I hope Hasbro and Takara Tomy and Paramount and Dreamworks made them pay through the nose for using their IP, but my guess is Elon just did it without permission.
I can find no press release or documentation that Tesla bought the rights to Bumblebee or Optimus Prime or any transformers robots. Looks like theft.

Hasbro and Takara Tomy and Paramount should sue the pants off of him for blatantly stealing their IP for advertising purposes.

Fuck you Elon, you’re a thief and a liar.

"Obamacare" is not as good as single payer, but it's the best he could push through, sadly. It is also a Republican plan from the mid 90's that he appropriated, and now is given credit/blame for. Single payer, his original plan, was much better and may have saved billions (by eradicating the 'insurance' industry that adds immensely to our health care cost while adding nothing positive, only cost and confusion). Oh well, thanks obstructionists...you really won that one, huh?
The US is less insolvent and moving in the opposite direction than when he became pres, so he reversed the trend towards insolvency, not accelerated it....but nice try.
Actually, Bush had more 'cronies' and known felons in his administration than anyone before or since (yet), no matter what your propaganda link said, and it actually didn't say he was the 'most crony-friendly president in history', it didn't compare him to any other administration at all except McDonnell where it made comparisons of proven apples and alleged oranges to imply Obama had 'sold' access and favors like McDonnell was convicted of without offering anything but minimal anecdotal evidence of any 'quid quo pro' or wrong doing...it actually called an appearance at a Dreamworks function a 'quid quo pro' that should be prosecuted...WHAT?! Hardly a federal indictment.
True enough, one should never believe a candidate will achieve all they promise to attempt, but they should expect them to attempt what they say they'll attempt. For that huge failing, I can't bring myself to applaud Obama's 'successes'.

I'd like to know more about this.
Was that Spielberg? Or a look-a-like?
Was it cut between different sources (guy interviewing recorded interviewee in response to some DVD extra dialog from the director)?

RE: "All the people I met at Dreamworks were, and still are, AWESOME!"
-> It is rarely the people that work at a company, rather than the people who manage the company, that are absolute shitheads.

So, if the interviewee knows Spielberg and the CEO of DWS, I could see it being a case of attempted pro-nepotism, sure. That shouldn't get a ban for life, especially since the video seems to be tongue in cheek.

Even if he paid these people to say these lines without their knowledge of the use... Not really a ban for life. Maybe 20% ingenuity and 80% stupidity on the guys part.

Regardless of all of the above, it takes imagination, creativity and openly thinking outside of the usual formula to create something like this as an introductory video for application to a specific company. That kind of outside thinking and (most importantly), the ability to conceive, produce and complete such a project, is exactly the kind of people companies, any company should be looking for.

But that's all pending on the full story, and based on what I see here. If he held Spielberg in a small storage unit at gunpoint and forced him to say these lines: definitely a ban for life from the organization.

Also: the Jurassic Park theme is shit.

Why would he be banned, that seemed pretty awesome? Hrmm time to go check out the reddits.

edit: ok found the post on Reddit from the guy who apparently made this:

Hey there, I'm the friend in question (and the other half of Funny Shorts, for those that didn't make the connection). A couple things:
1) It wasn't DWA, it was DreamWorks Studios, on the live-action side of things.
2) I was only given a slap on the wrist over the phone. It was my college that received a phone call saying I'd never get a job there after that.
3) All the people I met at Dreamworks were, and still are, AWESOME! And I mean that sincerely. I hold no hard feelings whatsoever for the reaction to the video. It was an entirely valid response.I mean, I put their CEO AND ONE OF THE MOST RESPECTED DIRECTORS IN THE WORLD in it, without permission, as if we were BFFs. That deserves an extreme reaction, one way or the other. I was sort of hoping for the other, but still, totally valid.
4) I'm not sure that I can prove that this happened, really. Hopefully people can just enjoy the video regardless? It has the Jurrasic Park theme in it, guys. How can we listen to that and not all get along?

There's actually a distinction between waking up because one has to urinate and dreaming about having to urinate. While the latter can lead to the former, there's a reason why you don't wake up in order to pee and instead remain asleep and dream about urination...

While the meaning of any particular dream is far too important to take anyone else's word for, it's been my experience that such dreams about urination often have something to do with the feeling/desire to express oneself more freely, and/or to "speak one's truth," as it were, in a free and unobstructed way.

While your mileage may vary, there are frequently multiple layers of meaning to any particular dream (dream image, or dream fragment), but there are also universal themes that tend to come up (which makes sense to me, given that we're all humans in human form experiencing much of the same things, especially -- or perhaps exclusively -- when it comes to the human body).

(P.S. I've take several classes on the topic of 'dream interpretation' and some of the meaningful work has been the result of studying with this man.)
>> ^raverman:

I only remember dreams of needing to pee... and we all know what that means.

I didn't see the full film (wasn't interested), but this was quite bad. I expect more of dreamworks.

Pixar is so superior to Dreamworks in every way.


Mostly agree - but I'd take the best Dreamworks Animation movie (How to Train Your Dragon) over the worst Pixar one (Cars 2) - and maybe even Kung-Fu Panda over Bug's Life.

Overall I think the gap is closing (animated movies are so much better than they used to be that it hardly makes sense). That said, Brave looks amazing: well acted, has an interesting setting, and really ups the ante on animation quality (compare the hair in, say, The Incredibles to the hair on this girl).

Pixar is so superior to Dreamworks in every way.

@EvilDeathBee Everything you said +1 Pixar doing classic films, Cars 2 being crap, not having high hopes for this, it looking like a Dreamworks pic, and Tangled being surprisingly awesome.

You sir/Mam, have impeccable taste

Meh. From the trailers, it looks more like your average Dreamworks movie rather than another Pixar classic. I doubt it'll be as bad as Cars 2, but I don't have my hopes high for this one. Although I would love to be proven wrong, as I was with Tangled

one of the reasons I got a doctorate in psychology was my fascination with dreams.

one of the best professors I had throughout all of my schooling, was my graduate school professor on dreams.

His books are pretty good, as is his website, but the classes were just amazing.

I too assume it'll be awesome because it's Pixar, but my god does it look like a Dreamworks film from that trailer!

I just watched the trailer. The film looks overproduced and terrible.

From the trailer:

"Let's make some money!" ~Dreamworks producer.

This reminds me of the DreamWorks movie "Flushed Away"

>> ^westy:
I think they are bing over dramatic about it , Its not comparable to cropping a still painting , you can still as a viewer receive a good propotoin of the essence of the film. maby more so than if you had a 15" tv and you tired to watch it in wide screen.
obviously its not as good and is different from the original intended composition of the film but I would argue its not that bad compromise to get a wide screen film onto a tv and looking comparably good.


From time to time, when I'm watching a film in the theater, I become aware that the director / cinematographer has made a conscious effort to screw the pan-and-scan guys, by putting vital information on opposite sides of the screen. This was especially true of Inglorious Basterds. Frankly, I don't blame them. They don't like their composition dictated by the home video market. That being said, it was fascinating to discover that Pixar and Dreamworks both manipulate the position of characters within the shot when making a 'full screen' version.