Jump to content

lumpenprol

Members
  • Posts

    9,170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lumpenprol

  1. they did it all wrong, the toilet should have been over the glass part, and then you could watch your waste fall for eternity. Guess you'd have to figure out some sophisticated waste-catching system though...wonder if one human could fill the entire shaft in his lifetime?
  2. Balut Ortolan Francois Mitterrand's last meal has become a legend. The Ortolan Bunting, a bird about the size of your thumb, was on his menu. The bird is prepared by drowning it alive in Armagnac, cooked and then served whole, eaten bones and all. Now, aside from being considered more than slightly cruel, even by the standards of French cuisine, serving Ortolan is also highly illegal, because the bird is endangered. People typically will eat it under a white napkin. And part of it is to create a little capsule for yourself so that all of the aromas and tastes are captured in the space before you. But also people traditionally ate beneath the cloth napkin because they didn't want to have God see them eating these little songbirds.
  3. "Kiev-UkrainianNationalChernobylMuseum_15.jpg"
  4. I always get this feeling when watching Cameron interviews that he probably had a pretty profound experience with acid when he was younger. Has he ever admitted to such?
  5. I'm afraid that latter-day Scott isn't very subtle. It's like he's filmmaking in ALL CAPS. SEE THIS GUY GIVING THE TED TALKS? HE IS REAL SLEAZY, YOU CAN TELL BY ALL THE HAIR GEL. WE ALSO GAVE HIM AN EXTRA HELPING OF HUBRIS. OH, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS? ALL RIGHT, I BETTER HAVE HIM EXPLAIN THE MYTH OF PROMETHEUS TO YOU TOO, JUST IN CASE YOU'RE A TODDLER OR MOUTH BREATHER. SEE THIS ROBOT? HE'S EVIL. YOU CAN TELL BY THE NAZI LOOK. AND THE CROCODILE TEARS. AND IN CASE THAT WASN'T CLEAR ENOUGH, HERE HE IS SWIMMING IN GOOP.
  6. kinda well done but the cg (esp at the very start) was terrible, looked like the intro to some cheap kids cartoon. Plus the "partially formed David in a bag with mucus and white blocks stuck to his face" was a bit too lol. Otherwise was pretty good, reminded me of a fusion between an Apple and Dyson ad.
  7. seems to me it'd probably be a good idea for all modern city-dwellers to have some "time out" each day just to be mindful. I'd like that. I have no idea how much TM differs from that, though, I'm guessing it has more of an agenda. And yeah, $2,000 is ridiculous.
  8. As Obel said I see your point...I think the sort of random nature is what they were trying to achieve, which is also what makes the album stand out to me: it sounds like a bunch of notes have coalesced around a melody, rather than forming the melody themselves. I'm sure there's a programming feat that allowed them to achieve this, in the same way they used to talk about using some sort of generative algorithm to make tracks. I think it's neato, mostly. But what about a track like Treale, it's not really twinkly at all, does it do anything for you?
  9. I really like Oversteps for a coupla reasons: 1) for me, Ae seemed to lose a sense of direction after Draft (Quaristice with all the messy versions is the very definition of muddled clusterfuck), so in the sense of having a clear vision Oversteps is a return to form; and 2) like LP5, Draft, and Confield before it, it defines a totally new sound that I haven't heard anywhere else. So yeah, clear direction, and groundbreaking. As for the actual tunes, I too like the "twinkly bullshit", but I also realize that it lacks some of the hallmarks that we probably have all come to love about ae, meaning a sort of ruthless, intense asceticism. It's not "evil", "tough", "cold", "detached", "autistic", "machinelike", or any of the typical things you associate with ae. And Move of Ten went even further in the direction of harmless, goofy noodling. I think it's natural that as we age, we become less intense (in the way that only young people can be intense). So is Oversteps the best ae album? I think it is, for this stage in their development. Incidentally, i liked BoC's "Campfire Headphase" a lot as well, even though I think it also shows signs of "aging." In both cases it's much more graceful than, say, what happened to Orbital... Eugene, how can you like r-ess and os veix3 but not like qplay? Or Treale? Eh, listening to the album again now, it's great...
  10. that happens to people who download albums illegally and only have a tiny jpg of the cover art as reference
  11. yesh, he's the guy making the goofy "dang, when I signed up for this nobody told me Scott always kills off his bug-eyed black dudes" pre-imminent-death face
  12. Well that's a very good point, in fact the first time I saw it, it was on mute, of sorts: I was at a drive in movie theater with my mom intending to watch some Disney flick, but I happened to look over at the neighboring screen and my life changed forever. Imagine the mark the chestburster scene made on my impressionable 6 year old mind!
  13. and Charlize Theron and Idris Elba can act, so that's good. Yeah it's all IMO of course. I love Alien and Blade Runner dearly, despite their flaws. I think it's indisputable that Scott certainly knows how to film science fiction flicks properly (in terms of using props, sleight of hand, lighting, and his overall proficiency with the camera). He's a bit like David Fincher, I trust him implicitly when it comes to composing an artistic looking frame, but I have less confidence in his storytelling ability.
  14. odds are it will be terrible though. Ridley Scott hasn't made a great film in quite some time. Also, and I'm going to be a heretic here, as a film the original Alien is just "very good." What elevates it to the classic status is that it was groundbreaking (the ideas behind it, and pioneering the genre of space horror), and the art direction is second-to-none. But in terms of the filmmaking and editing? Mmm, it's less than perfect. The ending sequence leading up to the escape pod drags on for too long, has epilepsy-inducing flashing lights, and is somewhat incoherent. IMO. Same thing with Blade Runner (though I think it fares better). Genius-level art direction, and some brilliant philosophical issues, but the film itself drags a bit. And the ending was botched - was that solely the studio's fault? In any case my point is Scott has made a few of the classic, seminal sci-fi flicks, but they were not without their flaws. I think he's always had trouble with pacing, editing, and with making the viewer emotionally invested in characters (something Cameron does better, whether you find him childish or manipulative or both). I sort of wonder if Scott was ever as good as we all thought he was, or if he kind of blundered into being a pioneer, the same way it seems Lucas did.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.