Comment Re:I was waiting for this! (Score 1) 40
because he's a juggernaut in both the digital world, and the physical one.
because he's a juggernaut in both the digital world, and the physical one.
I watched H1 in HFR3D and didn't like it; that was the source of my comments about the lighting during the "That's What Bilbo Baggins Hates" song.
that's interesting.
(Reminds me of a scene with an aspiring cinematographer sitting in a bar, fawning over some "artsy" B&W movie playing on the TV... until the barman whacks the old set on the side, and the screen snaps back to color).
that's interesting, but the main reason is any camera jitter is much more noticeable/smoothed out. Similarly, lighting effects become more obvious. In particular
* during the first movie, they set the lighting for filming in 24fps, forgetting / not realizing that with double the framerate, comes double the lighting. Hence the lighting looks off, noticeable during the plate-tossing scene in Bilbo Baggins' house.
* during Thorin Oakenshield's conversion (or, reversion, I suppose), as he's travelling across the frozen lake of gold, there is a scene of alternating illumination on his right/left cheek that looks remarkably contrived, like someone sliding an analog dial that controls the lamp wattage on the left, then the right. Not at all like reflections off gold...
now that I'm thinking about it, in general:
* choreographic blunders, and quality-in-general, becomes more apparent. Anything that's not John Wu with countless hours of training isn't good enough.
* in some postmodern action sequences, if you can actually see the action, you're losing contrast. Imagine if you were able to cleanly-track the Bourne-Desh fight scene from Ultimatum: you'd ruin the effect.
I'm a engineer that simply happens to pay attention, and watch Netflix a lot. There shouldn't be this many naysayers. Then again, I consider myself more observant than most, and have friends in very high places making over 6-figures who regularly consider me to be "smarter", in spite of their ability to work a good 30-40% faster at what we do, because I both recognize, and can explain, random details about everything (like this) that I apply myself to.
(Also, I made a documentary once, which was the most fun I had in college, you should try it.)
And Beorn, the most interesting and mysterious character in "The Hobbit" much like Tom Bombadil in FOTR, was never developed. Or how Gandalf used trickery and mind games to get Beorn to accept dwarves. Now that would have been interesting. The eagles could have also been explored as a race and characters. Instead we get an elf and dwarf falling in love. WTF? And an escape scene that looked like a Disney ride or an abomination out of the "Pirates of the Caribbean".
Basically, with the removal of ideals from society, you can expect their absence from culture, too.
Everything these days boils down to
* she's hot
* someone said something offensive and I will defend my idiom
* actions, explosions, battles
* it's his dying breath
It's actually a tragedy and missed opportunity, that Jackson has so little talent as a director, and so little discipline in telling a story.
I was appalled by how little he regarded the audience - and proportionally insulted his actors - in "Desolation". Huge musical cues 'instructing' the audience of the drama or character development that was supposed to be on screen, at all times. This seems to be because he cannot elicit real performances from his actors.
I might muse that this is because to Jackson, they are not actors - but merely the armatures on which he templates his green-screen composited glory... But to assume that this is the root of his deficiency, rather than another symptom of of his artlessness, would be to succumb to curmudgeonly urges.
The lesson to be taken away is that Jackson should be designing games, not ruining popular cinema.
It appears that - despite the contempt it provoked in my teenaged self - Rankin and Bass actually produced the best ever adaptation of Tolkien, with the greatest respect and truth towards the source text in feel and substance. Perhaps, when we have destroyed the concept of copyright as a tool of corporate greed, another - more thoughtful - filmmaker might use this as a point of departure for a loving and well-crafted "Hobbit".
apparently you missed the memo where he was dragged kicking and screaming into directing it, having been assured during sign on he was simply there for consulting; after Guillermo del Toro left. After LOTR he said he was done. No more movies. Ever. And certainly not another Tolkien. Took too much out of him. You can blame the media companies, but honestly I'm not going to hate PJ for it. When you burn out in life, you'll understand.
Even Attenborough admits he doesn't have a clue how the crocodiles "know" when to gather at the ford.
well, Attenborough died. Which shows you how much he knows...
the opportunity cost is that you're taking 90 seconds to fill up with gas anyway, so you're just waiting another 90 seconds.
this is what journalism has come to: Tesla has everything else worked out with such finesse and perfection that this is the only thing the writer can come up with to complain about.
And it's the only thing that can generate slashdot comments.
...what ruffled THEIR feathers?
According to TFA, they sensed low level harmonics in the atmosphere long before the storms arrived...
"
The most likely tip-off was the deep rumble that tornadoes produce, well below what humans can hear.
Noise in this "infrasound" range travels thousands of kilometres, and may serve as something of an early warning system for animals that can pick it up.
so why don't we start listening for it with our warning systems?
"well, you see, you just don't have enough of us..."
The long term plan is obviously to be able to DOMINATE through superiority.
I had to think about this and then realized you were not saying something obvious.
I needed an objective metric to track to determine when it was enriching the AFR
To the third power actually.
Someone didn't take thermodynamics.
I've been tracking the data myself with torque. Fuel consumption per unit time increases with the square of speed because after 65mph drag does.
But since you get there faster it's just linear increase in consumption per unit distance.
Personally, I discovered my AFR drops from 14.1 to as low as 11.5 any time the engine produces over 400 grams CO2/mile for more than about 3 seconds. On a completely flat road this works out to about 85mph or so, I can do slight inclines at 80, and if I don't ever want to have to touch the cruise control, 75-76mph.
at 55mph I get 34mpg, at 70 I get 32, at 75 I get 29.5 and at 80 I get about 27.
If I want to get there I go 75.
If I kinda want to get there I go 65.
If I don't really care or I'm feeling cheap I go 55.
haha
you had two jokes in one there.
Waste not, get your budget cut next year.
