"It appears that Disney is bowing to the supposed pressures of the market, even though the hand-drawn Lilo and Stitch was considered a success and the all-CG Dinosaur (done at Disney's now-defunct FX house The Secret Lab) was not."
I have doubts that the reason 'Dinosaur' didn't do as well was because it was all CG. The bigwig Hollywood producer mentality is that pumping $50,000,000 into a production will sell more seats, but maybe they should take the time to consider WHY they're doing it. This isn't the stock market; find a good story first, then serve that story.
It's funny that in all the action, violence, and sex (all good), at times we forget that the reason we'll pay $10 to sit in a big room with a bunch of strangers is so someone can tell us a story.
The problem with translated movies is that there's usually a different voice director than the original director of the movie. This doesn't seem like a huge departure, but it's especially important in animated films. A different director and different actors can change the subtext of what's being said, and any script that doesn't exercise subtext is usually bad writing.
Dialog is also sometimes stretched or summarized to match the talking heads on screen... ie, in Japanese it might take 10 seconds of screentime to say "I'm going to the Waterfront to kill the bastard," and in english, it may take 14 seconds to say something of similar effect. The end result is the script gets some rewriting.
As for subtitles, you're basically doing the job of the director and the actors yourselves-- you're reading what you see on screen and either taking it at face value or supplying their subtext. To a certain extent it's possible to interpret the way they deliver it on screen, but it's never as easy or as precise as if you were actually fluent in the language.
That's not to say that foreign films of different languages are a waste of time, it's just important to be aware of how much you are potentially missing in the translation.
Hello, was just wondering what the intent of this sort of project is. Was this a learning experience, done for fun, or a stab at advancing yourself professionally? I can understand the value of it as a learning experience, but it occurs to me that if you were trying to get your foot in the door, showcasing your own originality instead of copying someone else's may have been more beneficial.
BTW, what was this shot on? I downloaded the low-quality version so I can't really tell. It looks quite good. Did you have your own lighting rig or was it just whatever light was available?
Well, I wouldn't say Debian is the most user-friendly Linux distro, but it made installing gnomemeeting a hell of a lot easier than anything else (including windows, IMO):
1. Open a terminal 2. apt-get install gnomemeeting 3. gnomemeeting &
Done.
I'm not aware of all the gui frontends for apt, but if someone would make a really simple Gnome one (HIG compliant, of course), apt-based distros (even apt4rpm) would make installing software a lot less intimidating to Joe Sixpack.
Of course, that's just my opinion, and I sure as hell can't code it.
"The first time you saw the first film, you were just as much baffled by such talk..."
Really? I didn't realize we saw the movie together! Especially surprising, since the script was so articulate everyone I went with understood it (including myself).
...and "...a prison for your mind" or "any software still hardwired to the system..." (no one knew what the hell Morpheus was talking about until they saw the film for the second time)...
"A prison for your mind" is a lot easier to understand than "There were certain programming algorithms that caused a disfunction in the Matrix due to the replicated infusion of several one-eyed test monkeys that brought optical processing mechanisms to the Matrix."
Cut the Wachowskis some slack. You didn't get the first Matrix the first time, and Reloaded is every bit as much fun as the first.
You're sitting here telling me what my opinion of a movie is. That's crazy. It comes down to personal opinion. I respect yours enough to not tell you what YOUR opinion is, I'm entitled to the same respect.
Not trying to troll here, but the problem with it, IMO, is that the Wachowskis (who wrote and directed it) received so much praise for the first Matrix movie, that they were under the impression the whole world wanted to hear them babble on and on about it.
Characters will talk for what seems like hours and never actually say anything. In the first movie, the language was simple (Morpheus holds up a battery and proclaims that the machines: "Turn humans... into this."), and you just had to wrap your head around the concepts. In RELOADED, you have to wade through all the tech talk before you can even start to understand what you're being told... by then it's time for the next scene already.
Also a problem was the overabundance of subplots (Agent Smith, the Morpheus love-triangle, the operator of the Nebachadneza(sp?) and his wife, etc) that they're all underdeveloped and hard to care about.
Great action though. The Wachowskis obviously care about developing their mythology quite a bit, and that's commendable (and for some, this will demand repeated viewing), but they just need to make it a little more accessible IMO.
The critics seem to like it overall, and, skimming through the reviews, the ones who dislike it seem to do so for the usual reason: it's a cartoon."
I didn't know that fourth-graders could be critics. Even the most amateur critic doesn't usually dismiss a movie simply because it's a cartoon. Would you expect to see the following sentence in any newspaper? "The characters were truly motivated, the mythology deepens with every scene, and the story is well-paced. But it's a cartoon, so I can't recommend it." Please.
Maybe some critics didn't find the animation up to par with their expecations. That's a whole world of difference than "I don't like it because it's a cartoon."
Just because the poster likes Cowboy Bebop doesn't mean everyone else is going to. Nor does it mean that those who don't are as ignorant as the poster implied.
"The BSA (or Canadian equivalent) would be itching to raid the place"
If ANYONE wants to put their grubby hands on my computer, they better have a search warrant in hand, otherwise they be gettin' straight up bitchslapped! (In Quake I mean, physical confrontation alarms me) *snort*
The third season? I realize that it's personal opinion, but how can you say the THIRD season was bad? I can understand a complaint about the fourth season (when the season story-arc kind of sucked, if only because it was poorly executed). And the sixth season was darker than usual and perhaps out of the show's character... But the third season was arguably the best!
A brilliant, three-dimensional villain who wanted to become a giant snake and eat people... but who had hangups on germs and profanity. A slayer who was destined to rid the world of vampires and got a taste for killing people instead. And what about Buffy and Angel's relationship? It had survived monsters, demons and an apocalypse or two, but in the end it couldn't survive the sobering truth that ultimately, they just weren't compatible.
It's these grey areas that make the show so brilliant. The bad guys aren't bad for no reason, the good guys have their weak moments, and the romance is relentlessly true-to-life. No other season represented that better than the third, IMO. It's out on DVD now, btw.
Plus, females get fingerbanged by Hollywood. The only thing they're good for, it appears, is to be rescued. I don't know about you, but female empowerment is sexy:)
This is awesome. I anxiously await Slashdot headlines like "FreeBSD to be released in one week!" and "FreeBSD to be released tomorrow!" and the ever classic, "FreeBSD to be released in an hour!"
Relax, I'm only kidding.
I know I'll never forget where I was when I heard the news that FreeBSD was released the day before yesterday...
And yet, when Microsoft delays their products (even though they delay them for a long time), they get severely criticized.
Sure, they might not say they're doing security audits, but who can blame them? They have many corporate partners who would see security auditing as an indication of flawed software.
Galeon is a gecko-based, lightweight browser for Gnome that is more matured than Phoenix. Their slogan/motto/whatever is: "The web, and only the web." It does all the things Phoenix does, (themes, tabbed browsing, etc) and a few more. Only thing I'm not certain of is if it does group homepages, I'll have to check when I get off work.
Anyways, check out Galeon, if -- like myself -- you find Mozilla's default UI too sluggish.
So ADSL2 and ADSL2+ offer more bandwidth... That's all well and good, but it doesn't make any difference to ME because my ISP doesn't even offer me an option (even a ridiculously expensive one) that approaches what today's ADSL standards allow.
ADSL2 and 2+ are only going to further the gap between what is possible, and what my ISP offers. It's still a good thing, but I doubt it will benefit the regular Joe, at least not for quite awhile longer.
I'm not taking a stand on either side here. Certainly pop-ups are annoying and banner ads are less obstrusive, and on the other hand some websites offer me useful information for free and I don't mind if ONE extra window pops up if it means the site stays up.
But I'm noticing a lot of people complaining that anyone is blocking pop-up blocking software in the first place. Hello? Dramatic irony at work here: "We can block you, but you can't block us." Dream on kiddies, you knew they'd find some other way to get us to buy their shit, and when this doesn't work, they'll find another way.
Those who complain that these people are blocking our ad-busters are the same people complaining that you can't publish exploit code now because "someone might use it." It's more or less the same thing, so don't be a hypocrit.
Besides, it won't be long before all the pop-up blockers (Personally I only care about Galeon) hack up something to emulate pop-ups so that this software doesn't work either. Just a speedbump, guys, don't panic.
Will this really work? It looks good on paper, sure, but what about people who choose to share their pay-accounts with other people? What if this only adds to the number of high quality mp3s that are available on existing -- and free -- p2p networks? Hell, even I have second thoughts of paying to burn lossy audio to media that I have to buy myself.
I hope this does work out for the best, but EMI has to be extremely competetive in order to get people to pay for something that they can already get for free. There better be fast, effecient downloads, lyrics, album covers, videos, band history, download history, chat, reasonable pricing, the whole nine hundred yards.
What everyone on the planet needs is a nice fat bitch of a pipe so that we can download uncompressed, high quality audio to burn to our cds.
Really, is the Microsoft memo so different from this and similar documents?
They're similar in that they're both strategies. They're different in that Microsoft's strategy is just FUD. From the aforementioned link:
# Focus on what Linux has to offer. There is no need to bash the competition. Linux is a good, solid product that stands on its own.
This is very different from MS's objective. Also, they're spending money, we're not. On the other hand, enough Microsoft bashing... who gives two shits about what they're doing? Let's take it as a compliment that they see open source as a threat and quit our bitching.
DVDs were created to be obsolete, and within a few years, when Blu-Ray technologies are creating 30GB+ disks, a DVD burner will be one of those devices that will make someone say "You bought an expensive computer 4 years ago, and that device was overpriced crap", much like we view zip drives today.
Everything was created to be obsolete.
DVD-Burners will catch on, regardless of a new, better technology that may be around the corner.
How many people have CD-RW drives right now? A lot, even though there are DVD burners. DVD (re)writeable units just need to get faster (4x is WAAAAAAY slow, especially since there's more space on a DVD than a CD) and cheaper, and people will buy them like flapjacks.
It's the same principal with blu-ray devices. Sure it will be the superior audio/video/backup medium, but until prices drop to the point that your average consumer can afford it, people will continue using DVD burners.
Slashdot Mirror
...That's five words.
"It appears that Disney is bowing to the supposed pressures of the market, even though the hand-drawn Lilo and Stitch was considered a success and the all-CG Dinosaur (done at Disney's now-defunct FX house The Secret Lab) was not."
I have doubts that the reason 'Dinosaur' didn't do as well was because it was all CG. The bigwig Hollywood producer mentality is that pumping $50,000,000 into a production will sell more seats, but maybe they should take the time to consider WHY they're doing it. This isn't the stock market; find a good story first, then serve that story.
It's funny that in all the action, violence, and sex (all good), at times we forget that the reason we'll pay $10 to sit in a big room with a bunch of strangers is so someone can tell us a story.
The problem with translated movies is that there's usually a different voice director than the original director of the movie. This doesn't seem like a huge departure, but it's especially important in animated films. A different director and different actors can change the subtext of what's being said, and any script that doesn't exercise subtext is usually bad writing.
Dialog is also sometimes stretched or summarized to match the talking heads on screen... ie, in Japanese it might take 10 seconds of screentime to say "I'm going to the Waterfront to kill the bastard," and in english, it may take 14 seconds to say something of similar effect. The end result is the script gets some rewriting.
As for subtitles, you're basically doing the job of the director and the actors yourselves-- you're reading what you see on screen and either taking it at face value or supplying their subtext. To a certain extent it's possible to interpret the way they deliver it on screen, but it's never as easy or as precise as if you were actually fluent in the language.
That's not to say that foreign films of different languages are a waste of time, it's just important to be aware of how much you are potentially missing in the translation.
Hello, was just wondering what the intent of this sort of project is. Was this a learning experience, done for fun, or a stab at advancing yourself professionally? I can understand the value of it as a learning experience, but it occurs to me that if you were trying to get your foot in the door, showcasing your own originality instead of copying someone else's may have been more beneficial.
BTW, what was this shot on? I downloaded the low-quality version so I can't really tell. It looks quite good. Did you have your own lighting rig or was it just whatever light was available?
enntee@N0-SPAM.localgod.net
Well, I wouldn't say Debian is the most user-friendly Linux distro, but it made installing gnomemeeting a hell of a lot easier than anything else (including windows, IMO):
1. Open a terminal
2. apt-get install gnomemeeting
3. gnomemeeting &
Done.
I'm not aware of all the gui frontends for apt, but if someone would make a really simple Gnome one (HIG compliant, of course), apt-based distros (even apt4rpm) would make installing software a lot less intimidating to Joe Sixpack.
Of course, that's just my opinion, and I sure as hell can't code it.
Just my two cents.
Really? I didn't realize we saw the movie together! Especially surprising, since the script was so articulate everyone I went with understood it (including myself).
"A prison for your mind" is a lot easier to understand than "There were certain programming algorithms that caused a disfunction in the Matrix due to the replicated infusion of several one-eyed test monkeys that brought optical processing mechanisms to the Matrix."
Cut the Wachowskis some slack. You didn't get the first Matrix the first time, and Reloaded is every bit as much fun as the first.
You're sitting here telling me what my opinion of a movie is. That's crazy. It comes down to personal opinion. I respect yours enough to not tell you what YOUR opinion is, I'm entitled to the same respect.
Not trying to troll here, but the problem with it, IMO, is that the Wachowskis (who wrote and directed it) received so much praise for the first Matrix movie, that they were under the impression the whole world wanted to hear them babble on and on about it.
Characters will talk for what seems like hours and never actually say anything. In the first movie, the language was simple (Morpheus holds up a battery and proclaims that the machines: "Turn humans... into this."), and you just had to wrap your head around the concepts. In RELOADED, you have to wade through all the tech talk before you can even start to understand what you're being told... by then it's time for the next scene already.
Also a problem was the overabundance of subplots (Agent Smith, the Morpheus love-triangle, the operator of the Nebachadneza(sp?) and his wife, etc) that they're all underdeveloped and hard to care about.
Great action though. The Wachowskis obviously care about developing their mythology quite a bit, and that's commendable (and for some, this will demand repeated viewing), but they just need to make it a little more accessible IMO.
You're going to have to use an analogy that slashdotters will understand.
I didn't know that fourth-graders could be critics. Even the most amateur critic doesn't usually dismiss a movie simply because it's a cartoon. Would you expect to see the following sentence in any newspaper? "The characters were truly motivated, the mythology deepens with every scene, and the story is well-paced. But it's a cartoon, so I can't recommend it." Please.
Maybe some critics didn't find the animation up to par with their expecations. That's a whole world of difference than "I don't like it because it's a cartoon."
Just because the poster likes Cowboy Bebop doesn't mean everyone else is going to. Nor does it mean that those who don't are as ignorant as the poster implied.
If ANYONE wants to put their grubby hands on my computer, they better have a search warrant in hand, otherwise they be gettin' straight up bitchslapped! (In Quake I mean, physical confrontation alarms me) *snort*
Seems to me it's this same mentality of dismissing the show based on it's premise that keeps Buffy from Getting an emmy.
Try watching a couple episodes.
A brilliant, three-dimensional villain who wanted to become a giant snake and eat people... but who had hangups on germs and profanity. A slayer who was destined to rid the world of vampires and got a taste for killing people instead. And what about Buffy and Angel's relationship? It had survived monsters, demons and an apocalypse or two, but in the end it couldn't survive the sobering truth that ultimately, they just weren't compatible.
It's these grey areas that make the show so brilliant. The bad guys aren't bad for no reason, the good guys have their weak moments, and the romance is relentlessly true-to-life. No other season represented that better than the third, IMO. It's out on DVD now, btw.
Plus, females get fingerbanged by Hollywood. The only thing they're good for, it appears, is to be rescued. I don't know about you, but female empowerment is sexy
Report the REAL security holes, dagnabbitall!
This is awesome. I anxiously await Slashdot headlines like "FreeBSD to be released in one week!" and "FreeBSD to be released tomorrow!" and the ever classic, "FreeBSD to be released in an hour!"
Relax, I'm only kidding.
I know I'll never forget where I was when I heard the news that FreeBSD was released the day before yesterday...
Sure, they might not say they're doing security audits, but who can blame them? They have many corporate partners who would see security auditing as an indication of flawed software.
Just keeping things in perspective.
Phoenix is great, but it's not a new concept.
Galeon is a gecko-based, lightweight browser for Gnome that is more matured than Phoenix. Their slogan/motto/whatever is: "The web, and only the web." It does all the things Phoenix does, (themes, tabbed browsing, etc) and a few more. Only thing I'm not certain of is if it does group homepages, I'll have to check when I get off work.
Anyways, check out Galeon, if -- like myself -- you find Mozilla's default UI too sluggish.
ADSL2 and 2+ are only going to further the gap between what is possible, and what my ISP offers. It's still a good thing, but I doubt it will benefit the regular Joe, at least not for quite awhile longer.
Or I could be wrong. Whatever. I'm tired.
A few people submitted asking for an open discussion for Spielberg's Taken miniseries that premiered last night on SciFi last night.
Today Slashdot destroyed my ability to speak properly today.
But I'm noticing a lot of people complaining that anyone is blocking pop-up blocking software in the first place. Hello? Dramatic irony at work here: "We can block you, but you can't block us." Dream on kiddies, you knew they'd find some other way to get us to buy their shit, and when this doesn't work, they'll find another way.
Those who complain that these people are blocking our ad-busters are the same people complaining that you can't publish exploit code now because "someone might use it." It's more or less the same thing, so don't be a hypocrit.
Besides, it won't be long before all the pop-up blockers (Personally I only care about Galeon) hack up something to emulate pop-ups so that this software doesn't work either. Just a speedbump, guys, don't panic.
I hope this does work out for the best, but EMI has to be extremely competetive in order to get people to pay for something that they can already get for free. There better be fast, effecient downloads, lyrics, album covers, videos, band history, download history, chat, reasonable pricing, the whole nine hundred yards.
What everyone on the planet needs is a nice fat bitch of a pipe so that we can download uncompressed, high quality audio to burn to our cds.
Oh, and it better work on linux.
They're similar in that they're both strategies. They're different in that Microsoft's strategy is just FUD. From the aforementioned link:
# Focus on what Linux has to offer. There is no need to bash the competition. Linux is a good, solid product that stands on its own.
This is very different from MS's objective. Also, they're spending money, we're not. On the other hand, enough Microsoft bashing... who gives two shits about what they're doing? Let's take it as a compliment that they see open source as a threat and quit our bitching.
Actually I did not know that. Thanks for the info. (I'm still right about the other stuff tho
DVDs were created to be obsolete, and within a few years, when Blu-Ray technologies are creating 30GB+ disks, a DVD burner will be one of those devices that will make someone say "You bought an expensive computer 4 years ago, and that device was overpriced crap", much like we view zip drives today.
Everything was created to be obsolete.
DVD-Burners will catch on, regardless of a new, better technology that may be around the corner.
How many people have CD-RW drives right now? A lot, even though there are DVD burners. DVD (re)writeable units just need to get faster (4x is WAAAAAAY slow, especially since there's more space on a DVD than a CD) and cheaper, and people will buy them like flapjacks.
It's the same principal with blu-ray devices. Sure it will be the superior audio/video/backup medium, but until prices drop to the point that your average consumer can afford it, people will continue using DVD burners.
"So, in closing, mono means one, and rail means rail."