Good God, man! What kind of university do you attend that can, in such a sweeping move, infringe upon your civil and legal rights? Bob Jones University?
That was utter rubbish. No matter how "independent" they may claim to be, everything they supposedly researched had already been tainted by that son of a bitch and his party.
Let's go to war so we can all forget about what a lousy job I'm doing here. He's just like his father, except not as smart.
In case you're wondering- yes, I'm trolling, but I really mean this, so I'm not just saying it to illicit a response.
Yeah. It's a paperweight that can run the world's best OS, the world's best software, has no DRM implementation, and is also the world's best looking paperweight.
There's a reason that cartoonists don't go into animation. Movies are not a good medium for telling complicated plots. What they are good at is showing character development.
You're right when you say that movies are not good at telling complicated plots. But what they ARE good at is telling relatively simple plots. What they are TERRIBLE at is showing character development. Literature will always be the ultimate character development medium because it enables you to get inside a character's head in a way that film and theatre cannot.
Perfect example: the novel "Dune" tends to make a very poor movie (at least, compared to the book) because so much of the story depends on the reader knowing exactly what everyone is thinking. Depicting that in a movie is very awkward, and can only be compensated for by the addition of scenes and scenes of tedious exposition whereby the characters have to somehow act out or just speak out what they are thinking. Of course, there's always the voice-over, which is what Lynch used. But too much of that is annoying.
Apply theater acting rules to a movie, and you get... a bad movie!
Only if the acting rules you apply to Cinema come from more than about 100 years ago. Today's theatrical acting style is very realistic. Except for slight modification due to the nature of performing live in a theater, the style itself would work just fine on film. Perhaps that's why so many Shakespearean actors are so good on film.
Aristotle cannot tell people how to make movies any better than I can teach time travel etiquette to Captain Janeway.
He cannot tell me how to make a movie, no. But he can tell me how to construct an effective drama, which makes for an excellent movie!
And I wish SOMEONE would teach good time travel ettiquette to Janeway.
Thank you for so eloquently making the point for me.
As to Aristotle's words in "Poetics" being more relevant to "books," that is completely wrong. Aristotle was speaking about theatre or, more specifically, dramatic "poetry," when he laid out the guidelines for dramatic structure. In fact, books (meaning prose) are usually entirely character driven. A novel can be quite entertaining with very little strength in terms of plot. It is drama, whether on stage or on film, that is plot driven.
Plenty of novels center around people talking about themselves and their lives. Most moveis that do only that are too boring to comprehend.
"Plot is nowhere near as important as the characters."
Not according to Aristotle. In cinema, as well as in theatre, plot is much more important than character.
Not that character doesn't matter, it just can't carry a story with no plot. A story with a great plot and no great characters, while not a great thing to see, can still be followed and enjoyed.
How many protocal droids have we seen in th3e movies so far that look exactly like Threepio. Quite a few. In fact, usually the only difference is that their coverings are a slightly different shade.
Also, keep in mind that Threepio's coverings have been completely replaced by the time he and Owen meet again. He is a completely different color.
It's also very likely that he enjoys many items from their menu that contain no animal products whatsoever.
Besides, if he eats sushi, then he's not vegan. Simple as that. And I've heard too much about his legendary vegan status to believe anything less.
Of course, they could all have it wrong. Personally, I would rather it not be true. I dream about sitting down with Steve and talking Apple over a nice, rare New York Strip and a dry martini.
Actually, Steve's a vegan. Tragic, but true. So you might want to amend that to "...would be eating veggie dogs and oatmeal every day instead of...," uh, does anyone know what rich vegans eat?
I agree that he is over exposed. But that is probably not really his doing. He happens to attract a lot of viewers to Food Network, so they run him often. For many people, such as myself, he is what initially attracts them to FNW, giving them a chance to discover the other, wonderful programming that they feature. So don't knock him. He's part of the reason you get to watch "Good Eats."
And he is not the reason his sitcom failed. Granted, he should have run away from that pitch meeting as if Ronald McDonald himself were trying to sell him a franchise. But the show failed because the writing was TERRIBLE. I mean, some of the worst I have ever heard.
I think there is enough variety in his show to keep it from being a drag more than occasionally. But, if you really feel that way, the Essence of Emeril is much more laid back and easy to follow. It's a very good show, though it's no "Good Eats."
Actually, I have seen him use his sink many times. he even makes reference to it as the one that the "Sopranos" gave to him. And he always uses a clean utensil to sample his food, then promptly disposes of it. I have seen no evidence that he is unsanitary. Indeed, I find it difficult to believe that any true chef could be.
I think that if you really pay attention to other chefs, you will see more than one of them do SOMETHING that you will find objectionable. Seriously, if you're concentrating on preparing a meal, talking to an audience, focusing on a television camera, and being entertaining, do you think you can remember every time you touch your face?
If you want to see some sweat and spittle, try watching Iron Chef, particularly when Chen Kinichi is cooking. Now THAT man can SWEAT!
Now, I'm a huge fan of the food network. I keep it on in my home constantly, and there are very few shows on it that I do not like ("From Martha's Kitchen" and "Hot Off the Grill with Bobby Flay" being two of those.)
My favorite shows consist of Good Eats, Unwrapped, Food 911, The Best of, Extreme Cuisine, A Cook's Tour, Iron Chef, Malto Mario and, yes, Emeril Live.
In my opinion, every star on the Food network has his or her place, and all have their strengths and weaknesses. What I want to know is this- why does everyone here seem to have a problem with Emeril? The man has done wonders for cooking shows and, for a long time, practically carried the Food Network. He's got skill, talent, knowledge, and, most of all, personality. If you think he couldn't take on any of the chefs on the Food Network, you'd be dead wrong. Personally, i'd love to see Emeril go tetê a tetê with Hiryuki Sakai, the Iron Chef French (my favorite of the four.) Perhaps Sakai would win, but it would be a hell of a battle. And there would be no "copying" on anyone's part.
I'm a big fan of Emeril, yes. But I'm also a big fan of Alton, Tony, Mario, and Tyler.
Slashdot Mirror
Good God, man! What kind of university do you attend that can, in such a sweeping move, infringe upon your civil and legal rights? Bob Jones University?
That was utter rubbish. No matter how "independent" they may claim to be, everything they supposedly researched had already been tainted by that son of a bitch and his party.
Let's go to war so we can all forget about what a lousy job I'm doing here. He's just like his father, except not as smart.
In case you're wondering- yes, I'm trolling, but I really mean this, so I'm not just saying it to illicit a response.
Yeah. It's a paperweight that can run the world's best OS, the world's best software, has no DRM implementation, and is also the world's best looking paperweight.
Wow. All of those things in one.
You're right when you say that movies are not good at telling complicated plots. But what they ARE good at is telling relatively simple plots. What they are TERRIBLE at is showing character development. Literature will always be the ultimate character development medium because it enables you to get inside a character's head in a way that film and theatre cannot.
Perfect example: the novel "Dune" tends to make a very poor movie (at least, compared to the book) because so much of the story depends on the reader knowing exactly what everyone is thinking. Depicting that in a movie is very awkward, and can only be compensated for by the addition of scenes and scenes of tedious exposition whereby the characters have to somehow act out or just speak out what they are thinking. Of course, there's always the voice-over, which is what Lynch used. But too much of that is annoying.
Only if the acting rules you apply to Cinema come from more than about 100 years ago. Today's theatrical acting style is very realistic. Except for slight modification due to the nature of performing live in a theater, the style itself would work just fine on film. Perhaps that's why so many Shakespearean actors are so good on film.
He cannot tell me how to make a movie, no. But he can tell me how to construct an effective drama, which makes for an excellent movie!
And I wish SOMEONE would teach good time travel ettiquette to Janeway.
Thank you for so eloquently making the point for me.
As to Aristotle's words in "Poetics" being more relevant to "books," that is completely wrong. Aristotle was speaking about theatre or, more specifically, dramatic "poetry," when he laid out the guidelines for dramatic structure. In fact, books (meaning prose) are usually entirely character driven. A novel can be quite entertaining with very little strength in terms of plot. It is drama, whether on stage or on film, that is plot driven.
Plenty of novels center around people talking about themselves and their lives. Most moveis that do only that are too boring to comprehend.
"Plot is nowhere near as important as the characters."
Not according to Aristotle. In cinema, as well as in theatre, plot is much more important than character.
Not that character doesn't matter, it just can't carry a story with no plot. A story with a great plot and no great characters, while not a great thing to see, can still be followed and enjoyed.
How many protocal droids have we seen in th3e movies so far that look exactly like Threepio. Quite a few. In fact, usually the only difference is that their coverings are a slightly different shade.
Also, keep in mind that Threepio's coverings have been completely replaced by the time he and Owen meet again. He is a completely different color.
Why should Owen necessarily recognize him?
Let's hope they don't find an empty Coke bottle, too.
It's also very likely that he enjoys many items from their menu that contain no animal products whatsoever.
Besides, if he eats sushi, then he's not vegan. Simple as that. And I've heard too much about his legendary vegan status to believe anything less.
Of course, they could all have it wrong. Personally, I would rather it not be true. I dream about sitting down with Steve and talking Apple over a nice, rare New York Strip and a dry martini.
Of course, I have OTHER dreams, too.
Actually, Steve's a vegan. Tragic, but true. So you might want to amend that to "...would be eating veggie dogs and oatmeal every day instead of...," uh, does anyone know what rich vegans eat?
I agree that he is over exposed. But that is probably not really his doing. He happens to attract a lot of viewers to Food Network, so they run him often. For many people, such as myself, he is what initially attracts them to FNW, giving them a chance to discover the other, wonderful programming that they feature. So don't knock him. He's part of the reason you get to watch "Good Eats."
And he is not the reason his sitcom failed. Granted, he should have run away from that pitch meeting as if Ronald McDonald himself were trying to sell him a franchise. But the show failed because the writing was TERRIBLE. I mean, some of the worst I have ever heard.
I think there is enough variety in his show to keep it from being a drag more than occasionally. But, if you really feel that way, the Essence of Emeril is much more laid back and easy to follow. It's a very good show, though it's no "Good Eats."
Actually, I have seen him use his sink many times. he even makes reference to it as the one that the "Sopranos" gave to him. And he always uses a clean utensil to sample his food, then promptly disposes of it. I have seen no evidence that he is unsanitary. Indeed, I find it difficult to believe that any true chef could be.
I think that if you really pay attention to other chefs, you will see more than one of them do SOMETHING that you will find objectionable. Seriously, if you're concentrating on preparing a meal, talking to an audience, focusing on a television camera, and being entertaining, do you think you can remember every time you touch your face?
If you want to see some sweat and spittle, try watching Iron Chef, particularly when Chen Kinichi is cooking. Now THAT man can SWEAT!
Excuse me for asking this, but...
Now, I'm a huge fan of the food network. I keep it on in my home constantly, and there are very few shows on it that I do not like ("From Martha's Kitchen" and "Hot Off the Grill with Bobby Flay" being two of those.)
My favorite shows consist of Good Eats, Unwrapped, Food 911, The Best of, Extreme Cuisine, A Cook's Tour, Iron Chef, Malto Mario and, yes, Emeril Live.
In my opinion, every star on the Food network has his or her place, and all have their strengths and weaknesses. What I want to know is this- why does everyone here seem to have a problem with Emeril? The man has done wonders for cooking shows and, for a long time, practically carried the Food Network. He's got skill, talent, knowledge, and, most of all, personality. If you think he couldn't take on any of the chefs on the Food Network, you'd be dead wrong. Personally, i'd love to see Emeril go tetê a tetê with Hiryuki Sakai, the Iron Chef French (my favorite of the four.) Perhaps Sakai would win, but it would be a hell of a battle. And there would be no "copying" on anyone's part.
I'm a big fan of Emeril, yes. But I'm also a big fan of Alton, Tony, Mario, and Tyler.