?

Geeks are anti-fat   2 votes - 40 %
Geeks are not particularly anti-fat   2 votes - 40 %
-   0 votes - 0 %
Mona Lisa is worth seeing   2 votes - 40 %
Mona Lisa is not worth seeing   1 vote - 20 %
-   1 vote - 20 %
Critics are partly to blame for dumbing down of movies   3 votes - 60 %
Critics are not to blame for dumbing down of movies   1 vote - 20 %
 
5 Total Votes
aeon flux by martingale (4.00 / 1) #1 Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 12:54:48 AM EST
Did you know the story from some other source before you saw the film? I found the story hard to follow and not well paced, but I'd never heard of AF before I saw it. My verdict: too much eyecandy and not enough SF.

Louvre's massiveness is just plain impressive.

Never cared much for "art just is" bull. Didn't do any at school on account of a scientific baccalaureate. But there are a few interesting TV programmes that really make the stuff interesting. BBC has some, I think, on the history of painting and sculpting technologies.
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$

Hadn't seen the series by TheophileEscargot (4.00 / 1) #2 Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 01:04:22 AM EST
Might watch it now, though it's a bit pointless when you know the ending.

I've read enough SF that it wasn't that hard to follow. It was pretty obvious from the start that the sensitive, good-looking ``villain`` was going to turn out to be one of the good guys.
--
It is unlikely that the good of a snail should reside in its shell: so is it likely that the good of a man should?

[ Parent ]
pointless by martingale (4.00 / 1) #3 Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:01:49 AM EST
like reading superman comics?

My understanding is that the plot leaps in the movie are actually filled in properly by the series.
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$

[ Parent ]
I dunno by spacejack (4.00 / 2) #6 Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 07:10:14 AM EST
I haven't seen the movie, but the series was pretty weird. I don't remember there being a coherent story arc throughout; more like ideas and characters revisited.

Also, she dies in a lot of the episodes, as if she's like a video game character. I avoided the movie because I thought a live-action movie would be way too literal and conventional to be anything like the series. That said, I might check it out, even if it's just a hollywood actioner that stole the title and a few visuals.

[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by yicky yacky (4.00 / 2) #4 Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 02:37:12 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by yicky yacky



Annoyed me as well by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #13 Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 12:45:18 AM EST
I got really iritated by it

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

[ Parent ]
After five solid years of architecture school by greyrat (4.00 / 1) #5 Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 04:41:00 AM EST
All I really want to see of the Louvre is the Grande Gallerie. I'll do my best to remember gobsmacked as the description.

Le Radeau de la Meduse by ammoniacal (4.00 / 2) #7 Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 08:18:33 AM EST
Colour me jealous. Purchase any nice lithographs of it?

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

You just want this by calla (4.00 / 2) #8 Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:01:43 PM EST
litho-


"Are Linux chicks worth it?" fencepost

[ Parent ]
Critic Theory by Christopher Robin was Murdered (4.00 / 1) #9 Sat Jun 17, 2006 at 03:52:17 PM EST
I'm not sure I buy the theory that critics are partially to blame for the dumbing down of the blockbuster.

First, I don't think critics automatically pan any summer blockbuster action flick.

I've seen critics praise action flicks they thought were well done. I know this because I tend to avoid summer blockbuster-style action extrvaganzas unless I run across a handful of good reviews that convince me I should give it a chance. Sometimes it works (Man on Fire, V for Vendetta, all the LoTR films - although those were technically holiday season blockbusters) and sometimes it doesn't (Sin City, King Kong), but the central point remains: critics don't trash every blockbuster actioner automatically and uniformly or I'd never have seen any of the last five or six years worth of popcorn cinema.

Second, if critical denunciations don't stop people from going to see shit now, why should more nuanced denunciations stop people from going to see this dreck? "Failed" blockbusters make their money the opening weekend and in the DVD long haul. The first windfall occurs prior to critical impact and the second long after the reviews have ceased to matter.

Regarding Operation Become Less Fat by joh3n (4.00 / 5) #10 Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:06:59 AM EST
I think you should re-work your graph, since it doesn't highlight the fact that you are making great progress very well.  The y-axis minimum value of zero kind of implies that that is your target goal, and it sets the stretch such that a 1 increment change, which is 14 pounds looks trivial, which it is most certainly not.  I'd set the minimum y-value to be your target weight.

----
I am a crime against humanity
-theantix

LISTEN TO THIS MAN-- by ammoniacal (4.00 / 3) #11 Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 07:38:28 AM EST
HE SPEAKS IN TEH NAME OF SCIENCE!

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
ph34r t3h l337 gr4ph p0w4h by joh3n (4.00 / 2) #12 Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 08:28:33 AM EST

----
I am a crime against humanity
-theantix

[ Parent ]
Explaining composition and technique by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #14 Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 12:53:57 AM EST
Is much more valuable than the free expression stuff, though it shouldn't constrain it. I get the feeling most teachers don't explain it because they don't actually know.

Have you read Ways of Seeing by John Berger?

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

hitech hatred by Dr H0ffm4n (4.00 / 1) #15 Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 02:15:44 AM EST
Techies tend to be major geeks. (No problem for me; I tend to really like geeks.) As a result, I think that a lot of them look to torment someone lower on the social scale than they are to make themselves feel better.

Intelligencia always suffer from this. The brainbox tends to get incredibly frustrated and hostile towards the lack of intelligence in their 'inferiors'. If the brainbox assumes that they are inherently vastly more intelligent than most people, why is their attitude different (i.e. charitable) towards people who are naturally physically disadvantaged?

That would be by TurboThy (4.00 / 2) #16 Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 02:50:09 AM EST
intelligentsia, you fat, ignorant slob.
__
Sommerhus til salg, første række til Kattegat.
[ Parent ]