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 ;).
The interesting thing (or "news for nerds") is that a scientific documentary has become the second-highest grossing non-IMAX documentary in history... as opposed to another one where Michael Moore makes fun of people he disagrees with.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
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/
"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"
And they write great software too!!!
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
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.........
In the harshest place on Earth, linux finds a way
Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.
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?
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...
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)
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.
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)
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!!!
[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
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.
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.
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.
I think that is why it was appealing and contraversial, it asked (loaded) questions, people on both sides of the gun debate drew thier own conclusions. I think I can understand why you didn't comprehend it properly, the questions didn't sink in because guns are part of your culture. Having grown up in a country where only lunatics wander around with handguns I have a similar problem. I simply don't comprehend the US obsession with gun ownership.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
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
I don't know about you, but I think that when I look back on my life many years later, I'll consider it much more important to have spent time watching something emotive and novel than consuming political propaganda. The films I've seen, the art and music I've enjoyed, and the places I've explored either in person or by proxy will be very much valued, when all is said and done. 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. I mean, seriously, the argument that seeing one man's inherently biased and un-countered rant rendered on film is prerequisite to making important choices is total bullshit, assuming you bother to read once in a while. Yes, I'm being a bit overzealous with the critique of Fahrenheit, but I can't see how anything like it can be considered truly enlightening and significant on a personly level.
So I guess what I'm saying is that I think you may have your priorities severely confused. Yes, there are important and momentous events and conflicts happening in the world. There always are. They oblige us to become involved and to form our own opinions and to seek truth, but more obsession does not mean more effect. The truly important things are the things that happen in the midst of constant turmoil that make life worth bothering with. Nobody and no philosophy is going to force us to seek these things out and partake in them, and it's up to us to make sure they don't pass us by. That's the uglier truth.
I don't know whether this documentary is really any good or not, or whether it warrants this sleep-deprived, starry-eyed rant at all. But to rank works like this to be *by definition* of lesser importance than political discourse reveals a very narrow point of view.
(And please stop with the mouth-frothing. It's very unsanitary.)
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
You're right. Most documentaries document reality.
--Matthew
"If the lights of Broadway blind me, I won't mind..."
They only mean that it topped the documentaries in box office.
Linux: When reboots are for upgrades.
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.
You sure? Even the ones having homosexual sex?
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.
Where's the "cute" in slogging across Antartica, starving yourself for countless weeks, and then having to leave your offspring to die because your mate got eaten by a seal?
And the very definition of "safe", by the way, is sitting through a political spiel that you already agree with.
Mind the Gap
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.
"Please tell me which country that is...."
Australia.
"....so that I may stay far away."
Tell your mates not to come either, dickhead!
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
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
"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?
Is this where we are filing the Michael Moore rants?
Bowling for Columbine is not an "anti-gun" movie!
I know it is popular to bash his movies as hippie/commie crap but at least watch the friggin movie first. He specifically mentions that Canada has similar per-capita gun ownership and less strict gun control laws yet mysteriously does not suffer from the same gun-crime rates the US does.
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?
As a numbed member of the US who has relatives from sane countries, I hope to visit your country someday. Cheers.