Heck, name 1 film in the past decade where it was, other than some gimmick ending?

• More alternative locations challenge Hollywood. Sure, Sundance: but why haven't festivals begotten more local challengers?
• More amateur auteurs, given the lower barriers to entry for hardware.
• More traditional stage productions.

I suppose its a time/money/advertising thing, but this craptacular economy seems like it should be freeing up some time to explore for some folks.

yeah ... I've done a little bit of designing WiFi networks to work in very difficult locations, and the general thought experiment is to think of both ends of the path as the points of a football. Unless there's ground in the way, in which case the football goes through the earth, except when it doesn't. Or if there's a metal roof inside the football, except all of that is illusory and not really what it looks like, to the extent that anything exists and is not virtual. It's not like visible light in its behavior, and these get wildly different at different frequencies.

I get the impression that Tesla could visualize it, but most humans just don't have it in them.

Does it come in a Ubuntu flavor?

You didn't miss much. Looking back, only a few of the 12 movies have actually been any good, but I keep going and hoping for the best.

Don't you mean....

My... god... was Generations... ...bad.

The problem is they are relying on customers to tell them what they want in movies. I

Not surprisingly, the easiest things to describe are described ( Explosions, stars, special effects), and the more difficult things to describe are not described well ( plot, character development, etc...).

Its like a GM in baseball using viewer feedback to determine how to build his team instead of actual measurable facts ( hits, walks, strike outs, innings pitched, earned runs, etc).

Well, maybe there should be a law against MBAs taking leading positions (unless they additionally have a relevant degree for the respective field).

If the science is to extract as much money as possible, then there must be a flaw in that science, or else how could those movies be flops?

Well, unless they somehow profit from those flops, of course.

I've found the reboot much more emotionally engaging and entertaining than the original ever was. The production quality and so on is only part of that -- the actual content is just better. Integrating so much of the original concepts as nods to the original while going off on a new more exciting tangent was very welcome in my home.

I just want a 1% cut of all new movies.

OK, here are some cut-out scenes. They were shit anyway.

First Contact wasn't good, it just sucked so much less than the other fare that fans thought it was good. Taken on its own, its still pretty bad.

I find it funny how many people tell me there's nothing worth watching on TV these days but it turns out they don't watch actual series at all. There's quite a bit of good writing even on network television, especially compared to movies.

Some people can't.