of their new customers
with improper equipment and facilitating a fit/position that
guarantees unpleasantness, they may be systematically
eliminating their long-term customers. It may also be
true that since many if not most of the 'comfort bike'
buyers are older folks, there may not be much concern
about molding them into long-term customers.
> The obvious answer is to make every Y26-seeker test-ride it, immediately
> followed by a trip around the block on a 7.3FX.
>
> I think they'll end up like my supervisor at work, who once I directed
> him towards fast hybrid bikes, ended up with a flat-bar road machine (a
> reasonably nice Giant), and is continually impressed by its turn of
> speed.
The writer and director of 40Year Old Virgin missed an opportunity
to have Carrell's character patiently explain to new girlfriend
about the inappropriateness of her gift and exchange for proper
ultra-geeky 700c commuter machine with fenders and lights.
And his repeated ragdolling over the handlebars of such a bike
would be just as rip-roaringly funny to non-cycling audience.
Robert
|
| |
Date: 31 Dec 2006 08:29:32
From:
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article <5iElh.55647$qO4.20116@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>,
>
> You and I know what sentiment is at work: people want a comfortable
> bike, and assume that full suspension equates to comfort. What they
> don't understand is that they're sacrificing an enormous amount of
> pedaling efficiency to get that comfort, not to mention the weight.
>
> The obvious answer is to make every Y26-seeker test-ride it, immediately
> followed by a trip around the block on a 7.3FX.
That's exactly what I did with an engineer friend who was going to buy
his first bike in 30 years. Of course, he'd "researched" online and
was quite confident the new springs-everywhere technology was what he
needed.
It took careful diplomacy to get him to consider he might be wrong.
But the comparative road tests nailed it. As a bonus, the rigid bike
he bought - an unfashionable last-year's model - saved him quite a few
bucks. He loves it.
- Frank Krygowski
|
| |
Date: 30 Dec 2006 17:30:06
From:
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> > And then in the end the main character's girlfriend
> > gives him a brand new Trek full-suspension downhill
> > bike--because that's just what every urban cyclist covets.
>
>
> Well, every urban cyclist just might covet a Trek full-suspension downhill
> bike. Would be great for ramp jumping etc! But the bike in the movie was, if
> I recall correctly, a Y26. Under $400, weighs half-a-ton
> looks-the-part-but-isn't. It's actually fairly popular with the
> less-sophisticated commute crowd, who want something that has a smooth ride
> and don't care about what it weighs or ever take it off road.
Trek probably approved and perhaps even
paid for the use of their product in the movie. It
seems a strange product placement, in a film
that denegrates cyclists to some degree.
Robert
|
| |
Date: 29 Dec 2006 23:50:27
From:
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> It's actually fairly popular with the
> less-sophisticated commute crowd, who want something that has a smooth ride
> and don't care about what it weighs or ever take it off road.
I don't suppose the good bike shop owners of the
world will do much to relieve these customers of their
ridiculous notions as long as those customers keep
wavin that dinero.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Dec 2006 01:23:13
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
>> It's actually fairly popular with the
>> less-sophisticated commute crowd, who want something that has a smooth
>> ride
>> and don't care about what it weighs or ever take it off road.
>
> I don't suppose the good bike shop owners of the
> world will do much to relieve these customers of their
> ridiculous notions as long as those customers keep
> wavin that dinero.
Not much "dinero" involved in the bike in question. We'd much rather someone
a more-appropriate bike for a similar amount of money (for example, a Trek
7.3FX hybrid).
Aside from that, there's a certain amount of arrogance in saying that the
type of bike you or I prefer is what everyone should ride. I try to educate
my customers, and I lose quite a few sales because I don't have a row of (to
you & me) silly, heavy, non-functional but cheap dual-suspension bikes. In
three years, I've sold exactly three Y26s. Special orders. But just because
it's not a $2000 road bike with someone drooling over wheel options doesn't
mean that style is irrelevant.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
<christie133@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1167465027.063675.219630@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>
>> It's actually fairly popular with the
>> less-sophisticated commute crowd, who want something that has a smooth
>> ride
>> and don't care about what it weighs or ever take it off road.
>
> I don't suppose the good bike shop owners of the
> world will do much to relieve these customers of their
> ridiculous notions as long as those customers keep
> wavin that dinero.
>
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Dec 2006 09:07:03
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
In article <5iElh.55647$qO4.20116@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net >,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com > wrote:
> >> It's actually fairly popular with the
> >> less-sophisticated commute crowd, who want something that has a smooth
> >> ride
> >> and don't care about what it weighs or ever take it off road.
> >
> > I don't suppose the good bike shop owners of the
> > world will do much to relieve these customers of their
> > ridiculous notions as long as those customers keep
> > wavin that dinero.
>
> Not much "dinero" involved in the bike in question. We'd much rather someone
> a more-appropriate bike for a similar amount of money (for example, a Trek
> 7.3FX hybrid).
>
> Aside from that, there's a certain amount of arrogance in saying that the
> type of bike you or I prefer is what everyone should ride. I try to educate
> my customers, and I lose quite a few sales because I don't have a row of (to
> you & me) silly, heavy, non-functional but cheap dual-suspension bikes. In
> three years, I've sold exactly three Y26s. Special orders. But just because
> it's not a $2000 road bike with someone drooling over wheel options doesn't
> mean that style is irrelevant.
You and I know what sentiment is at work: people want a comfortable
bike, and assume that full suspension equates to comfort. What they
don't understand is that they're sacrificing an enormous amount of
pedaling efficiency to get that comfort, not to mention the weight.
The obvious answer is to make every Y26-seeker test-ride it, immediately
followed by a trip around the block on a 7.3FX.
I think they'll end up like my supervisor at work, who once I directed
him towards fast hybrid bikes, ended up with a flat-bar road machine (a
reasonably nice Giant), and is continually impressed by its turn of
speed.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Dec 2006 08:45:16
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
>> Aside from that, there's a certain amount of arrogance in saying that the
>> type of bike you or I prefer is what everyone should ride. I try to
>> educate
>> my customers, and I lose quite a few sales because I don't have a row of
>> (to
>> you & me) silly, heavy, non-functional but cheap dual-suspension bikes.
>> In
>> three years, I've sold exactly three Y26s. Special orders. But just
>> because
>> it's not a $2000 road bike with someone drooling over wheel options
>> doesn't
>> mean that style is irrelevant.
>
> You and I know what sentiment is at work: people want a comfortable
> bike, and assume that full suspension equates to comfort. What they
> don't understand is that they're sacrificing an enormous amount of
> pedaling efficiency to get that comfort, not to mention the weight.
>
> The obvious answer is to make every Y26-seeker test-ride it, immediately
> followed by a trip around the block on a 7.3FX.
As I said, we've sold just three Y26s in three years. We do, in fact, almost
require that they ride something else, so they can see why we don't
recommend it. But in the process we're discouraging someone's dream, and
quite possibly damaging their desire to ride. Obviously that's balanced by
the fact that someone on an FX-style hybrid is more-likely to enjoy and
continue riding! But our pursuit of the practical sometimes limits our
ability to evangelize our favorite means of getting around.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
"Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca > wrote in message
news:rcousine-502958.01070331122006@news.telus.net...
> In article <5iElh.55647$qO4.20116@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net>,
> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com> wrote:
>
>> >> It's actually fairly popular with the
>> >> less-sophisticated commute crowd, who want something that has a smooth
>> >> ride
>> >> and don't care about what it weighs or ever take it off road.
>> >
>> > I don't suppose the good bike shop owners of the
>> > world will do much to relieve these customers of their
>> > ridiculous notions as long as those customers keep
>> > wavin that dinero.
>>
>> Not much "dinero" involved in the bike in question. We'd much rather
>> someone
>> a more-appropriate bike for a similar amount of money (for example, a
>> Trek
>> 7.3FX hybrid).
>>
>> Aside from that, there's a certain amount of arrogance in saying that the
>> type of bike you or I prefer is what everyone should ride. I try to
>> educate
>> my customers, and I lose quite a few sales because I don't have a row of
>> (to
>> you & me) silly, heavy, non-functional but cheap dual-suspension bikes.
>> In
>> three years, I've sold exactly three Y26s. Special orders. But just
>> because
>> it's not a $2000 road bike with someone drooling over wheel options
>> doesn't
>> mean that style is irrelevant.
>
> You and I know what sentiment is at work: people want a comfortable
> bike, and assume that full suspension equates to comfort. What they
> don't understand is that they're sacrificing an enormous amount of
> pedaling efficiency to get that comfort, not to mention the weight.
>
> The obvious answer is to make every Y26-seeker test-ride it, immediately
> followed by a trip around the block on a 7.3FX.
>
> I think they'll end up like my supervisor at work, who once I directed
> him towards fast hybrid bikes, ended up with a flat-bar road machine (a
> reasonably nice Giant), and is continually impressed by its turn of
> speed.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
> "I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
> to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| |
Date: 29 Dec 2006 11:53:54
From:
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
Mike Kruger wrote:
> Possibly of interest along this line:
> The Chicagoland Bicycle Federation's web site has "Roll Film", which are
> bicycle-themed movie reviews by Borzo and Strauss.
> http://www.biketraffic.org/content.php?id=219_0_6_0
> "40 Year Old Virgin" gets 3.5 wheels.
Interesting film from a cyclist's perspective.
Not only is transportational cycling portrayed as
the ultimate badge of geekdom, but two brutally violent
bike wrecks (which in reality would cause some
fairly serious injuries, perhaps ending in a pile of teeth,
fracture, or even head injury that puts the victim in
the hospital or worse) are offered as slapstick comedy.
This is a trend in contemporary Hollywood comedies.
Whoever the stuntguy is who performs these 'funny'
endos, I hope they are paying him handsomely. He
does it well. Makes me cringe every time, while
everyone else roars with laughter. Ha ha look at the
bike nerd smash the car and go all floppy! Can't
get enough of that crazy ragdoll action! Look at his
helmet all askew!
And then in the end the main character's girlfriend
gives him a brand new Trek full-suspension downhill
bike--because that's just what every urban cyclist covets.
The only thing that comes out worse than cycling in
this movie is chest waxing.
Pretty funny movie though, overall. He does eventually
get laid.
Robert
|
| | |
Date: 02 Jan 2007 17:09:16
From: Paul O
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
r15757@aol.com wrote:
> Mike Kruger wrote:
>
>> Possibly of interest along this line:
>> The Chicagoland Bicycle Federation's web site has "Roll Film", which are
>> bicycle-themed movie reviews by Borzo and Strauss.
>> http://www.biketraffic.org/content.php?id=219_0_6_0
>> "40 Year Old Virgin" gets 3.5 wheels.
>
> Interesting film from a cyclist's perspective.
> Not only is transportational cycling portrayed as
> the ultimate badge of geekdom, but two brutally violent
> bike wrecks (which in reality would cause some
> fairly serious injuries, perhaps ending in a pile of teeth,
> fracture, or even head injury that puts the victim in
> the hospital or worse) are offered as slapstick comedy.
> This is a trend in contemporary Hollywood comedies.
> Whoever the stuntguy is who performs these 'funny'
> endos, I hope they are paying him handsomely. He
> does it well. Makes me cringe every time, while
> everyone else roars with laughter. Ha ha look at the
> bike nerd smash the car and go all floppy! Can't
> get enough of that crazy ragdoll action! Look at his
> helmet all askew!
>
> And then in the end the main character's girlfriend
> gives him a brand new Trek full-suspension downhill
> bike--because that's just what every urban cyclist covets.
>
> The only thing that comes out worse than cycling in
> this movie is chest waxing.
>
> Pretty funny movie though, overall. He does eventually
> get laid.
>
> Robert
>
Awwww... You spoiled the ending!
--
Paul D Oosterhout
I work for SAIC (but I don't speak for SAIC)
|
| | |
Date: 29 Dec 2006 23:28:26
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
> And then in the end the main character's girlfriend
> gives him a brand new Trek full-suspension downhill
> bike--because that's just what every urban cyclist covets.
Well, every urban cyclist just might covet a Trek full-suspension downhill
bike. Would be great for ramp jumping etc! But the bike in the movie was, if
I recall correctly, a Y26. Under $400, weighs half-a-ton
looks-the-part-but-isn't. It's actually fairly popular with the
less-sophisticated commute crowd, who want something that has a smooth ride
and don't care about what it weighs or ever take it off road.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
<r15757@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1167422034.887848.228310@a3g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Mike Kruger wrote:
>
>> Possibly of interest along this line:
>> The Chicagoland Bicycle Federation's web site has "Roll Film", which are
>> bicycle-themed movie reviews by Borzo and Strauss.
>> http://www.biketraffic.org/content.php?id=219_0_6_0
>> "40 Year Old Virgin" gets 3.5 wheels.
>
> Interesting film from a cyclist's perspective.
> Not only is transportational cycling portrayed as
> the ultimate badge of geekdom, but two brutally violent
> bike wrecks (which in reality would cause some
> fairly serious injuries, perhaps ending in a pile of teeth,
> fracture, or even head injury that puts the victim in
> the hospital or worse) are offered as slapstick comedy.
> This is a trend in contemporary Hollywood comedies.
> Whoever the stuntguy is who performs these 'funny'
> endos, I hope they are paying him handsomely. He
> does it well. Makes me cringe every time, while
> everyone else roars with laughter. Ha ha look at the
> bike nerd smash the car and go all floppy! Can't
> get enough of that crazy ragdoll action! Look at his
> helmet all askew!
>
> And then in the end the main character's girlfriend
> gives him a brand new Trek full-suspension downhill
> bike--because that's just what every urban cyclist covets.
>
> The only thing that comes out worse than cycling in
> this movie is chest waxing.
>
> Pretty funny movie though, overall. He does eventually
> get laid.
>
> Robert
>
|
| |
Date: 29 Dec 2006 08:29:17
From:
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> >I recently watched Arabesque on TCM. I was amused by
> > the implausible scene where Prof Pollock (portrayed
> > by Gregory Peck,) totally goofed on some sort of truth
> > serum and tumbled by his waylayers out of a moving vehicle
> > onto a busy freeway, finds a loose bicycle and proceeds to
> > ride it, lane-splitting and going the wrong way.
> >
> > (Sophia Loren looked like a high-maintenance hooker.)
>
> It was an appalling-bad movie, considering they rated it 3.5 stars (out of
> 4).
My movie rating system is simple.
"That was a good movie. It had three bicycles in it."
Or: "Bad movie. No bicycles."
My wife humors me on this.
Actually, it's a little more complicated. For example, I can honestly
say "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" was a nearly perfect movie. If only
it had a bicycle in it...
But the 1999 movie of "A Midsummer Night's Dream" with Calista
Flockhart, Kevin Kline, Michelle Pfeiffer etc. was perfect. For me, it
was the best-ever presentation of Shakespeare. And ah, the music!
And having the protagonists wheeling about on antique bicycles? Well!
What more could a retro-grouch ask?
- Frank Krygowski
|
| | |
Date: 29 Dec 2006 17:00:11
From: Mike Kruger
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>
> My movie rating system is simple.
>
> "That was a good movie. It had three bicycles in it."
>
> Or: "Bad movie. No bicycles."
>
> And having the protagonists wheeling about on antique bicycles? Well!
> What more could a retro-grouch ask?
Possibly of interest along this line:
The Chicagoland Bicycle Federation's web site has "Roll Film", which are
bicycle-themed movie reviews by Borzo and Strauss.
http://www.biketraffic.org/content.php?id=219_0_6_0
"40 Year Old Virgin" gets 3.5 wheels.
--
Mike Kruger
"We have a lot of kids who don't know what works means. They think work
is a four-letter word." --Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
|
| |
Date: 28 Dec 2006 22:58:23
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: bikes in the movies
|
>I recently watched Arabesque on TCM. I was amused by
> the implausible scene where Prof Pollock (portrayed
> by Gregory Peck,) totally goofed on some sort of truth
> serum and tumbled by his waylayers out of a moving vehicle
> onto a busy freeway, finds a loose bicycle and proceeds to
> ride it, lane-splitting and going the wrong way.
>
> (Sophia Loren looked like a high-maintenance hooker.)
It was an appalling-bad movie, considering they rated it 3.5 stars (out of
4). And you're right about Sophia Loren. In general, Gregory Peck is one of
the few actors that makes almost any movie watchable, but even he seemed
pretty ill-at-ease in the role.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
|
|
