top of page


Public·51 members
Mstislav Osipov
Mstislav Osipov

Subway (1985)1985 ((BETTER))

Éric Serra's score and other musical pieces from the soundtrack, such as Fred's band's song, "It's Only Mystery" (also written by Serra), were released on vinyl and cassette in 1985. The soundtrack sold over 100,000 copies in France.[7] The soundtrack was released on CD in 1996.[8]

Subway (1985)1985

This is exactly the "Christopher Lambert hides out in the Paris subway system to avoid the gangsters who are trying to kill him and forms a rock band to pass the time while Isabelle Adjani tries out a variety of astonishing hairstyles and also there's a guy on rollerskates" film that I never knew that I needed in my life.

Car chases, explosions, roller skates (not blades) with headlights attached to them, perpetual sex hair (nobody is having any sex), bodybuilders, slappin' bass, sweet sax, and a labyrinthine Parisian subway that houses an underground society of criminals and more! Isabelle Adjani ? has the perfect hairstyles. Her hair is so good they had to put it smack-dab on the cover! She also has the best outfits out of everyone in the movie.

Ferdinando Scianna started taking photographs in the 1960s while studying literature, philosophy and art history at the University of Palermo. He became a Magnum member in 1982 and three years later travelled to New York City, capturing its eccentricities and characters. Pictured here, a young man on the subway in 1985.

1985 was a moment in French fashion when punk and post-punk styles were butting up aggressively against the mainstream. Despite its reputation for cutting-edge chic, Paris has always been quite conservative about how people dress in the street, and this, in combination with a growing financial divide, saw those who didn't fit driven out into the more notorious banlieues or literally driven underground. Although there had been people living in the city's disused Métro tunnels at least since the war, what had merely been a refuge was, in the Eighties, become a political option with its own subculture. In setting his film there, Besson was announcing himself as an outsider, as someone who, despite his artsy approach, was willing to break the rules. Aspects of the film - especially its ending - have been compared to Breathless, but where Godard seduced middle class viewers with his handsome imagery, Besson set out to make them uncomfortable.

In the background of the image, there is a blurred, abstract pattern of bright lights and dark shadows, suggesting the underground environment of the subway where the scene is taking place. The image is shot in a high-contrast style, with deep shadows and bright highlights emphasizing Reno's features and the textures of his clothing.

Fred (Christopher Lambert) escapes from gangsters stealing some important papers and crashes into the Paris Metro. He in his tux is hiding out in the subway. He negotiates an exchange for ten grand from the gangster's trophy wife Héléna (Isabelle Adjani) but she doesn't pay. He befriends roller-skating thief Jean-Louis whom the cops call Le Roller. Roller introduces him to the underground world of the underground. Roller has a gun and a scheme to rob the weekly subway money transfer.This is full of the Euro-fun style of Luc Besson. It's full of memorable characters. One of them is Jean Reno as the nameless drummer. The plot is a bit meandering but the visual imagery is unforgettable. Roller skating down the escalator is fun action and Besson injects music like in a music video. The cops are a little inferior stylistically although Batman and Robin is a fun name.

The dispute now is over the proper amount to be deducted as an equitable adjustment for the elimination of a specific *23 part of the work that General Railway Signal Co. (GRS) contracted to perform on defendant WMATA's subway system. On January 17, 1979, WMATA's contract officer set the deduction at $1,336,500, and that amount was withheld from progress payments to GRS. Pursuant to the disputes clause of the contract, the parties submitted the issue to the Army Corps of Engineers Board of Contract Appeals (the Board). The Board fixed the credit due WMATA at $1,403,325, and WMATA's general manager adopted that amount as his final decision on April 17, 1984.

On consideration of plaintiff's complaint to review the general manager's decision adopting the Board's recommendation, the Court on November 14, 1984 held that the Board's finding was not supported by substantial evidence and was erroneous as a matter of law. The Court then remanded the case to the Board "with direction to determine a reasonable cost estimate within 90 days, plus interest as provided by law." On January 30, 1985, the Court denied WMATA's motion to stay proceedings pending appeal and ordered the WMATA general manager to issue a decision within seven days of the Board's determination of the remand.

On March 29, 1985, the Board determined the amount of the credit at $360,548, although it declined to rule on the amount of interest to be added to that base amount.[1] In determining the reasonable cost of the deleted work, the Board used WMATA's own estimate of the cost with certain adjustments primarily for redundant work. The Board added standard percentage markups for indirect costs and profit to GRS and its subcontractor.

On April 5, 1985, the WMATA general manager rejected the March 29 Board decision and stated that his prior decision adopting the Board's first decision "is correct and the same ... is hereby restated and reaffirmed." The general manager made no findings of fact beyond readopting the Board's initial decision.

In its motion for entry of judgment, GRS asks the Court to reject the general manager's final decision as not based on substantial evidence and to adopt the March 29, 1985 Board decision with the addition of interest from the date in 1979 when the payments were withheld from GRS.[2] GRS thus seeks the difference between the amount withheld in 1979 and the amount that should have been withheld that is, $1,336,500 minus $360,548, or $975,952 plus interest of $752,713.01. The interest figure is derived from the rates established by 26 U.S.C. 6621, which are based on the average prime rate as determined by the Secretary of the Treasury.

Prejudgment interest against a governmental entity like WMATA is allowable only when there is a statutory or contractual waiver of sovereign immunity for such interest. Waiver occurred here by virtue of the "equitable adjustment" language in the "Changes" clause of the contract.[5] Equitable adjustment is a term of art designed "to keep a contractor whole when the Government modifies a contract." Bruce Construction Corp. v. United States, 163 Ct.Cl. 97, 324 F.2d 516, 518 (1963). Prejudgment interest may be necessary to restore the contractor to the status quo prior to a change in the contract. Such is the case here. Moreover, the equitable adjustment provided for by the "Changes" clause does not exclude profits on a contractor's increased costs. Compare Excavation Construction, Inc. v. WMATA, Civil Action No. 83-1125, slip op. at 4-5 (D.D.C. Apr. 19, 1985).

[4] WMATA makes one new argument that is wholly frivolous and also must be rejected. It contends that even if $360,548 is a reasonable estimate of the cost of the deleted work, the equitable price reduction must nonetheless be $1,403,325 to avoid paying GRS overhead and profit on the deleted work. The legal principle that GRS should not receive a profit and overhead windfall on the deleted work is not in doubt. What WMATA ignores is that the Board expressly included an overhead and profit calculation in reaching the $360,548 figure. See Board Opinion of March 29, 1985, at 10-11.

In 1968, New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) embarked on a large subway expansion program. Two projects were started and are nearly finished in the program affecting the fast growing Borough of Queens: a new East River tunnel from 63rd Street, Manhattan; and a new subway on Archer Avenue in eastern Queens. Escalating costs and fiscal crises halted further work. These two unconnected sections, which are intended to relieve overcrowded conditions, will provide no relief unless linked in some way. The Queens Subway Options Study (QSOS) evaluated five alternative courses of action. Key evaluation criteria included the degree of overcrowding relief to existing Queens lines, and the extent to which committed capital investment is utilized. This paper contains a description of an evaluation methodology developed for this study that combines computer-based Urban Transportation Planning System (UTPS) network assignment techniques, 1980 Census socioeconomic tract data, and detailed land-use information, especially as they relate to the area of influence of proposed heavy rail transit stations. The potential for proposed stations to attract riders from overburdened existing facilities demands realistic assessment of trip origins and destinations, station access modes, and ridership. The specific travel demand characteristics for each station are needed to: (a) evaluate the options, (b) dimension the frequency of service provided on affected rail and feeder bus lines, and (c) evaluate the environmental costs of introducing a new service into developed urban environment having a complex existing public transportation network. Characteristics of travel behavior and land use within station tributary areas provided by this methodology can be used to prepare functional designs to accommodate transfer demands that minimize negative impacts and enhance development opportunities.

When management talks of tough international competition, employees sometimes scoff at what they regard as corporate propaganda aimed at making them work harder. Raymond Royer, president of the Mass Transit Division of Bombardier Inc., overcame that skepticism among the workers at the company's subway car production plant at La Pocati`ere, Quebec, 75 miles east of Quebec City. He sent four of them to Japan to visit a competitor. 041b061a72


Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...


bottom of page