Sun was the jerk because they kept misrepresenting what Java was and what they were going to do with it in order to get industry support. They pulled out of standardization efforts and bullied other companies with outrageous legal threats, all the while running Java into the ground technically and having an army of contributors fix their problems for them under exploitative licensing terms. They had everybody by their balls.
Wait, was that Sun or Oracle? Sun is long dead.
At the moment I am unwilling to give Oracle a single benefit of the doubt about Java. What they have done lately is EXACTLY the opposite of what Java was originally intended for. Talk about being a jerk.
look at the first Terminator which was all practical effects, it STILL looks good to this day,
Oh, it was not all practical effects, many many shots of the Terminator after it had all the flesh melted off were front projections of stop-motion and look laughibly bad, even unconvincing back in 1982. Aliens, even though it's my favorite sci-fi action film of all time, also had some weird-looking front-projection shots that just look out of place. T2 got rid of the front projection entirely, the opening robot vs human battle in the future looks great. I love well-done miniatures.
But a good number of sequences in T1 are great, like the 70s-style car chase, the firefight between Reese and Terminator, etc. Good times.
compare it with the fight scene between Neo and the hundred Smiths in Reloaded and your mind screams "Bad PlayStation game!" because CGI never seems to age well.
I agree, most of the effects in the Matrix sequels were bad effects.
because they can have a computer just crap shit on a screen frankly movies that in the past would have been told "Go rewrite that shit and bring it back when it don't suck"
Nah, good CG is expensive. Bad CG exists, but it's harder to sell a movie on that than it was in the past. Now budgets are much higher, even for bombs.
I mean how many movies have YOU seen where this sentence applies "Effects were good, movie sucked ass" as a perfect description?
A number of them, but I said the same thing in the 80s. But of course back then my threshold for what "good effects" were was much lower back then too.
Ok, so In Bruges was rejected. There are many small-scale movies that are produced and made in the United States. You and the OP are giving examples where a certain type of movie was rejected and making the claim from that that those types of movies do not get made anymore -- but the weekly releases would tell another story. This last weekend, five out the top 10 grossing movies were on somewhat small (under $30m) budgets: The Call, Admission, Spring Breakers, the Incredible Burt Wonderstone (that's pushing 'small' though), and Silver Linings Playbook.
What -HAS- greatly declined is the mid-scale movie, the non-blockbuster. They don't have costs low enough to be small productions, and they don't go all out like the big blockbusters. When they are released, it's in the slower points of the year, like February or March (John Carter's problem is that it was released in the mid-range timeframe and made mid-range business, but it cost ultra-blockbuster dollars to make).
Well not really, but that was the big fear in the 50s, and old prejudices die hard.
I think, mostly likely, it's a reaction from True Believers to an Other. When there's no markings on the package, the true believer is likely to think there's a good chance that it comes from another true believer.
But "Atheist" on the packaging, declaring itself intentionally, explicitly, to be an Other? The True Believer might think "these are not my people. These are people I don't like. They fight against my faith. Oops, their package was 'lost.' What a tragedy."
Heck, even the WoW community are better served moving to Mac
Or they would be if performance on the Mac wasn't ass-slow compared to the PC. Granted, it's nowhere near the client disaster that Diablo 3 was, but overall it doesn't seem like Blizzard can make a well-tuned Mac client.
And you get what you pay for, and similarly, you shouldn't trust them or rely on them. The problem with Google's free services is that they make it difficult for for-pay products to compete with them. The only way to compete is for people to realize the Google brand is tarnished and untrustworthy. IE, that the free choice might not be the wisest choice for them.
I really doubt that. Based on what I see on other forums, most US consumers refuse to buy almost anything if they have to buy it online. I see people all the time who shlep down to their local brick and mortar store to pay more money, spend more time and get a worse quality product than something they could buy cheaper and of higher quality online. Ever been the grocery store or Wal-Mart and noticed how many people refuse to use the self-checkout line? I rest my case.
In my case that's because there's a line for the self-checkout terminals, and the self-checkouters are almost always confused about how to work the thing. They have to search through a list of images for the right produce (while a real checker will have it memorized or have a quick list they can look through). Whoops, they're buying alcohol, now they have to wait for someone to come by to authorize the approval. Swipe one item, wait for a moment, put it in the storage area.. oops, they put too many things in the storage area, now they have to figure out how to put the correct amount of things there for the system to think that they're not trying to shoplift. Swipe one item, wait 10 seconds, read everything on the screen, swipe another item...
I'm pretty quick about it, but again, produce or anything else without a barcode will slow the process down appreciably. I eventually learned that the self-checkout line can be much longer than the regular line staffed with a competent checker (which is most of them, surprisingly).
If your judge by dollars spent, modern government is a mechanism to transfer money from the young to the old, which occasionally happens to build a road or kill a brown person.
That's a natural result of each generation living longer than the previous. With our bizarre need to extend life to the maximum number of days that current science makes possible, expect it to get worse, especially if people retire "early" and the gap between retirement and death continues to grow.
If the government would get out of all of the venues they shouldnt be in,
See, the citizens of our country have demanded that the government be in those venues. To fulfill those mandates, the government needs money. Those most half-assed of government involvement comes when it gets a mandate that is underfunded.
See how mature that was? And somehow it was more mature than your wanna be insult regarding Atlas Shrugged.
Atlas Shrugged is a screed from a particularly childish and selfish philosophical movement, it neither requires nor deserves a particularly rigorous debate.
Right, because that's what capitalism and free-market economics is all about - leveling the playing field by force.
Sheesh.
The current situation artificially props up online businesses -- when you levy a tax against brick and morter stores that online stores do not have to pay, of course it's a very non-free-market advantage to the online stores.
Having both paying the same taxes reduces the current (unintentional) government meddling, allowing market forces to be more dominant.
I'm sorry but bullshit, CGI has made selling ideas that frankly would have NEVER been green lighted if they actually had to pay for practical effects and THAT is the problem.
I think you're simultaneously right and wrong. Yes, CGI has made bad movies more possible, but it's also made good movies more possible as well. LOTR is an obvious example. Life of Pi is a more recent one. Others have said things along the lines of "there's no way we could have made this movie 20 years ago. The special effects weren't there yet." I'd go back to what the AC was saying -- previous decades were just as full of bad movies as today is. We just don't remember them because they were so unmemorable. Go back and read a release schedule from several decades ago and three quarters of the movies will be ones you don't remember. There's a reason for that.
We'll remember a number of good movies from this last year. In 2030, no one will remember there was ever a Battleship movie, except perhaps as a trivia novelty because it was based on a tabletop game (not even a board game). People will remember Lincoln and Argo though, and say "Man, they made some good movies back then."
Mel Gibson got shunned for a lot of reasons. First, he's crazy. Albeit, in 2003 people didn't quite yet realize -how- crazy. Second, he's anti-Semitic, like father like son. And third, Passion was a snuff/torture film. It played really strongly to a certain sect of evangelicals who consider the torture parts a wonderful intesifying of Christ's sacrifice, but it also turned off a number of regular Christians who found the fetishism of the suffering and torture to be a bit disturbing... and possibly un-Christ-like. Oh, and it altered history in an anti-Semitic way as well.
You are clearly not a screenwriter. You have demonstrated no actual insight into screenwriting at all. All you write is what any outsider knew already.
He could be a screenwriter but he also sounds like he's taking one or two real examples and generalizing it into a "this is how it works everywhere in Hollywood" screed.
He could also be an embittered screenwriter who wrote a bad screenplay that wasn't considered and blames it on the action crowd rather than his own work, but without seeing the original product there's no way to know.
Wow. That's the exact plotline of "Taken," sans Liam Neesan.
The first time I saw that movie, I thought it was overdramatized. Well, the rescue part is, of course, but I remember thinking "Nah, it's 2008. That sort of thing doesn't really happen anymore. Cute movie plot though." The Blu-Ray extras sobered me up pretty quickly.
Sorry, its not informative, it is wrong. You can't prove a negative, there is no faith in not believing a fantastic made up notion. There is no reason to give it any intellectual weight.
You may not -like- it, but the grandparent was absolutely correct. Of course you can not prove a negative. You can't prove a religion either. That's why so many still exist.
I think his point is that the ISPs from where these packets originated should never have allowed those spoofed packets out. And the network backbone of that ISP should never have allowed those spoofed packets to reach the DNS servers. And so forth.
Why is it that the highest violent crime rates in the US of A are in cities with the strictest gun control laws?
Many reasons, one of which is that it doesn't matter what the gun laws in a city are if someone can just drive half an hour and get easy access to firearms.
Um, Japan's rate is 0.4 compared to the US's rate of 4.8. Your own link shows that... yet, of course you cherry pick your statistics and go on about suicides because that fits your narrative of who's more violent... how is this drivel modded up?
Japan is also a completely different type of society, such that comparing Japan and the US is like comparing apples and oranges.
Sure, the term has gained a broader meaning, but come on, it originated from porn.
Incorrect. The phrase originates from the movie industry, but not necessarily the porn industry. It refers to a shot that is much more expensive to produce (think effects clips included in trailers) such that a decent amount of film budget goes into producing the shot. That's why it's called a "money shot," because a lot of money went into it. That was incorporated into porn lingo, but the phrase has long been used in the movie industry in general.
Slashdot Mirror
and you can't patent a language. Sameway you can't claim copyright on a telephone directory.
But you can copyright a database, even if it's a database of publicly-available information.
Sun was the jerk because they kept misrepresenting what Java was and what they were going to do with it in order to get industry support. They pulled out of standardization efforts and bullied other companies with outrageous legal threats, all the while running Java into the ground technically and having an army of contributors fix their problems for them under exploitative licensing terms. They had everybody by their balls.
Wait, was that Sun or Oracle? Sun is long dead.
At the moment I am unwilling to give Oracle a single benefit of the doubt about Java. What they have done lately is EXACTLY the opposite of what Java was originally intended for. Talk about being a jerk.
look at the first Terminator which was all practical effects, it STILL looks good to this day,
Oh, it was not all practical effects, many many shots of the Terminator after it had all the flesh melted off were front projections of stop-motion and look laughibly bad, even unconvincing back in 1982. Aliens, even though it's my favorite sci-fi action film of all time, also had some weird-looking front-projection shots that just look out of place. T2 got rid of the front projection entirely, the opening robot vs human battle in the future looks great. I love well-done miniatures.
But a good number of sequences in T1 are great, like the 70s-style car chase, the firefight between Reese and Terminator, etc. Good times.
compare it with the fight scene between Neo and the hundred Smiths in Reloaded and your mind screams "Bad PlayStation game!" because CGI never seems to age well.
I agree, most of the effects in the Matrix sequels were bad effects.
because they can have a computer just crap shit on a screen frankly movies that in the past would have been told "Go rewrite that shit and bring it back when it don't suck"
Nah, good CG is expensive. Bad CG exists, but it's harder to sell a movie on that than it was in the past. Now budgets are much higher, even for bombs.
I mean how many movies have YOU seen where this sentence applies "Effects were good, movie sucked ass" as a perfect description?
A number of them, but I said the same thing in the 80s. But of course back then my threshold for what "good effects" were was much lower back then too.
Ok, so In Bruges was rejected. There are many small-scale movies that are produced and made in the United States. You and the OP are giving examples where a certain type of movie was rejected and making the claim from that that those types of movies do not get made anymore -- but the weekly releases would tell another story. This last weekend, five out the top 10 grossing movies were on somewhat small (under $30m) budgets: The Call, Admission, Spring Breakers, the Incredible Burt Wonderstone (that's pushing 'small' though), and Silver Linings Playbook.
What -HAS- greatly declined is the mid-scale movie, the non-blockbuster. They don't have costs low enough to be small productions, and they don't go all out like the big blockbusters. When they are released, it's in the slower points of the year, like February or March (John Carter's problem is that it was released in the mid-range timeframe and made mid-range business, but it cost ultra-blockbuster dollars to make).
pie recipes in spiderman?
Yes, Hostess pies. Their delicious cherry filling is perfect for catching Dr. Octopus.
OMG. I loved those Hostess ads. I couldn't find one with Doctor Octopus (I remember one though), but this one is my favorite for sheet WTF-ness:
http://www.seanbaby.com/hostess/v2spiderman17.htm
Atheists == communists, don'cha know?
Well not really, but that was the big fear in the 50s, and old prejudices die hard.
I think, mostly likely, it's a reaction from True Believers to an Other. When there's no markings on the package, the true believer is likely to think there's a good chance that it comes from another true believer.
But "Atheist" on the packaging, declaring itself intentionally, explicitly, to be an Other? The True Believer might think "these are not my people. These are people I don't like. They fight against my faith. Oops, their package was 'lost.' What a tragedy."
Heck, even the WoW community are better served moving to Mac
Or they would be if performance on the Mac wasn't ass-slow compared to the PC. Granted, it's nowhere near the client disaster that Diablo 3 was, but overall it doesn't seem like Blizzard can make a well-tuned Mac client.
Get it right if you want your payout, Scroogle apologist.
You have zero credibility, AC.
Google services are free!
And you get what you pay for, and similarly, you shouldn't trust them or rely on them.
The problem with Google's free services is that they make it difficult for for-pay products to compete with them.
The only way to compete is for people to realize the Google brand is tarnished and untrustworthy. IE, that the free choice might not be the wisest choice for them.
I really doubt that. Based on what I see on other forums, most US consumers refuse to buy almost anything if they have to buy it online. I see people all the time who shlep down to their local brick and mortar store to pay more money, spend more time and get a worse quality product than something they could buy cheaper and of higher quality online. Ever been the grocery store or Wal-Mart and noticed how many people refuse to use the self-checkout line? I rest my case.
In my case that's because there's a line for the self-checkout terminals, and the self-checkouters are almost always confused about how to work the thing. They have to search through a list of images for the right produce (while a real checker will have it memorized or have a quick list they can look through). Whoops, they're buying alcohol, now they have to wait for someone to come by to authorize the approval. Swipe one item, wait for a moment, put it in the storage area.. oops, they put too many things in the storage area, now they have to figure out how to put the correct amount of things there for the system to think that they're not trying to shoplift. Swipe one item, wait 10 seconds, read everything on the screen, swipe another item...
I'm pretty quick about it, but again, produce or anything else without a barcode will slow the process down appreciably. I eventually learned that the self-checkout line can be much longer than the regular line staffed with a competent checker (which is most of them, surprisingly).
If your judge by dollars spent, modern government is a mechanism to transfer money from the young to the old, which occasionally happens to build a road or kill a brown person.
That's a natural result of each generation living longer than the previous. With our bizarre need to extend life to the maximum number of days that current science makes possible, expect it to get worse, especially if people retire "early" and the gap between retirement and death continues to grow.
No, it doesnt. That's the lie you've bought into.
If the government would get out of all of the venues they shouldnt be in,
See, the citizens of our country have demanded that the government be in those venues. To fulfill those mandates, the government needs money. Those most half-assed of government involvement comes when it gets a mandate that is underfunded.
BURN!
See how mature that was? And somehow it was more mature than your wanna be insult regarding Atlas Shrugged.
Atlas Shrugged is a screed from a particularly childish and selfish philosophical movement, it neither requires nor deserves a particularly rigorous debate.
Right, because that's what capitalism and free-market economics is all about - leveling the playing field by force.
Sheesh.
The current situation artificially props up online businesses -- when you levy a tax against brick and morter stores that online stores do not have to pay, of course it's a very non-free-market advantage to the online stores.
Having both paying the same taxes reduces the current (unintentional) government meddling, allowing market forces to be more dominant.
I'm sorry but bullshit, CGI has made selling ideas that frankly would have NEVER been green lighted if they actually had to pay for practical effects and THAT is the problem.
I think you're simultaneously right and wrong. Yes, CGI has made bad movies more possible, but it's also made good movies more possible as well. LOTR is an obvious example. Life of Pi is a more recent one. Others have said things along the lines of "there's no way we could have made this movie 20 years ago. The special effects weren't there yet." I'd go back to what the AC was saying -- previous decades were just as full of bad movies as today is. We just don't remember them because they were so unmemorable. Go back and read a release schedule from several decades ago and three quarters of the movies will be ones you don't remember. There's a reason for that.
We'll remember a number of good movies from this last year. In 2030, no one will remember there was ever a Battleship movie, except perhaps as a trivia novelty because it was based on a tabletop game (not even a board game). People will remember Lincoln and Argo though, and say "Man, they made some good movies back then."
Mel Gibson got shunned for a lot of reasons.
First, he's crazy. Albeit, in 2003 people didn't quite yet realize -how- crazy.
Second, he's anti-Semitic, like father like son.
And third, Passion was a snuff/torture film. It played really strongly to a certain sect of evangelicals who consider the torture parts a wonderful intesifying of Christ's sacrifice, but it also turned off a number of regular Christians who found the fetishism of the suffering and torture to be a bit disturbing... and possibly un-Christ-like. Oh, and it altered history in an anti-Semitic way as well.
You are clearly not a screenwriter. You have demonstrated no actual insight into screenwriting at all. All you write is what any outsider knew already.
He could be a screenwriter but he also sounds like he's taking one or two real examples and generalizing it into a "this is how it works everywhere in Hollywood" screed.
He could also be an embittered screenwriter who wrote a bad screenplay that wasn't considered and blames it on the action crowd rather than his own work, but without seeing the original product there's no way to know.
Agreed. I personally think they should be tortured to death however.
Well the OP didn't where -where- on the body they should be shot..
Wow. That's the exact plotline of "Taken," sans Liam Neesan.
The first time I saw that movie, I thought it was overdramatized. Well, the rescue part is, of course, but I remember thinking "Nah, it's 2008. That sort of thing doesn't really happen anymore. Cute movie plot though." The Blu-Ray extras sobered me up pretty quickly.
Sorry, its not informative, it is wrong. You can't prove a negative, there is no faith in not believing a fantastic made up notion. There is no reason to give it any intellectual weight.
You may not -like- it, but the grandparent was absolutely correct.
Of course you can not prove a negative. You can't prove a religion either. That's why so many still exist.
I think his point is that the ISPs from where these packets originated should never have allowed those spoofed packets out. And the network backbone of that ISP should never have allowed those spoofed packets to reach the DNS servers. And so forth.
Why is it that the highest violent crime rates in the US of A are in cities with the strictest gun control laws?
Many reasons, one of which is that it doesn't matter what the gun laws in a city are if someone can just drive half an hour and get easy access to firearms.
Um, Japan's rate is 0.4 compared to the US's rate of 4.8. Your own link shows that ... yet, of course you cherry pick your statistics and go on about suicides because that fits your narrative of who's more violent ... how is this drivel modded up?
Japan is also a completely different type of society, such that comparing Japan and the US is like comparing apples and oranges.
Dude, the entire system is an organization supporting white men.
* This is what morons actually believe.
My god, are you blind? Willfully ignorant?
"Money Shot" does not mean porn.
Sure, the term has gained a broader meaning, but come on, it originated from porn.
Incorrect. The phrase originates from the movie industry, but not necessarily the porn industry. It refers to a shot that is much more expensive to produce (think effects clips included in trailers) such that a decent amount of film budget goes into producing the shot. That's why it's called a "money shot," because a lot of money went into it. That was incorporated into porn lingo, but the phrase has long been used in the movie industry in general.