<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Exxon Valdez]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><em>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Waterworld</em></p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto"><strong>Ogopogo99</strong> — <em>9 years ago(July 16, 2016 02:39 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Liked the symbolism.</p>
<hr />
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/220501/exxon-valdez</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 09:03:42 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/220501.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 09:41:47 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Exxon Valdez on Sat, 02 May 2026 09:41:48 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>cmjaustin</strong> — <em>9 years ago(August 13, 2016 06:02 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Funny you should mention this because I just noticed this for the first time (and I've seen this movie a few times) that the name of the ship is the Exxon Valdez and more interesting is that the captain of the actual vessel at the time of the Exxon Valdez disasterling,  Joseph Hazelwood, has his picture on the wall in the bridge.   It IS very nice symbolism indeed.  The truth is, the actual disaster cannot be blamed on the captain.  It was actually more Exxon's doing because they considered it too costly to repair the sophisticated radar aboard the Valdez that would have signalled the third mate on the bridge about the Bligh Reef they were about to hit.  Such a shame.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1850485</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1850485</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 09:41:48 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>