Cracker: Wallywood
735 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 16 17 18 19 20 … 30 Newer→ Last
-
Well that's even more silly. What are you going to watch it on if you're leaving your computer behind?
There's a computer on the capsule.
__If I was to be forced to take only one movie, I'd take one I haven't already seen.__
Good luck, man; they're mostly rubbish.
Wild applause.
-
I can see you now. Up in space, by yourself, holding your wee USB stick in front of you. "Man I should have brought a book!"
You don't already have a USB port in your neck? Man, Dunedin is really the end of the Earth ...
-
3410,
lol
-
There's a computer on the capsule.
Don't forget to bring the right codec for your AVI.
It's hard to imagine any kind of data that would be more wasteful to bring than a movie.
-
Also, it better have the subtitles if it's a foreign film.
-
either Citizen Kane or Young Frankenstein. There is no time to compress them so that they will both fit.
Well I would prefer something a little more cheerful.How about a nice children's movie. :)
Yes, it has sub-titles. -
BTW, anyone pick up on the delicious irony-gasm of the very media outlets sneering at this sign as being "cheesy and parochial" getting rather drippy knickered and awfully parochial about Temuera Morrison and Taika Waititi being cast in supporting roles in 'Green Lantern'.
BTW, much as I love Tem any comic book geek would tell you that you're really stretching it to call Abin Sur a "key role" -- which it is in one sense, but not really much in the way of screen time.
-
Perhaps we can use this to settle the film-quality conundrum, once and for all ...
-
3410,
My problem here is that I can't see how objective, absolute categories can also be historical.
Can't you just say "taking into account the period"? Absolute speed is clearly not the best way to compare Owens and Patton; something more like 'relative dominance in the field' seems a better measure.
-
BTW, anyone pick up on the delicious irony-gasm of the very media outlets sneering at this sign as being "cheesy and parochial" getting rather drippy knickered and awfully parochial about Temuera Morrison and Taika Waititi being cast in supporting roles in 'Green Lantern'.
I know. I haven't been this excited since Rawiri Paratene was cast in Brett Leonard's straight-to-video Man Thing.
-
Can't you just say "taking into account the period"? Absolute speed is clearly not the best way to compare Owens and Patton; something more like 'relative dominance in the field' seems a better measure.
But why do that? Isn't the faster runner the objectively better runner?
-
No, it's how they felt when they ran, and the message they conveyed. Also, the originality of the running is very important. We need to see running in a different way. It's not just about speed, but also about the narrative arc, the way the runners interacted and developed through the race.
Anyone can be a champion runner. You just have to train heaps and be naturally gifted. That side of it really doesn't come into things, indeed excessive training devalues the runner, makes their efforts mechanical and formulaic.
-
Nicely done sir.
-
But would the best runner be the best athlete full stop?
Or do we have separate 'runners' out as a subset of 'athletes', and put the 'pole vaulters' over there, and the 'swimmers' over here, and the 'shotputters' in another separate area? And then try to come up with some sort of empirical set of measurable standards to objectively define 'best athlete' which applies to all of them?
No, it's how they felt when they ran, and the message they conveyed. Also, the originality of the running is very important. We need to see running in a different way. It's not just about speed, but also about the narrative arc, the way the runners interacted and developed through the race.
You've been watching that 'Chariots of fire' again, haven't you?
-
Can't you just say "taking into account the period"? Absolute speed is clearly not the best way to compare Owens and Patton
Also, neither of them are as fast as a cyclist (or, for that matter, as fast as me on a bike) so who would care?
(Point being that we apply relative rather than absolute measures all the time. I know a really tall bloke but he's nothing compared to the Sky Tower. Just tall for a human. Owens was peerlessly fast for his time.)
-
But would the best runner be the best athlete full stop
Or do we have separate 'runners' out as a subset of 'athletes', and put the 'pole vaulters' over there, and the 'swimmers' over here, and the 'shotputters' in another separate area? And then try to come up with some sort of empirical set of measurable standards to objectively define 'best athlete' which applies to all of them??
But why stop at athlete? Why not the best human? Best athlete over there, best surgeon over there, best mechanic over there, best chef over there and so on.
Which proves nothing other than that the running/cinematography analogy wasn't much good to start with.
-
I can see you now. Up in space, by yourself, holding your wee USB stick in front of you. "Man I should have brought a book!"
or as Ron Cobb depicted it ...
-
Why not the best human?
I'm waiting for New Zealand's Next Top Human to hit the screen soon.
-
But would the best runner be the best athlete full stop?
how about athletes vs aesthetes
-
Why not the best human?
Modesty prevents, old chap...
Which proves nothing other than that the running/cinematography analogy wasn't much good to start with.
No, but it does help to support my hypothesis that there is no way of empirically/objectively measuring what is a 'good' film.
-
I'm waiting for New Zealand's Next Top Human to hit the screen soon.
I'm waiting for page 17.
-
Catching up I'm struck by a more basic question - why on earth the need to apply any notion of "best" or "better"?
I enjoy discussing movies, music, etc - not so I can rank them, more so I have a better idea what I might like next. Where they fit in culturally also interests me, and I'm certainly not a complete relativist about it.
Not everyone brings the same motivations but I wonder how many spend this much energy trying to decide whether movie A is "better than" Movie B? Except maybe when they're choosing what to see/hear next..
-
Not everyone brings the same motivations but I wonder how many spend this much energy trying to decide whether movie A is "better than" Movie B?
But Sacha, this is Public Address!
-
I believe that was Danyl's point..
-
I know a really tall bloke but he's nothing compared to the Sky Tower.
He might be if you put a giant needle on his head.
Aucklanders... sheesh.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.