Slashdot Mirror
March of the Penguins Tops Box Offices
Zinside writes "Yahoo News is running a story stating that March of the Penguins may become the No. 2 documentary of all time at U.S. box offices." From the article: "The film, which follows a pack of Emperor Penguins during an arduous mating season, had grossed $18.4 million by Wednesday and was poised to surpass the $21.6 million for Michael Moore's anti-gun documentary Bowling For Columbine. For 13 months, Jacquet and his crew braved Antarctic temperatures as low as 70 degrees below zero - and winds up to 150 mph - to capture astonishing images of thousands of emperor penguins engaging in a mating and child-rearing ritual that is nothing short of astonishing. The Penguins are a miraculous species, capable of extreme heroism, self-sacrifice, sorrow and unshakable love."
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
...for a second there, I thought it was linux related ;).
Penguins are actual animal. Linus Torvalds did not invent them. I fail to see the relevance of some boring smelly animal on slashdot, or some movie about said creature.
I have freaks! I did something right...
I got all excited for nothing!!! This has nothing to do with LINUX!
This would have been a great April Fools joke, except make the blurb really vaigue, and make them (linux fan-boys - like me) believe someone did a documentary about them... yeah... fun times.
I am fascinated that a nature documentary is garnering this much attention. I'm not sure if it is saying something about the audience, or if it is saying something about the quality of this season's Hollywood crop.
There is a meme in certain circles that G-rated films gross higher than R-rated films. Could this kind of flocking (hehe) to see a documentary about penguins be indicative of a trend towards a silent audience demand for wholesome, informative movies rather than violent and crass fare?
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
Sounds like you'd appreciate the Mr Cranky review, which starts out "I hate penguins. I just fucking hate them.":
. html
http://www.mrcranky.com/movies/marchofthepenguins
http://www.welton.it/davidw/
But can you make a Beowulf cluster out of them?
"For 13 months, Jacquet and his crew braved Antarctic temperatures as low as 70 degrees below zero - and winds up to 150 mph - to capture astonishing images of thousands of emperor penguins engaging in a mating... ritual"
1) A lot of server rooms may as well be -70 degrees, so any sysad could empathize with the conditions (sans sunlight, of course).
2) Any Slashdotter has at least one interest that the "normal population" would give a hearty 'WTF?' to.
3) A demonstration of the amazing lengths some folks will go through for their penguin porn.
"Common sense will be the death of us all"
I was thinking along those lines then I figured why not go get it to help it surpass Bowling For Columbine.
Let's get it past all the other crap they call documentaries.
And they write great software too!!!
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
"What are THOSE? Tux is clearly a cross between a King Penguin and an Adelie Penguin... Not an Emperor Penguin!! Sheesh.."
is yet another article to RTFA. I mainly meant what I was saying as a joke, but I thought the article was more of a space filler. Thank you for enlightening me.
I have freaks! I did something right...
This film evokes emotions that are hard to put into words.
Simply put, it is truly astonishing and moving -- and leaves you with a feeling that stays with you long after you leave the theater. I guess that feeling is: life.
Now you know why the Penguin is Linux's mascot. It is reliable, unshakable, self-sacrificing (think of all those selfless developers working night and day around the world), extreme heroism (ok, that might be taking it a little too far...)
March of the Penguins:
o ver_Windows.html
0 Linux_Penguins1024.png
http://www.ecliptic.ch/Stock/Detail/RE0908_Linux_
http://forum.osnn.net/photopost/data/508/medium/4
Isn't that the title of the nightmares Mr. Gates has had whenever he wakes up in a cold sweat.........
No need to rub it in that they have sex and we don't, as far as I'm concerned.
Is this degrees Celcius (what the world/scientists use) or Farenheight (Americans only)? You use mph in the article, so I assume Farenheight, but seeing it is a rare (yes, it's not too common) unit, it just doesn't make sence to use it (unless this is an American made doco and this is just a rip from the box)
beat out "Stealth" in the box office this weekend. Any documentary is better than a Jamie Foxx movie though :).
In the harshest place on Earth, linux finds a way
Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.
"had grossed $18.4 million by Wednesday and was poised to surpass the $21.6 million for Michael Moore's anti-gun documentary Bowling For Columbine."
WHEN?
All the copies in the world Self Destructed?
The world was hit by a meteor and no-one was left to go to the theatre's?
My butthole sucked up 10M in gross profit?
Pretty good. It makes you forget your problems as the hardships facing penguins just trying to raise their chicks makes your problems seem completely insignificant.
;-)
So, strangely enough, I would not qualify this movie as a nature documentary. For me it is genuine bona fida "escapist entertainment": 90 minutes to gawk at something so alien to your existence that it puts everything else in perspective when you emerge blinking from the theater.
And that is exactly what movies and entertainment are supposed to do. And that explains this movies success.
Bonus item: this movie teaches us that hundreds of thousands of years of evolution in the harshest terrestrial environment on earth has left the penguin with large rolls of belly fat as a major and important adaptation for survival (to protect the chick/ egg from the harsh cold). So eat your popcorn and drink your soda guilt free.
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Enjoy!
So.. it has come to this
>>>The Penguins are a miraculous species, capable of extreme heroism, self-sacrifice, sorrow and unshakable love.
More importantly, how do they taste? Fried, baked, or stewed? Anyone?
...to capture astonishing images of thousands of emperor penguins engaging in a mating...
SWEET JESUS! Penguin orgy pr0n! Won't anyone think of the children?
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Oooh! There's a penguin on the television!
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
Why on earth is this filed under "Linux"?
Get your torrents...
when i watched the movie, it didn't really seem anti-gun to me. it seemed more of a meandering movie that few if any conclusions. the only idea i could get from it was that maybe the violence was a cause of a society that seemed more violent than others.
And damn few sciences ever make it to the movies, let alone get this successful.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I prefer shooting them through space
http://www.bigideafun.com/penguins/arcade/spaced_
Like this comment? I accept Bitcoin! - 153sc8UUBXyp12ofQqfAWDmJrzyiKCYC1x
from the article: "to surpass the $21.6 million for Michael Moore's anti-gun documentary Bowling For Columbine"
Obviously whoever wrote that never watched "Bowling For Columbine" or is trying to distort what it's about. Say what you want about the documentary but any honest person can tell you it's not anti-gun.
It you watch it, weather you agree with it or not, it's final premis is that the culture of fear and violence perpetrated by our foreign policy and the mass-media that supports it, that seems to cause the staggering amount of gun deaths in the US...not guns. In fact there are arguments made that it's not the guns (I remember the comparison to canada). Michael Moore himself is a member of the NRA.
This may be taken as flamebait or trolling or whatever but that statement made there about "Bowling for Columbine" is simply not correct.
None of the big chain theaters have picked this film up here in Newport, RI, so the Jane Pickens Theater, one of the last of the single-screen Movie Houses from the golden age of movies, gets to cash in.
It's got an enormous screen, bazillions of seats (including a balcony!) and a Dolby surround-sound system that became the prototype for the one found in most theaters today. It was one of the only places film conservators could show acetate-based films before restoration, because the projection booth still had all its steel fire-shutters from the '20s operational. (An equipment change in the late '90s, and the growing trend to preserve, duplicate and restore before screening, ended the practice.) They sometimes still show cartoon shorts before the movie, on reels they've had since the '60s.
The Pickens also ran Farenheight 9/11, My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Chicago and The Nightmare Before Christmas when none of the chain multi-plexes would take the chance.
Support your local movie house!
...President George W. Bush vows to fight anti-freedom around the world.
"Who do these penguins think they are? Calling themselves 'Emperors'? We, in America, do not tolerate such anti-democratic policies. Let the penguins have their rights. These penguins are part of the axis of evil..."
I'm not sure "Bowling for Columbine" was simply "anti-gun". I seem to remember that it went a little deeper than that. If I remember correctly the movie asked why the per capita gun-related murders in the U.S. were higher than Canada even though the per-capita gun ownership was lower.
Something like that. While it was a gun related documentary I don't think it was imply "anti-gun".
Anyway, no such controversy with the penguin movie - it's pro penguin alright.
I don't understand. I thought that real, proud and good Americans had to boycott French products ?
When I noticed an article on Slashdot with the title 'March of the Penguins Tops Box Offices' I really did assume that 'March of the Penguins' was a documentary about Linux distributions (and their brave struggle against the elements of er, MS, I guess).
As a piece of trivia, March of the Penguins grossed more per screen shown on than the Fantastic Four did, in the Fantastic Four's first week. (Although MotP didn't make a whole lot of cash, it was only shown on 64 screens, whereas FF was shown on a something like 3,500. Those of you who also visit K5 may remember my diary entry on it at the time.)
Ultimately, it is the selling value of the narrator that probably made the big difference. HOWEVER, Hollywood pays attention to box office figures, and the fact that a wildlife documentary could hit the number 6 spot may cause them to seriously think about how they make movies for kids. (They're going to assume that kids are the main audience, whether that is true or not.)
If wildlife sells, then expect it to be merchandised to death. Having said that, it would be one hell of an improvement if kids get SOME natural history in their diet, as opposed to the turgid carp they get at the moment.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Wake me when its on the Discovery | Animal Planet | National Geographic | Scoence Channel
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this or not (/me is lazy), but if you liked this film, you might wanna also check out Winged Migration, by Jacques Perrin. It's good on details, and incredibly beautiful. If you suffer a bit from add (/me again), you'll like it cause it's split into regions of the world, so you can take it bit by bit, if you don't think you can stand 2 hours straight of birds flying...
No trespassing. Violators will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
The footage in this movie is incredible, no doubt. However, I think one valid concern that has been raised about it is its tendency for anthropomorphization of the penguins. The narration often ascribes various human emotions and motivations to the footage that is shown, and realistically, this probably isn't accurate and probably leaves a lot of audiences with the wrong impression. It's certainly understandable why this was done (if nothing else, penguins especially are prone to anthropomorphization anyway), but when this does come out on DVD, I think it might be nice to be able to just watch the footage and turn off the narration.
Thirteen months of EXTREME CUTENESS!!! Oh my god! Mother of Hello Kitty in a hand basket! belly sliding, wing flapping, fuzzy little baby penguin extreme cuteness as far as the eye can see! And the waddling!! Oh! the waddling!!!
I guess the nights sure are long and lonely for those camera men !
And thats why Firecrackers and kittens don't mix.
Anyway, to clarify the situation, this nice fuzzy penguin movie has not yet become #2, and has no chance at #1. The #1 documentary is Farenheit 9/11 , which is completely out of the league of normal documentaries. However, it was the success of Michael Moore's previous documentary that created enough interest in documentaries to support this "more gentle" documentary with some serious marketing. Still peanuts on the Hollywood scale, but hopefully a profitable movie, though unusually expensive for a documentary.
I want to be optimistic about things, but the ugly bottom line is that freedom is not free in the "free beer" sense. There's some confusion because you can't buy freedom with money, either. However, one of the prerequisites to being free is knowing enough of the truth to make important choices.
In conclusion, the truths of penguin life are cute, safe, even rather interesting, but NOT important. I feel no moral obligation to see this movie, but it would be entertaining if a friend wants to see it.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
I thought it was geeks storming a certain building in Redmond in this movie.
Evolution of Language Through The Ages: 6000 BC : ungh, grrf, booga 2000 AD : grep, awk, sed
[1] It is G rated. I guess some people are sick of car chases, boobies and scary monsters - go figure! The "naughtiest" part is penguins doing "it" to make more penguins. I actually saw a parent take their child out of the theatre for this one. Felt sorry for the poor kid...
[2] Penguins are somewhat similar to humans in the way they walk and behave. They walk upright but wobble and thus they look like "cute", "fat", "fuzzy" people. You couldn't pull this one off with snakes or, tigers. They are social creatures. In the movie ( I hope I don't spoil it for anyone ;) a mother penguin who lost her egg, tries to steal the chick from another penguin. The other females in the group would not "approve" of such behavior and came to protect the chick and the mother from the "thief".
Also penguins are monogamous (emperor penguins are monogamous at least for duration of one year) - which often is not the case with many humans nowadays - not that there is anything wrong with it... So that also anthropomorphosizes them even more.
[3] The bravery and determination of the people who shot the movie is impressive. Very cold weather, very dangerous, all just to film the cute little birds. And, of course, as some post mentioned, some like Morgan Freeman.
[4] It spread mostly by word of mouth. This is similar to the "My Big Fat Greek Wedding". A small movie that made big $ because everyone told their friends to go see and how great it was. I heard about the movie from my parents then after I saw it, I recommended it to all my friends and they saw it. If everyone who see it does it - it is quite a few people..
I use the metric system you insensitive clod! Oh... and saw the movie six months ago... it's really nice, really beautiful but the voice-over really sucks !
\u262D = \u5350
Go find daemons out there to film now.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
http://i.somethingawful.com/inserts/articlepics/ph otoshop/05-20-05-movies/KlenkyWah.jpg
When this movie does so well, Hollywood execs spend years trying to copy it's box-office success, spawning Polar Wars II - attack of the Penguins, Lord of the Icebergs, Antarctic Park...
Another excellent documentary is "The Blue Planet" series from the BBC. They also cover penguins, but not in as much detail, but then you get to see polar bears, whales, and the weird things deep down. It really gives an insight into the amazing variety of life on "our" planet.
...one of the best GBP30 I spent on DVDs.
The quality of the video is stunning - it's almost as if you have a window into the undersea.
March of the Penguins, according to Yahoo! Movies did not top the US box office this weekend. It was #6 behind The Dukes of Hazzard, Wedding Crashers, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Sky High, and Must Love Dops. How does this constitute "Tops" at the box office? Top means highest point... not in the top 10. To put the movie's earnings in perspective Dukes of Hazzard, the top (#1) movie at the US box office, made $30,575,000 slightly over 5 times as much as March of the Penguins made this weekend.
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
I know it's redundant, but I have to provide that line from Out of Sight:
"Andy, honestly, who gives a shit?"
a small sex game in a game can get it banned but a massive orgy with thousands of penguins is alright?
Coming soon from Rockstar "GTA: Antartica"
Nearly all the good doco's I can recall are made to fit a one hour TV time slot or are in "parts". Some notable exceptions are F.9/11 and "Born Free" (big hit in the 60's). The Penguin stuff was also covered in David Attenborough's "Life in the Freezer", as is normal for an Attenborough doco, the pictures were unique and awsome. Maybe this mixed with a bit of human emotion is what kindled the public's interest in Penguins.
I find the biggest problem with doco's is that interesting subjects often get treated like they do in the classroom, mono-tone presenters, long rambling scripts and pathetic visual aids. They are great if you want to fall asleep on the couch but absolutely useless for engaging the general public's attention.
Something like this that "humanises" a trully remarkable behaviour is bound to do well with the "family" market. The mega-hit "Lion King" was inspired by a very good doco depicting the rivalry between Lions and Hyeina's[sic]. Unfortunately alot of parents won't take thier kids to see Zebra's getting ripped apart by blood soaked Lion's.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
science documentary. SCIENCE.
S C I E N C E
in other news:
recent studies have shown that nerds and geeks are no longer interested in science.
Nature documentaries are gaining more and more attention: Winged migration and Microcosmos were really successful films and the Deep blue was extremely well received in Germany.
Of course the profit of these films will attract more and more producing companies to invest in nature documentaries: I bet there will be no long delay until the next one.
- yeah, i know, my englisk sucks
- my english also
It was a great movie.
braved Antarctic temperatures as low as 70 degrees below zero - and winds up to 150 mph
How about the penguins? They did this while naked.
The Penguins are a miraculous species, capable of extreme heroism, self-sacrifice, sorrow and unshakable love.
Or at least, that was the end goal of the camerawork and the filtering of the hundreds or thousands of hours of penguin footage in the editing room.
Call me cynical, but with enough footage you could probably make a pile of beercans express anthropomorphic emotions.
Michael Moore's "Bowling For Columbine" was not a documentary by any standard known to man despite the Academy Award. It was in the same vein as Moore's earlier work Roger and Me. Moore himself conceded this when he was questioned about the validity of its content. Moore accused the questioner of holding him to a different standard than he would another film maker, and was quoted as saying "because you see this primarily as a documentary...I think of it as a movie, an entertaining movie...An entertaining move like Sophie's Choice"
Fahrenheit 9/11 grossed $120 million at t the box office alone.
Okay, taking a quick peek, there aren't any good examples on the first page or so [exception], but here's the list of icons, should you wish to put up a journal yourself!
Wikileaks, no DNS
Just saw the US trailer for the movie. I think it's not really accurate, you can see all those penguins walking on that war-ish music...
:)
e mpereur/qt/marcheempereur.mov
Here's the french one. I think it is way better than the US one, but maybe you'll think the US one was better. That's why we have 2 trailers
http://www.commeaucinema.com/bandeannonces/marche
"The Penguins are a miraculous species, capable of extreme heroism, self-sacrifice, sorrow and unshakable love."
And they taste great too!
I wonder if next, we'll see a documentary about little red devils with Pitchforks and their struggle to survive deep below the Earth's crust. It could show them evading lava monsters, and tunneling through the Earth.
"Don't believe your own hype."
Good advice.
"The only reason Moore joined the NRA was because he wanted to run for the NRA presidency and force it to support gun control."
An NRA member, BOY SCOUT and meglomaniac all at the same time huh? Had you bothered to watch BfC you would have known this.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
My wife and I (no kids yet) went to see this movie early this Saturday. The theater was full of children too young to sit through an 80 minute nature documentary.
By the end of the movie there were about half a dozen kids running around the theater vying for attention from their parents. It is kind of hard to enjoy the end of the movie when a 2 year old is running up and down the steps next to you yelling for their parents.
Note to parents: Just because this movie is rated G doesn't mean it is automatically for kids! Older kids will be FASCINATED; younger kids will be BORED.
This should prove to Michael Moore that a documentary can be both successful and non-fiction. Who would have guessed?
Hey, I was monogamous for a year. However, my wife of seven years doesn't think that one year constitutes 'real monogamy', sheesh.
Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
WHAT!!!! What do you mean it spread by word of mouth?!?!?!? Have you not watched TV in the last 6 months. Every other commercial is a spot for this damn movie!!! Whether this makes more money than any other documentary, it is deffinetly hyped more than any other documentary. Don't have a clue where you came up with the idea that this movie spread by word of mouth.
In today's american society, how does a film with such blantant sexual imagry possibly get a G rating? What happening to our country when even our guardians or morality let this slip by. We need Hillary to do something about this.
On a more serios note, if you wonder why americans are so insane about sex, the above quote explains it pretty well. That kid will grow up in a household where the idea of sex evokes the emotion of shame. He will grow up with this and pass it along to his kids, simply because all that shame in his head will prevent him from teaching his kids that sex is a natural healthy thing. And the cycle continues.
Of all the negative idea about sex (sex is a sin, wait till marriage, sex is only for procreation, etc.), this direct linkage if sex and shame is by far the most damaging.
*anthropomorphizes
>March of the Penguins Tops Box Offices
Only Batman can stop them!
2005 would be the year for Linux on the desktop.
Does this movie have tux in it? If so, i might go see it.
Show this to your friends and family that don't know what a real hacker is
^
|
That's a bit more like what I've come to expect from a slashdot headline.
http://tinyurl.com/4ny52
In today's american society, how does a film with such blantant sexual imagry possibly get a G rating? What happening to our country when even our guardians or morality let this slip by. We need Hillary to do something about this.
On a more serios note, if you wonder why americans are so insane about sex, the above quote explains it pretty well. That kid will grow up in a household where the idea of sex evokes the emotion of shame. He will grow up with this and pass it along to his kids, simply because all that shame in his head will prevent him from teaching his kids that sex is a natural healthy thing. And the cycle continues.
Of all the negative idea about sex (sex is a sin, wait till marriage, sex is only for procreation, etc.), this direct linkage if sex and shame is by far the most damaging.
Let me assure you, the penguins did it only for procreation.
Tor
Any scenes of hot, steamy gay penguin sex to titillate the religious reich?
While Warner crows about the word-of-mouth success of Penguins, they're sitting on another fantastic G-rated movie for kids and won't let it out:
/ duma/index_np.html
http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/review/2005/08/04
(yeah, yeah, just skip the ad, it won't kill ya)
The film is so good that Ebert convinced Warner to give the movie one more try, and do a set of test screenings here in Chicago over the weekend. Yet, somehow, Warner still hasn't gotten the message. Very sad.
When does Wedding Crashers 2 get funded? Oh wait, it probably has.
It does seem to be a very interesting movie indeed, and I like penguins just like the next geek, but, please, no need to get upset on boobies, ok? I really don't see why penguins and boobies couldn't get along together like old friends... so much in common, think:
waddling.
Watching the emperor penguins care for their offspring, to the point of risking their lives, makes "March of the Penguins" the ultimate chick flick.
I guess some people are sick of car chases, boobies and scary monsters
I'm not. I'm going to go play GTA and Quake until more moving I like come out.
I was very disappointed in March of Penguins - blatant anthropomorphization and tugging at the heartstrings, and an overbearing soundtrack. I've been watching Attenborough's "The Life of Birds" series (1998) and I think this is far superior to the Penguins film - informative, beautifully filmed, tasteful use of slow-motion and music, and filled with wonder at birds and behavior that is truly different from and inexplicable to humans.
I'd go to see that movie, and I haven't seen a new movie since ROTS. Cheetahs are awesome!
and all the other IMAX films like that, they aren't documentaries?
http://wip.warnerbros.com/marchofthepenguins/
Yes, word of mouth, my mom called me and told me about the movie. After I saw it I told some of my friends who went and saw it and I think they liked it enough to recomment to thier friends and so on. So even though someone (let's say my parents in this case) saw an add on TV for it, I didn't and I don't know if all my friends did so that makes 'word of mouth' I think.
> I'm not. I'm going to go play GTA and Quake until more moving I like come out.
Maybe you should practice your English instead...
You had me totally interested in the movie until you drew comparisons to My Big Fat Greek Wedding. Ugh.
If I watched it and then recommended it to all my friends, that would be one more ticket.. I don't have any friends you insensitive clod ;-)
The incorrect statement was NOT that the movie was anti-gun. Obviously it was. You're delusional if you really believe otherwise.
...A complete distortion of reality.
/.
The incorrect statement was that it was a documentary. Whole sections of the movie were scripted and edited to create falsehoods.
In the famous scene where he gets a gun as a free gift from a bank for opening an account, not only does he NOT SHOW in the movie that he had to produce identification and pass an FBI background check (to exercise a constitutionally protected right) but the kicker is that he set the bank up...
The way the offer worked, if you opened a CD you could get your interest paid up front in the form of a gift certificate to a local sporting goods store where, yes, you could select a gun as your free give. (and in fairness the bank advertised it this way)
Moore had the bank go get a gun from the sporting goods store and bring it to the bank so he could take it out on camera. The hopeless sap at the bank thought they were doing Moore a favor and would be in holloywood movie so they agreed.
Moore in the movie cut the FBI background check and specifically made it look like the bank was just handing out guns to everyone who walked in.
Even the title of the movie (Bowling for Columbine) was based on a lie. Moore claimed that the title was based on the "little known fact" that the killers skipped school and went bowling before the murders. The police said it was flatly false. Moore then changed his story that they were supposed to go bowling before the murders. If he lied to create the title, how truthful do you think he was in the rest of the movie?
I wasn't going to post this screed but when as saw your ridiculous post, I just had to. You can BS your friends in a barroom but like the man said last night, Ya can't BS on
Instead of blindly following a politcal hack, why not use that watermelon on top your shoulders for something -eh?
I've tried to "enjoy" User Friendly many times. It just doesn't work.
But was it a male and female within the context of a Godly marriage or just sinful jezzabels?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
You sure? Even the ones having homosexual sex?
is this an indication that linux is slowly making grounds...one way or the other?
maybe the love for linux is showing in this movie.
there has to be some folks who watched the movie just to shout "tux!! we love you!" at the screen for like 50 times.
Or the penguins were really lousy at it and they didn't want the kid to pick up bad habits like pecking and other things which could hurt.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
The Penguins are a miraculous species, capable of extreme heroism, self-sacrifice, sorrow and unshakable love." And they look freakin' awesome in a tuxedo!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
That's what nature documentaries always do for me. Check out the "Blue Planet" episode about the deep ocean sometime. The movie in the theater now, "Deep Blue," includes some of the same footage, but it makes bad choices about tone that drag it down a half notch. Trying to be everything to everyone.
Most of what passes for escapist entertainment right now doesn't take me away at all. I can't tell the difference between the 20 minutes of blaring pre-show ads and promotional shorts and the main attraction. My kids playing with Star Wars figures are more escapist than the latest movie. It all comes in a can now.
But then that's me, and I think "Nature" and "The American Experience" are the best shows on TV. (Not so much now that George Page's narration is gone from Nature, but still...)
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
March of the Penguins Tops Office Boxes. Ahhh, one day...
The producers left out the most controversial part of Pengiuns... they are GAY!
Mozilla stole tabs from NetCaptor. So what? Right?
at the pole. In addition, the south pole is a tectonic plate so it has moved over time.
I wonder if the 'devotion' to the place isn't instead that they've been able to grow fatter faster than its grown colder.
Since the flights of cruise missiles over the Canadian artic, over the ocean and over deserts, we have learned that 'tractless' wastes are only tractless to the unpracticed eye.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
*BLAM*
I known darn well that it's "Antarctica", and I've been annoyed by people who pronounce it incorrectly for as long as I can remember. It's a typo, I swear. I can spel. The carp on teh Web hasnt overwelmd my prof-reading skils, honetsly...
Mind the Gap
Hmm, I doubt it. I would expect that they did it because its enjoyable and they are driven to do it. I'm not sure if they fully understand they decision they make, and chose to have another child.
no text
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
Enough work to fill a single REAL workday over the course of a week. The President sure is dedicated.
That determination was impressive!
The original version didnt have a Morgan Freeman narrating...There were voices dubbed to make the penguins appear as if they were talking but this was deemed too cutesy for the US
Children is the lack of co-branding appeal. Sure the movie beats out fantastic four, but you can't exactly get penguin "action" figures in your mcdonalds happy meal. The biggest trend I've seen in cinema in the last 10-15 years has been a diffusement of costs and the branding and "other items" market. Sell the soundtrack, the dvd, the tshirts, the childrens toys, and movies that totally flop in the box office still make profit for the company, since they already paid for the movie with advertiser rights from burger king. And the best part is, they are making money that they don't have to give back to the actors, since its not the "box office gross."
So hollywood doesn't actually pay as much attention to Box office figures as we think, which is why we get crappy comic book movie after comic book movie, along with video game movie, since they have so much co marketing potential. That and the target audience for movie goers is 14-22 year old boys with nothing to do on their weekends. The sappy chick flicks are for when they are going on their first date and need someplace to take the girl. I would be suprised if FF still made money for the studio, even if it is not recorded as making a profit.
I don't think I mentioned this, but it was astonishing.
There's a male bird that acts as a bottom so he can get the girls. Wish I could remember the species. When they're not showing off the colorful parts, they look like the females. So they imitate the body language, the male nails them and leaves, and then they get the real female nearby. Oh the sacrifices guys make.
Isn't a documentary. It is op ed puff piece. Michael Moore's movies should be classified as comedies. I haven't seen March Of The Penguins, but I'd be surprised if there is any kind of political agenda being pushed be the birds.
no brain
Funny. These are all things Michael Moore is incapable of.
Granted, I don't like Bush and the situation in Iraq just as much as the next guy, but I find Michael Moore's style of rabblerousing to be obnoxious and counterproductive. Humor is fine, but doing it at the expense of our government is a little harsh --- he's not doing anybody a service by building a public doubt and mistrust of the government.
On the other hand, Jon Stewart is friggin' hilarious, and seems to offend much fewer people.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
I understand, I've been there myself. I've gotten so used to the edit function that I forget to preview on slashdot.
I think there may be a legit reason for using different brackets, but I really don't know for sure.
There's no reason for a properly done car chase to rate anything above PG, though it might be a little intense for G. Skilled drivers running at insane speeds through twistie roads - now that's entertainment. "Gone in 60 Seconds" (the new one), "Fast 'n Furious", etc - those don't have real car chases. Something like Ronin or Bullitt, which don't have nudity, have only mild language by modern standards. I could do without the boobs that find their way into damn near every movie now, though...
"Bowling for Columbine" is NOT an anti-gun documentary. It's an anti-press-glorification-of-gun-violence documentary.
I wish the people who write these articles would get it right.
-- I am. Therefore, I think!
Like cold chicken.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
Documentaries have always been biased.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
Yes, it was moving and wonderful an all, but I was pretty disappointed about the lack of useful factual information. I thought that the movie excessively anthropomorphized the penguins and that it didn't present the information in scientific terms.
For example, in the movie they show the consequences of the penguins dropping their eggs and losing track of chicks, but nowhere in the film do they state what the survival rate of the chicks is. They show an albatross catching and killing a penguin chick while adult penguins stand around and do nothing, and fail to explain the lack of a response. They also say nothing about the ongoing environmental changes in the antarctic and how these may affect the penguins.
I went in to the documentary hoping to see some science, but it turned out to be mostly pretty pictures and emotionally loaded nonsense.
nuke the moon
More penguins!
They engineer an escape from a zoo, then hijack a ship to Antartica (the rest of the zoo animals end up in Madagascar where they haven't a clue.)
Best line in the movie: "The penguins are psychotic!"
When the cops show up at the zoo breakout, the penguin leader says (like Jack Nicholson in "Batman"): "We've been ratted out, boys! Cute and cuddly...cute and cuddly...!"
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
One example is here
But essentially the study (commissioned by a group in favor of G rated movies) found that over a 10 year period, Hollywood G rated fare tended to be far more profitable than R rated fare.
Make of it what you will, but it tells me that families want family-friendly movies.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
Kudo to Jacket for his success. I met him couple years back when he was working on a previous penguin documentary.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
No sign of Linus Torvalds or anything using Linux. Although I think the mechapeguin as run by a SCO system. Considering how easily the hero Penguins defeated it.
[what is a good slashdot discussion without a bit of SCO bashing?]
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
Michael Moore's anti-gun documentary Bowling For Columbine.
Wow, way to completely miss the point of that movie...
Check IMDB... females 19 to 29 gave it the highest ratings. To get some penguin lovin' from your lady friend, take her to see this!
I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
Antarctic Iceberg Blocks Penguins
Giant iceberg menaces Antarctic penguins
Repeat after me: We are all individuals
It also tells me many films are made to gratify managerial egos-rather than to actually make money.
Parent post was a parady of a typical attack against Michael Moore (or I guess any political documentary somebody disagrees with).
Pengiumns will stay together for a lot longer than that as long as they can find each other the following year. Stuff happens, and penguins die. When they regroup for next winter a percentage of the population would have lost their mate and have to find new ones.
:) last longer than humans'. That is, in proportion to their lifespans.
On agerage, pengiun's unions (I dare not call it marriage!!!
"It's not natural" and "It's not what God intended"
...thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
I can take no issue with the fact that many animals tend to display homosexual behaviors. The facts are the facts. That it appears in animal communities makes it as 'natural' as anything else in nature. For what it's worth, while examples do exist, it is quite far from the norm in animal communities.
With respect to "It's not what God intended" I'd have to say that is exactly right.
Let me be clear. What passes for socially acceptable behavior in the human community in areas other than homosexual expression are FAR from God's plan. For example: in 1 Cor 6, the Bible says:
Do not be deceived:Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers...
This is a harsh condemnation of 'natural' behaviors. Who among us is truly unselfish? There's a stark description of unacceptable behavior without a reference to homosexual acts.
It also says (between the ellipses) "nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor "
Finally, it says in I Cor 6:
"And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God....Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body."
God's plan was for man to behave in distinctively unnatural ways. In Philippians 2 it says: "Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others."
In fact, Jesus said in Luke 9:
Then he said to them all: "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me."
It stretches credulity to try to interpret the meaning of passages that explicitly condemn homosexual behavior in any way other than what they say. The fact is that the New Testament writings convey a radical lifestyle. Jesus himself, when talking about the marriage relationship said in Matthew 19:
Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry." Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriagebecause of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."
Even his disciples were unnerved by Christ's bold, counter-cultural and authoritative teaching about God's perspective on marriage.
Jesus' teachings are radical, and quite distinctly unnatural. I find no contradiction between suggesting that a behavior is natural and yet condemned by Christ.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
I fully agree. Kung Fu Hustle is now one of my top 4 favorite movies of all time. For documentaries, we've also got the Aristocrats to look forward to this year. It just opened up on four screens this past weekend and earned $243,796. I suspect Aristocrats will top this penguin movie in box office reciepts.
Oh, yeah. There was also the American release of "Old Boy" earlier this year. It's definitely the most extreme revenge flick I have ever seen. So, yeah, some people may generalize and say nothing but Hollywood crap is in the theaters, but like you've pointed out, that's not the case.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
do they charge for the movie ticket or is it free (free as in charge_no_money)? and am I free to edit it and re-release? on a serious note, would it not be awesome to have a movie like that, released on a website, free for us to download and watch.. like those atomfilms?
(1999-04-25)
h p?day=25&month=4&year=1999
http://pag.csail.mit.edu/~adonovan/dilbert/show.p
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
Gee, you don't suppose it has anything to do with the heavy TV advertising and wide release do you?
They use those techniques on crappy films all the time. The only really unusual thing this time was that they did it for a documentary for some reason, which presumably was still well-edited enough to be watchable by children.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
"Michael Moore's anti-gun documentary Bowling For Columbine"
Um, what? Did I watch a different movie? What I got out of that movie was that Canada has even more guns than the US, and much less gun violence, and that America's problem was not guns but our culture.
Am I missing something, or is this what passes for journalism these days?
Joseph: Hey. I just had a particular thought. What if we go all the way to the zoo, and the monkeys ain't in the mood?
Joey: What, for doin' it?
Joseph: Yeah, for doing it, the monkeys.
Joey: That's okay. We'll just watch the penguins do it.
Tony: Ahh..that's disgusting. You're like a perverted individual!
Joseph: What? Why is that disgusting, and watching the monkeys doin' it ain't?
Tony: Because monkeys is natural with humans, penguins, they ain't natural like that.
Joey: What are you talking about? Penguins is natural.
Anthony: Penguins ain't natural, they was chemically man-made like The Incredible Hulk.
Joseph: Anthony, how do you know this about the penguins?
Anthony: It's in the Bible.
J+J: It ain't in the Bible.
Anthony: It's in the Bible wit' Noah! Noah didn't take no penguins wit' 'em on the ark, so therefore penguins ain't natural. Read your Bible. There's no mention of penguins whatsoever.
Joey: Okay.
J+J: If it's in the Bible-
These are dysfunctional psychotic penguins suffering from strees from being in prison. They have "adopted rocks" as eggs. Clearly these penguins are psychologically distressed, perhaps homosexuality is a symptom of this.
For example, they don't show the vast over crowding on the penguin preserve on Pluto caused by the tanker spill of liquid dark matter. (Futurama: The Bird-bot of Ice-catraz)
No, the environmentalists don't show you this, do they.
Freakin' hidden agendas - sheesh.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I saw the movie some weeks ago, so my memory is not completely sharp. But as I remember it, some of the narration focused on emotions of the penguins...one particularly sad part is keyed with the line "the loss is unbearable."
Narration like this is often attacked as anthropomorphism, but I really have to disagree. Just because emotions are interpretted from an animal's actions does not mean it's automatically anthropomorphism. Saying so implies that animals don't have emotions, only humans do. Anyone who's raised a dog or cat knows that animals do have emotions, simple though they may be.
People are animals too. We have strong emotions that override our intellect occasionally...in many ways our emotions are deeper, more primitive and more powerful than self-conscious thoughts. I don't see how it makes sense to think that other animals do not share that experience simply because they do not share our capacity for self-conscious thought.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
"[1] It is G rated. I guess some people are sick of car chases, boobies and scary monsters - go figure! The "naughtiest" part is penguins doing "it" to make more penguins. I actually saw a parent take their child out of the theatre for this one. Felt sorry for the poor kid..."
That's sad. It's also sad to consider the mere sighting of a breast or animals having sex warrants a PG or higher rating. Why is it infants get to see boobies every day of their life, but as soon as they hit a certain age they must be protected from breasts? Reefer madness I guess.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
New Zealand pigeons recover from a berry-induced hangover... no really!
t m
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4131674.s
I tend to agree with you - while it is an amazing story, both from the perspective of the penguins and the filmmakers, and it's well worth seeing with children or anyone who happens to like animals, I too felt that it tried way too hard to evoke emotions in me. If I'm going to anthropomorphize cute Emperor penguin chicks, let me do it myself, dammit, rather then having it force-fed down my throat. :-)
Still reccomended, but with some reservations.
My English teacher once told me that two positives don't make a negative. Two words for her: Yeah, right.
Clearly the penguins worship the albatross and were making a virgin sacrifice.
it's because Linus was once bitten by one.
"Our interests are to see if we can't scale it up to something more exciting," he said.
I could do without the boobs that find their way into damn near every movie now, though...
This is a very common misconception. The trend in cinema is for fewer and fewer movies to release with an R rating and as such fewer are allowed to contain naked breasts. Of the R-rated films, not even all of them contain naked breasts. Compared to cinema in the seventies, far fewer of today's films contain female nudity or sex scenes.
I would provide statistics to support my observation here, but I'm at work and a search for 'female nudity in films' isn't something I want to embark upon.
My theory as to why this misconception exists is that people are becoming more sensitive to the appearance of female nudity than they were in the past.
seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
I can't agree with that. For most people (certainly in N. America) the natural world is very alien to themselves and their existence. I think what you meant to say is that this is a nature documentary which you found very entertaining. Nothing wrong with that.
That said, i have a saying i use when confronted (whether in a doc or in "real life") by some of the more bizarre occupants of our planet: "I wouldn't want to be the first off the spaceship." With the incredible variety of life here on Earth it's mind-boggling to think of what could be encountered orbiting some other star system.
"Our interests are to see if we can't scale it up to something more exciting," he said.
Bowling for Columbine was not an "anti-gun documentary". Only an idiot who watched only half of the film would think that. He started off presenting alot of gun related info and made it seem like he was going down the same tired anti-gun road, but then he turned it around when he pointed out how Canada has more guns per capita than the US yet less gun related crimes per capita.
It was pretty clear by the end of the movie that Moore's main argument was in regards to how the media focuses on violence, and fear-mongering (among other things).
Since Michael Moore's satire/propaganda/hit-piece movies don't qualify as documentaries, that leaves this movie as the all-time highest-grossing documentary.
I have to say that I object to homosexual behavior because the Bible provides an instruction manual for a successful life, and clearly teaches that this behavior is inconsistent with God's definition of a successful life.
It is important to note that God's guidelines have a lot to say about what will make me successful - and they address many many more issues than sexual expression. See more info in this post.
By way of an analogy: If you suggested that hitting your thumb with a hammer was a great plan for happiness, should I support your right to do it? I suppose. I don't object to what adults choose to do with their thumbs and hammers - or in private with each other. That's their business.
In my opinion, since the Bible says that sexual expression outside of heterosexual marriage is a bad idea, I'm inclined to agree.
I *do* object to essentially providing educational curriculum that indicates that hitting one's thumb with a hammer is an equal choice to not doing the same, and then making it hate speech to indicate that hammering thumbs is a bad idea.
Think I'm being alarmist? That this is a red herring? I think not!
See what has already happened in Sweden
See what has already happened in Canada
Do what you want in your bedroom with other adults. That's your business, and you have the right to engage in activities that are not healthy if you choose. I won't stand in the way of that viewpoint. This is the classical essence of tolerance. I don't have to agree with you, but I do have to respect your right to your point of view.
In the "new tolerance" the only tolerable viewpoint is pro-individual rights. Anything else is intolerable and must be labeled with a pejorative which indicates a character flaw.
I won't let *activists* intolerance of opposing viewpoints interfere with my civil rights. Does that mean that someone should issue a personal atack against me because of my viewpoint? How tolerant is that?
Respectfully,
Anomaly
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
This is a bit off-topic but man! the guy who does the voice over on trailers must be avery very rich guy i mean it's the same voice on every trailer
The Penguins are a miraculous species, capable of extreme heroism, self-sacrifice, sorrow and unshakable love."
They're also like big rats with flipper-wings...Those little pests will get into anything given the opportunity.
Time for the big Tux Racer tournament.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
Why believe that I'm hiding something? My point is that God's description of acceptable behavior does not single out homosexual acts for the purpose of condemning homosexuals.
For what it's worth, I was quoting the NIV as hosted here: and that translation does not include effeminate. The NASB (another fine translation) does include it, but that word does not appear in the NIV, NKJV or the KJV.
As I'm not a Latin scholar, I can't comment on the translation. As you point out, the Latin is a translation from the Greek. I think it would be best to 'go to the Greek.' I'd have to pull out my interlinear translation to do that effectively, and since I'm at work, I don't have that handy.
Thanks for the comments.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
Well, you can tell them appart. When they waddle they swing their hips more and they flap their wingtips everytime they say "fabulous" (with a lisp of course).
This is a sneaky attempt by anarchists to push the deviant operating system known as "linux".
It is immoral, unproductive, and un-American to support such a dangerous operating system. People who recommend this film to their friends are probably goddamn communists who want to destroy democracy!
(For you oblivious geeks who can't spot a joke without an accompanying instruction manual, the joke started on line 1)
I haven't seen either of the documentaries, but just reading your post I would have to agree with you. You have the principles of the matter sorted out well. Personally, I'd rather watch the move about cute, safe penguine life that allegedly does not matter, it seems so much more enriching.
But wait, there's more: the aquarium had given the penguin a human name, but it seems that penguins know the names they give each other. The way penguins can find their ways back to their mates and parents amid hundreds or thousands of other penguins is that they call out each others' names.
Penguins are smart!
Request your free CD of my piano music.
is just the latest sport to come to ESPN8, the Ocho!
Check your local cable listings!
"Astonishing images of . . . that is nothing short of astonishing!"
Okay, I'm astonished already.
astonishing astonishing astonishing astonishing astonishing astonishing astonishing astonishing
Doesn't even sound like a real word anymore, does it? Sounds more like a sex crime, or something a meteorite does when it enters the atmosphere a tad too hastily.
atmosphere atmosphere atmosphere atmosphere atmosphere atmosphere atmosphere atmosphere
**>>BELCH
Actually they have a lot of good information on their website in the production section. I think they chose not to include it in the movie because they didn't make a documentary for scientists, they made it for everyone. We (er, most people) are emotional creatures who don't need numbers to justify our feelings. That might go against the geek mentality of science & numbers ruling all, but that's just the way it is.
Put another way, your emotions aren't nonsense.
"Ultimately, it is the selling value of the narrator that probably made the big difference. HOWEVER, Hollywood pays attention to box office figures, and the fact that a wildlife documentary could hit the number 6 spot may cause them to seriously think about how they make movies for kids. (They're going to assume that kids are the main audience, whether that is true or not.)"
Compare the acknowledgement above of the importance of voice actors to the success of a movie, right next to the uniformily negative attitude displayed to the news that voice actors may be important to the success of a game.
---
Slashdot, the Fox News of the Internet.
Just don't tell the parents that you can unlock a 'hot coffee' mod of the movie where after the penguins have a date at the local bar they come back to her place for some hot and heavy naked penguin action.
Oh wait, there's already naked penguin action? oh in that case the hot coffee mod unlocks a scene guest directed by Jerry Bruckheimer where one of the penguins goes crazy and starts shooting the other penguins, especially the police and prostitute penguings in an orgy of violence and blood.
Im.
*ducks and covers*
Well, there was the fact that the bank scene was staged.
How exactly?
When you see me going in to the bank and walking out with my new gun in "Bowling for Columbine" - that is exactly as it happened. Nothing was done out of the ordinary other than to phone ahead and ask permission to let me bring a camera in to film me opening up my account. I walked into that bank in northern Michigan for the first time ever on that day in June 2001, and, with cameras rolling, gave the bank teller $1,000 - and opened up a 20-year CD account. After you see me filling out the required federal forms ("How do you spell Caucasian?") - which I am filling out here for the first time - the bank manager faxed it to the bank's main office for them to do the background check. The bank is a licensed federal arms dealer and thus can have guns on the premises and do the instant background checks (the ATF's Federal Firearms database--which includes all federally approved gun dealers--lists North Country Bank with Federal Firearms License #4-38-153-01-5C-39922).
Within 10 minutes, the "OK" came through from the firearms background check agency and, 5 minutes later, just as you see it in the film, they handed me a Weatherby Mark V Magnum rifle (If you'd like to see the outtakes, click here).
Apparently, Moore didn't "lie" often enough in BfC that his detractors didn't have to make shit up. Funny, really.
PA
Just testing out html on an old thread.
Totally with you; I enjoyed this film in a really unique way. No other movie I remember seeing (in a traditional cinema, anyway) captured me the way March of the Penguins did. It was very emotional, and I'm left in sheer wonder of life, having seen its cycles played out in such an uninhabitable place. It was watching the macro version of life itself in motion - almost every individual movement a penguin makes looks awkward and clumsy, but it's all a natural part of a vital chain of events without which there could be no survival. Any misstep along the way, if not for the numbers involved, could end it all instantly. Only by beating the odds over a long period of time can the population even sustain itself, let alone grow. Just boggling and awe-inspiring. Reminds me of a neat counter-statement to the idea of intelligent design: you couldn't create something that beautiful if you tried. Life! Ahh, it really does feel wonderful and refreshing to immerse yourself in the thoughts and feelings of life itself, to take a break from all the artificial layers of society and technology and beurocracy that we've built on top of it and so frequently get lost in. I'd like to someday thank the filmmakers personally for putting together something that evokes all that.
I'm also pleasantly surprised that it's doing so well. There were about six people at the screen when I saw it. Not that I'm complaining - no shrieking kids, no cellphones with human-shaped accessories, it was really an ideal and relaxing way to take in a film of this quality.
This doesn't mention emperor penguins, so I really don't know about their monogamy, but penguins in general are not really more monogamous than we are. At least not according to Lloyd Spencer Davis:
"I can't say the same for Fahrenheit 9/11, for example. Perhaps it is important for the number of people it reached for whom its ideas were new, I'll grant that. But to the informed and interested viewer, it was little more than a rehash of world events through the prism of Moore's crazed psyche."
...". And it is now apparent that the Dubya regime cooked the intel on Iraqi WMD as their first and primary justification for our illegal invasion, war, and subsequent occupation (by UN standards) there. In a "crazy" turn of events, it also now looks like, after the USA's 2-1/2 year occupation of Iraq, Rice and Cheney's quotes in those video clips were absolutely correct, since no WMD have every been found.
Certainly, you have every right right to your perspective. Considering that the term "crazy" is a subjective comparison to what society considers a "norm", one might also draw the conclusion that those who would have been considered "crazy" only a generation or two ago are now in charge, not unlike the story about the patients taking over the madhouse.
Not one of the video clips included in the documentary "Fahrenheit 9-11" were "doctored up", including those of then NSC Advisor Condi Rice or of VP Dick Cheney being quoted as saying "... that Saddam Hussein (of Iraq) did not have and could not get WMD because the USA and the UN had such a stranglehold embargo on Iraq
The entire Dubya regime position about "bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq" was a major flip-flop from the position that this regime had embraced to justify this war to begin with. Which helps the reader to understand why the Bush regime did not have a cogent plan for subsequently either "winning the peace" or "reconstruction and pacification" in Iraq.
Osama bin Laden is still on the loose and causing trouble. The Dubya regime illegally stripped money and materials earmarked by Congressional budgetary process for the war in Afghanistan for the ramp-up to the war in Iraq. The GAO has discovered that more than $9 Billion USD has disappeared from funds earmarked for reconstruction in Iraq. And nearly 2 years after Saddam Hussein was captured, less than 15% of the money the Dubya regime claimed was necessary for reconstruction of infrastructure, and the creation of jobs for the Iraqi people, has been spent.
You don't suppose that these issues might have a bearing on the hostility that a majority of the Iraqi people have for our continued occupation there, as well as helping to push the country toward civil war?
And isn't one of the primary tenants of warfare the doctrine of "divide and conquer", which a full-blown civil war in Iraq would achieve?
Wouldn't the collapse of our puppet Iraqi government due to civil war bring new justification for the USA's continued (and long-term) military presence there?
Beyond (1) the geographic location and climate, and (2) the number of Americans KIA, in what discernable way is the Iraqi conflict so different from the Vietnam conflict of 40 years ago?
A film about emperor peguins cannot in any way be considered in the same league as a timely political ducumentary. I do note, however, that the major TV networks have focused a lot more on drudge "reality TV" programming, instead of devoting more time to exploring the real truth AND real-politik that effects everyone, like a soothing "soma" to placate the public.
This is how:
The Penguins are a miraculous species, capable of extreme heroism, self-sacrifice, sorrow and unshakable love.
I have first-hand witnessed the mowing down of over a dozen adult Adelie penguins because they wouldn't get out of the way of an elephant seal plowing through their colony. Actually, they are pretty dopy altho very loveable birds. Did I mention ferocious? They are the top marine preditor down there after all! (OK, when krill is about the only thing to eat, that's not much grounds for bragging.)
People who have these sorts of arguments never seem to have very nice pets. ;) Regardless of what a crusty old book written by some long-dead people has to say about our relationship to the animal kingdom, simple observation of non-humans would reveal the following obvious truths:
;)
;) )
;) /former-altar-boy-now-lapsed-catholic
1) Animals seem to love
2) Animals seem to miss
3) Animals play, animals cry, animals laugh
4) Animals have saved humans on countless occasions without being "ordered" to
5) Animals pair-bond, or what we refer to as "marry". 90% of all bird species are monogamous, which is quite astonishing considering they supposedly descended from the dinosaurs!
6) And last but certainly not least, animals engage in all sorts of sexual behaviors, not all of which produce offspring. If you enjoy oral sex, as probably 95% of your human brethren do, you're enjoying without procreating. And most of the time it's done in the context of a loving relationship. I suppose hell is a small price to pay.
I don't think that spiritual development (which I also believe in) is somehow mutually exclusive or incongruous with "everything our evolving beings have learned along the way so far while they were still animal-like and not spiritually-aware". To me this is like saying that since we've built up the skyscraper to the great view on the 300th floor, we might as well remove floors 1-100 since we've gone "beyond" those and don't need them anymore. Everything has ALWAYS built on what came before, but has never totally eclipsed it. Cars did not completely replace horse-drawn carriages, calculators did not replace understanding math. Corporations did not replace mom-and-pop stores, and money did not completely replace bartering. Computers did not replace, well, everything (as some of us geeks would have preferred
So basically, go fly a kite, open your eyes and stop listening to dogma for a minute and THINK FOR YOURSELF, as we're not as different from the animals as some ancient power-grabbing pontificators who had no extensive experience with animals (or science for that matter) would indicate.
On a somewhat unrelated note, Jesus never dictated any sort of religious hierarchy. In fact, I'm pretty sure he was all about tearing those down. Otherwise "The System" wouldn't have been so interested in getting rid of him. And here we are again, with a religious hierarchy trying to dictate its views to us within the sheeps' clothing of the Republican party. Where's Jesus when you need him to f*** some sh** up?
Are you serious?
According to this article, the specific risks are listed as:
Mechanical damage to the rectum
Interruption of the columnar epithelium makes "the rectum inherently more susceptible to infections...that may lead to anal cancer"
According to this
a recent study conducted by a homosexual group, the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association (GLMA), confirms what past studies have already shown: The homosexual lifestyle carries serious health risks. Health risks cited in the study include HIV and AIDS, substance abuse, depression and anxiety, cancer, and sexually transmitted diseases.
An article here refers to a study that shows that the life expectancy of homosexual males is substantially shorter than that of heterosexuals.
For you to suggest that there's 'no deonstrable harm' you have to deny the medical evidence otherwise.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
When I was a boy, I had 2 to 3 _male_ dogs in the backyard. On occasion, they'd go boofoo'ing eachother something fierce like in a love humping train. I didn't give 'em civil rights. I just sprayed 'em off with a water hose. All was back to normal.
I'd shut the screen door and go back to my regularly scheduled program of watching the Brady Bunch on television. If I knew then that Mr. Brady was a dookie sticker as well, I probably would have watered the television as well...
Ultimately, it is the selling value of the narrator that probably made the big difference.
Meg: So, the $26 would probably be safe in my room.
Stewie: Right. It'd probably get lost amongst the pin-ups of Justin Timberlake and Tom Cruise and...blast! Who the devil do teenagers like these days? Morgan Freeman.
Never attribute to "extreme heroism, self-sacrifice, sorrow and unshakable love" what can be more easily explained by stupidity.
Well, I didn't want to specifically state bees or ants as I knew someone would ask for an example that wasn't an insect/bug. I've read about Monkeys being homosexual, but it's not clear how it benefits the group. The only theory I can think of is population control.
"The film, which follows a pack of Emperor Penguins during an arduous mating season", had grossed $18.4 million by Wednesday"
;)
Face it, penguin porn sells.
Seriously, everyone's pet theories about current films, public tastes, and MPAA ratings, relative to this film, can be thrown out the window as pure spin.
This film just happened to get good word of mouth and reviews that helped snowball it's press attention, and get it on to more screens and more people into those showings.
And if anyone brings it up again, any talk of the supposed current "slump" in ticket sales based on last year, fails to take into account the enormous added traffic that came from people that don't normally come to the theaters, that came to see "Passion of the Christ" last year.
Be Seeing You, Shawn Levasseur -Rockland ME
That it certainly appeared to me that you were painting all people who disagree with the homosexual lifestyle as "homophobes" and I think that is an unreasonable characterization. I do not fear homosexuals, and object to being called a homophobe when I philosophically tolerate but disagree with their choices.
With respect to biblical interpretation, it is possible to find proponents of just about *any* interpretation of the Bible. I have done some reading in this area and it seems to me that those who argue that the Bible is ambiguous on this matter must torture the rules of biblical interpretation to come up with those explanations.
As a 'case in point' Jesus did not say that I as a heterosexual must not insert my penis into a woman's vagina to commit sexual sin. (This assumes that the woman in question is not my wife. It's no sin for me to have sex with my wife! It's a great thing!)
Jesus said "I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." This is a much higher bar than where I put my body parts.
It seems clear that the Bible teaches that sexual thoughts and activity belong only in the context of heterosexual marriage. I don't get the impression that you are interested in documentation of this assertion, so I won't trouble you with it.
You are entitled to your opinion. I wonder, though, have you considered whether the Bible teaches absolute truth? If it does, and we can discern that truth, then it's more than mere opinion about how to interpret the Bible that matters.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
Don't they have rules about such smut over there? If they kids watch sex the terrorists have won!
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Pretty lame whenever something like this makes it to slashdot. I understand that Linux is 'the in thing', but come on...
"I think my mom threw out my instruction book when I was born, could you please send me your copy so I can finally know exactly what I am _supposed_ to do with my life?"
Well whatever it is. It'll never be as good as your imagination.
---
The "are you a script" word for today is aspire.
OK, so perhaps I unwittingly built a straw-man.
;)
So what are your non-religious reasons for being against that? Allow me to deconstruct every other possible argument against it in a single post:
1) It seems "wrong".
Do you ever remember when sex, period, seemed wrong? Like, before you started fantasizing? The first time someone told me about sex, I was fairly grossed-out. Why the hell would someone do THAT? Funny what some happy endorphins primed with didn't-ask-to-have-them fantasies will do for a person's opinion on exchanging bodily fluids, though. I do loves me some women... But this effect never bothered to make me think same-sex wasn't gross. I still think it is... but then again, I know I wasn't primed to like it, so who the hell am I to judge?
2) It is not procreative.
Hmmm, seems like few sex acts actually are...
3) It is a choice made by perverts.
Oh, how I love this one. Funny, I never remembered choosing to like sticking it in girls, so perhaps some small percentage of us also didn't choose to like sticking it in the same sex? Hmmm?
4) "Unnatural" aka, appeal to an incomplete understanding of evolution.
Evolution would appear to prefer those who actually bother to procreate, eh? Makes sense, right? Guess what. Game theory predicts that even though homosexuality might not be good for the individual, it might be good for the species. In fact, my personal belief is that homosexuality is a "short-term biological cost" of a long-term gain in... sexual dimorphism! (I have a degree in psych, so I know a little bit about this.) That's right, the possible side effect of having two very distinct sexes that are very hot for each other and thus have lots of babies (a huge resource drain, by the way...), is that occasionally, a few are born so hot to trot that they scrimmage instead of compete, so to speak
And that's a wrap. I challenge anyone to shoot me down, as I have taken this topic up as a pet peeve of mine, even though I am quite firmly in the heterosexual camp.
FYI- I replied to your anonymous reply to me. Forgot one bit.
::grumble:: priests ::grumble::, as the victims are in the news all the time. Homosexuality, meanwhile, is a victimless crime. Figure out the difference. Who the hell is harmed by two people wanting to sign away the rest of their lives to be with someone (who happens to be the same sex)? Hell, I'm hetero and even I can't come around to that yet, more power to them. As long as it's a loving relationship. I am no judge and neither should you be.
Is it okay to say "homosexuality is good because animals do it" but not "pedophilia is good because animals do it"?
Apples, meet oranges. Pedophilia is a crime with definite victims, victims who end up needing counseling and carry a lot of pain. I live in Boston, so I know all about those
Braaaaaaaaaackkkk
Why do people turn a blind eye to adultery and premarital sex?
Easy - it's fun to criticize and condemn *your* sin (metaphorically speaking, of course) but when you start saying that I need to control *my* thoughts, or restrain my libido, that's an entirely different story.
We all want to stand in judgment of others and have no one stand in judgment of us.
Look at Genesis chapter 3. When God called Adam and Eve on their disobedience, Eve tried to blame the serpent, and then Adam tried to blame *both* Eve and God! It's the nature of man to avoid accountability.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
When i clicked the comments button, I expected a lot, but not every single f***ing comment to be about the same thing. Where is the posts about TUX? I mean seriously, haven't you guys figured out that (sadly) this debate will not be resolved for along time...at least not before some of the hatred preaching churches cease to campaign against homosexuality.
I suggest this: While we fool the rest of the world by starting to talk about tux and linux when it comes to penguins, we shall in all actuallity build a secret army of death-bringing killer penguins, equip them with suicide bombs, and finally have them takeout all government and religious institutions for ultimate world domination!
PS: i don't actually have anything against religion or people of faith; I have seen it do winderfull things to people. But more often than not, I see it's power greatly missused!
* I'm sure you could write a scientific abstract that could provoke a strong emotional response, but that is rarely the intent of the authors. That is always the intent of good filmmakers.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Do you or do you not get a free gun with the account? You do? Well then, stop being a stupid apologist and realize he went to a bank that gives out free guns with an account and got a free gun with an account.
What is interesting is that the amount of explicit violence seems to be increasing. Take for comparison Dirty Harry (R) and Final Destination 2 (MA).
In my country (Aus) R is 18+, MA is 15+.
The most violent moment I remember in Dirty Harry was someone getting beaten up. IIRC there was also a brief instance of full frontal nudity (of a dead body).
Compare that to Final Destination 2. You see someone get the bottom of a ladder through their eye (complete with blood spatters). You see someone get sliced and diced by some wire (the sliced and diced sections stay standing there for a moment or two). Added to that the effects were much more believable.
I was actually slightly disturbed by watching Final Destination 2. I wasn't disturbed by watching Dirty Harry.
I think overall you are right that female nudity is less acceptable, but equally violence is more acceptable. I'm not quite sure why this is.
meh
+3 insightful. You have survived to post another day.
"Oh the sacrifices guys make."
Well that only explaines bisexuals.
---
The "are you a script" word for today is curable.
"And that's a wrap. I challenge anyone to shoot me down, as I have taken this topic up as a pet peeve of mine, even though I am quite firmly in the heterosexual camp."
*shrug* Why do all that work when we can simply sit back and watch events unroll? If devient behaviours (not just homosexuality) are as benign as some wish to believe? Then it stands to reason that at worst nothing bad overall will happen, at best it will improve things. However if human history is any kind of indication about humanities powers of prognostification? Then we'll all be coming back a couple years from now, going "oh woe is us. why is this happening to us?", and we'll still not have a clue, except maybe we'll expect science to have some kind of solution, to a problem that has no basis in science. So just sit back and watch. It might be painful, but it will most certainly be educational.
[1] the United States
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
Matt,
What evidence would be sufficient to:
a) convince you that a god exists, and
b) convince you that Jesus Christ is God?
Respectfully,
Anomaly
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
The original title for this documentary was "La marche de l'empereur", or "the emperor's march" which is a lot wittier than the current translated title.
Why the marketing department decided to dumb down the title translation is one of life's little mystery.
This means that there is *no* evidence that could ever convince you, regardless of whether or not it is true. Is that an accurate statement?
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
A lot of people have commented about how its a good change for kids to see nature documentaries rather than anything else that might have been playing, but what I found the most interesting when i went to see this movie was that as an 18 year old, i was one of the youngest people in the audience. In fact, I would say the average age of the MotP audience when i went was 60 years old. It was like a geriatric festival (which isnt bad, it was just that I had expected the under 10 crowd to be dominating, and there werent a lot of kids at all). Anyway, I was absolutely satisfied when i stepped out of the theater from MotP, and I cannot say the same for F9/11; I do hope that these type of documentaries get a bit more mainstream attention.
Technically, I'm counting things like TombRaider, Elektra, and X-Men where the womens clothes appear (or, in the case of X-Men and X-Men 2, literally are) painted on. Perhaps I should have said something along the lines of "gratuitous focus on boobies", since nudity meand nipples. A covered nipple, regardless of how much boob is visible (refer to "anythign worn by Lil' Kim here), moves from nudity to mere "suggestive dress".
;)), but there's a whole lot more "throw some random boobs in so the young male demographic will watch" recently - where recently is defined as whatever timeframe supports my argument. And I guess that getting uptight about actually telling a story in movies could easily veer off onto a whole separate rant by itself. :)
I've got no problem with it when relevent to the story (or pretty much any time outside of the theater
Somehow, I don't find this plausible.
As a rational, thoughtful person would you believe what you saw, or believe that 'there must be some other explanation for what I thought I saw'
Smoke, mirrors, elegant parlor tricks, or perhaps mind altering substances, maybe even hypnotism or the like?
I simply don't find it credible that you would accept that as evidence.
Is it reasonable to suggest that there is NO creator? Can you logically say that without having all knowledge? I don't think that's a rational point of view.
Wouldn't it be more intellectually honest to say that
a) you do not know whether there is or is not a God, and
b) you're unwilling to consider any evidence that might convince you otherwise?
Respectfully,
Anomaly
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
::sigh::
tis time methinks to wip out this quote from west wing:
President Josiah Bartlet: Good. I like your show. I like how you call homosexuality an abomination.
Dr. Jenna Jacobs: I don't say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr. President. The Bible does.
President Josiah Bartlet: Yes it does. Leviticus.
Dr. Jenna Jacobs: 18:22.
President Josiah Bartlet: Chapter and verse. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I have you here. I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be? While thinking about that, can I ask another? My Chief of Staff Leo McGarry insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police? Here's one that's really important because we've got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point? Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? Think about those questions, would you? One last thing: while you may be mistaking this for your monthly meeting of the Ignorant Tight-Ass Club, in this building, when the President stands, nobody sits.
"goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
why can't 2 gay men for example (or a hetero couple having anal sex) engage in a pleasurebal activity that doesnt risk anyone else?
n gs.html
n things.html
It matters not to me what consenting adults do behind closed doors. Adults are free to do as they choose.
However, the risk of STDs is real, and risk mitigation is dependent on the consistently behaving in ways that reduce risk. within the homosexual community, that seems a bit unlikely to me.
The GLMA (Gay and Lesbian Medical Association) lists 10 things that men who have sex with men should be concerned about:
1. HIV/AIDS - 'the last few years have seen a return of unsafe sexual practices'
2. Substance abuse - in a higher percentage than the rest of the population
3. depression/anxiety - at a higher rate than the general population
4. Hepatitis
5. STDs at a high rate - (syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, public lice, and others), and for which no cure is available (HIV, Hepatitis A, B, or C virus, Human Papilloma Virus, etc.).
6. Prostate, Testicular, and Colon Cancer:
7. Alcohol: 'it is still thought that gay men have higher rates of alcohol dependence and abuse than straight men.'
8. Tobacco: 'Recent studies seem to support the notion that gay men use tobacco at much higher rates than straight men, '
9. Fitness (Diet and Exercise): 'Problems with body image are more common among gay men than their straight counterparts, and gay men are much more likely to experience an eating disorder such as bulimia or anorexia nervosa.'
10. Anal Papilloma: ' often thought to be little more than an unsightly inconvenience. However, these infections may play a role in the increased rates of anal cancers in gay men.'
http://www.glma.org/news/releases/n02071710gaythi
The point is this. Homosexual activity in men is not healthy. The only item on the list above in which gay men could statistically be compared with straight men is #6. 90% of the top risks identified by the GLMA have higher risk factors for men who have sex with men.
The poster indicated that there was no demonstrable harm. I submit to you that statistically speaking, that is not true.
Abstinence has a 100% effectiveness rate. If you abstain from all forms of sex, you cannot get an STD.
Statistically speaking, if you engage in sex with men, you are less likely to be physically and emotionally healthy.
With respect to lesbians, they have specific health concerns, too:
again, according to the GLMA,
Breast Cancer
1. Breast Cancer "Lesbians have the richest concentration of risk factors for this cancer than any subset of women in the world"
2. Depression/anxiety
3. Gynecological Cancer
Lesbians have higher risks for some of the gynecologic cancers
4. Fitness Research confirms that lesbians have higher body mass than heterosexual women.
5. Substance Use Research indicates that illicit drugs may be used more often among lesbians
6. Tobacco Research also indicates that tobacco and smoking products may be used more often by lesbians
http://www.glma.org/news/releases/n02071710lesbia
While they may not be at the same level of risk as men who insert things into their rectums, they *do* have health risks that are apparently linked
to behaviors unique to lesbians.
The lifestyle that accompanies homosexual tendencies is apparently less healthy than the heterosexual lifestyle.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?