I don't know about filmmaker but I perceive him to be an excellent movie critic. Actually, my favorite was Siskel who is no longer living.

I grow weary of your bullshit and will waste my time on your comments only briefly. You say reality or what is real is, by definition, anything which is in the universe. Wrong!!! Reality from a human perspective is that which we personally perceive to be real and we all pick and choose differently. Reality to one individual may be fantasy to another and we all tend to view the world based, not upon reality but rather, on what we expect to see, what we have seen before. It is a concept/percept continuum which negates reality and promotes complacency as you so aptly demonstrate in your writing. You can't see the forest for the trees dimwit and it is you who is "ass-talking", not me. The only difference between fantasy and reality lies in your pre-conceptions which are based, not on reality but upon that which you choose to acknowledge in a feeble attempt to bolster your personal bias, your world-view which has no validity beyond the limitations of your perceptions. You say that I have no knowledge of superstrings and I say neither do you or the physicists who postulate them. That being the case, what is wrong with a bit of fantasy? After all, self-imposed realities tend to be just that, beliefs and concepts unique to each of us and mere conjecture based upon a very limited amount of information which we pick and choose to suit our particular preferences. I could go on but it is late and time for some refreshing oblivion. Peace!

Would you say Roger Ebert is an above-mediocre filmmaker?

PS-Now, please stop spitting and pay attention. I'm not insane pointing out that the uninformed pseudo-science in your poem is guff and unnecessary guff, as that's essentially what EVERY SINGLE PERSON who's bothered to comment on your poem has said. So GET OFF MY BACK, man. You've gotten in way over your head here! Just take a chill pill, and back yourself up. And so on and so on and so on.

"In a time/space continuum, time does flow freely at its outer limits as there exists nothing to impede its flow" is wrong. And it's essentially saying, 'Time is not impeded unless there is something to impede it', which is doubly silly. And that's not what you're saying in the poem. "Time is being created, not in a conventional sense but in accordance with quantum theory and a four dimensional time/space" is a bunch of big words you have no idea about. You don't know what quantum theory has to do with time (hint: practically nil); you just thought you could talk enough science to scare me off. Without that buncombe bit about "quantum theory", you're essentially saying, 'Time is created along the principles of time-space'. Congratulations! Why do you think it's called time-space? COULD IT BECAUSE BECAUSE TIME EXISTS (IS POSSIBLY 'CREATED') AND INTERACTS WITH SPACE IN IT?? YES!!! "Light is indeed impeded by gravity and other things such as mass but that is not what is happening as time becomes extant" is similarly wrong. That's exactly what happens to time (cf. Theories of Relativity 1:1). Re: "(yes, they do cause craters to form but on the waters surface, not on a flower.)" - you have no basis for saying that, except that it sounds cool and semi-scientific and you don't imagine anyone has the cojones to call you on it. Think again, buster. "exploding stars creating reycled stardust" is essentially the same thing as saying, 'Empty aluminum cans creating recycled aluminum'. If you can't see why that's silly, please check yourself before you wreck yourself. Please don't tell me what an oxymoron is. I didn't attend 7 years of Accredited Poetry School for nothing. Being slightly drunk now, I can't recall exactly why I said "random destination" is an enormous contradiction, though I imagine it must have been because the word destination in itself connotes some sort of determination, which is the opposite of random, or because I was talking out of my ass. Obviously, I can spin a globe and decide that wherever my finger randomly lands on it will be my destination, but that's not what you've said in your poem, anyway. So: buncombe. 4) You don't know what superstrings are. Or, I daresay, dimensions. 5) "Bizarre concepts beyond reason, when reality becomes fantasy" is too gufftuous to bother with disembow'ling. At any rate, "reality" (or "what is real") is, by definition, anything which is in the universe. It's entirely different from "fantasy", not at all "beyond reason", and you're just ass-talking to the Nth degree. The only people "unsure" of the difference between fantasy and reality, I'm afraid, are monstrously deformed clods. 6, 7, & 8) Etc., etc., etc.

You are entitled to express your opinions but what makes you the Roger Ebert of poetry? I have read some of your work and found it to be generally mediocre. Pick your best poem and I will pick mine. Then we can compare and critique each other and let other members express their opinions. That would cut through all the bullshit and self-serving rhetoric. Your move, turkey.

Yes well... I mean it became apparent to me quite some time ago I wasn't going to be winning the Miss Congeniality prize this year, but that's neither here nor there when it comes to writing poetry. You're not very good at it, and that's just the cold-hearted facts. Hey, but it's a free fucking country here in Poemrankia, so you just go on hanging round the other talentless citizens, blowing smoke up each others asses. Enjoy your monkey's tea party, and tottle off to sleep each night with a self-satisfied grin all over your clueless mug. Sweet dreams.

it's a slideshow under a microscope. it is exacting. if you have ever felt that way, you can identify. and that makes it strong.

god'swife... You are correct in saying there is no time if you mean at the infinite level where there is no beginning or end. No beginning doesn't make any sense so congrats on your keen observation. But you know how elusive time is to us mere mortals and answering your rubbish is surely a waste of same. If mixing ecstasy, vodka and PBS always turns out ugly, so be ugly. I'll have a glass of chablis and be beautiful for a "time." Love and kisses creep!

Where's your mommy? Ask -=Dark_Angel=- if you can suckle on his overflowing poetry tit. He's such the mothering type.

Robert Frost brought us the elegant theory in his poem, SNOW, "Save us from being cornered by a woman." Consider yourself saved. He expounded on science in several poems without proposing new science.

Robert Frost

"To represent a (scientific) concept in a precise and cogent way," or to relate it to other aspects of life is the poetry of science. Much of science borders on mystical - string theory, quantum mechanics, evolution - and thus attracts metaphor and image. A poet who understands a scientific topic is not likely to make the science more vague, but rather enhance others' understanding of it. Furthermore, "to read things into scientific findings in the aesthetic and philosophical world," if done artfully, expands our understanding of both the scientific and the aesthetic. Poets can and do abuse science, but they often enhance it.

this is not the name I was referring to earlier - and I used none of those words, girlfriend. If I wanted to be all those things then I would use -= ZODIAC =- (notice the larger-than-life capital letters.