Agree with the above. Stopped when it got to the Ninja combine. Here is a videogame famed for its story and characters...and he makes a short film with nothing but "cool" action scenes stitched together at random.

I hope there will never be a HL movie. Its impossible to do service. Here you have a faceless, nameless maincharacter, a void which the player fills. It works for videogames, but for movies?...well, look what they did to Hitman. The story is told in whispers, foreshadowing, tiny little glimpses over the course of many many hours of play. You slowly build a picture of the world, of the combine, of what might have happaned. Nothing is expressed directly and it helps maintain the mystery. How on earth would you do that in a 2 hour movie? You dont have the hours that a videogame does to slowly build everything little by little, episode by episode. It would be a mess.

So, leave HL alone thanks.

>> ^Xax:

The humiliation belonged to a faceless, blurry figure, and now she's claimed it as her own. Fuck her. She's doing this for the money, plain and simple.


You're probably more correct than you know.

http://technolog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/20/5885523-texting-fountain-ladys-problems-bigger-than-youtube-fame

From the link:

"In the hours that followed Cathy Cruz Marrero's appearance on 'Good Morning America' today to talk about the fall and its aftermath, she was in court for a status hearing on charges of five felony counts, including theft by deception and receiving stolen property," reports ABC News.

Turns out Marrero's been out on $7,500 bail since 2009, after being charged with running up more than $5,000 in purchases on a co-worker's credit card. No wonder she had a lawyer handy.

She's walking a fine line with the Streisand Effect here. Giving interviews is the last thing she should do if she's just trying to make money. Privately contact the mall management, threaten to sue, and get an out of court settlement real easy. Now, I suspect if it went to trial, she would likely have a hard time of it.

I'd guess that she doesn't have a lawyer yet. I'd also guess that she doesn't have a full understanding of how and why damages are calculated in a lawsuit.

>> ^Xax:

The humiliation belonged to a faceless, blurry figure, and now she's claimed it as her own. Fuck her. She's doing this for the money, plain and simple.

The humiliation belonged to a faceless, blurry figure, and now she's claimed it as her own. Fuck her. She's doing this for the money, plain and simple.

So my argument is invalid because I'm jaded? You really have nothing to back up your claims, do you? Does that help you sleep at night, believing that everything that is wrong with society can be blamed on the government? I've got bad news for you. The government is run by people. Individuals. Thinking, hoping, loving human beings. They are not mindless, faceless clones or constructs or bogeymen. They are the very same people you think will live next to you in peace and harmony without the government.

I definitely agree with ending nationalism, but until corporate pollution, crime, and abuse are treated the same as street-crime, I believe the state is a necessary evil. As sickly imperfect as it is, the "state" is the only thing powerful enough to stand up against giant faceless corporations like AGM, BP, Monsanto, etc...

In other news, Subway tells you to "eat fresh" (on ingredients shipped in from who knows where), Apple tells you to "think different" (as long as you brand of different doesn't include installing apps not approved by Steve Jobs), and Burger King lets you "have it your way" (as long as ~700 calories in a Whopper is OK).

Is New Holland a faceless corporation that will say literally anything that helps it ship more units? Yep. Just like everybody else.

This didn't seem particularly more egregious or arrogant than your average bit of advertising to me. Then again, I'm one of the "farm raised" people that they are targeting.

@rebuilder. No. I am pointing out how individual people don't easily fit into this 'doing x is bad for you' paradigm, and rather how collectivizing people into large faceless groups makes it easy to create blanket statements that 'doing x is bad for you therefore it's our concern'. We're all individuals and we all do things differently. Sometimes those things are harmful, and quite frankly it's none of my business nor yours.

If you're prone to tax things that are harmful, then would you put a tax on suicide (taxing the deceased family from the recently deceased's assets)? Or attempted suicide? Would you put a tax on abortion (after all it's the most harmful because it snuffs out a potential human life)?

I kept waiting for a non-action part. When are people going to realize that action is boring without reason...without tension? It's like the new Star Wars movies...you never think anyone's going to die, so there's no tension. The only people that are in danger are people you just don't give a crap about, and all the main characters are just running around in perfectly choreographed action scenes.

Here you have a trailer full of faceless protagonist, faceless enemies. Empty lifeless city. The protagonist is basically omniscient with perfect timing....

Don't get me wrong, it LOOKS great, but that doesn't mean it'll be worth a shit. If I were a producer, I'd want proof there's a story, not that you had a cool idea for an action scene. Still, it gets an upvote for possibly being cool at some point.

>> ^Skeeve:
And yet religion has still been responsible for more deaths... fancy that.
>> ^acidSpine:
Men like you built the hydrogen bomb. Men like you thought it up



That makes no sense. Let us look at logic instead of being like the God-believers we assume just don’t understand…

Humanity created what? Oh! That's right! Religion... so in other words, religion has not corrupted humanity but rather humanity has corrupted religion, right? That's logical for many reasons, but the best is because we corrupt everything else.

But that means... human beings have killed, not religion. We simply blame religion because it is the faceless problem. However, religion is the excuse, not the problem! As though fabricated beliefs lead to killing.

Religion leads to war... so get rid of religion and no more war huh?
Skimpy clothes lead to rape...so get rid of loose-dressed women and no more rape.
Wealth leads to robberies...so... you get the point.

Only human ambition, greed, narcissism, and our instinctual need to slay one another are to blame for killing. Religion just makes certain people feel superior when doing it. Religion is powerless because we create it, fabricate it. If we got rid of religion, we would find another reason to keep slaying. We are addicted to killing like a smoker who continues to puff his cancer stick, a fat man who eats his double whoppers, a meth addict, a nymphomaniac, and all the other habits that kill us and that we cannot stop. Period.


If you don't believe in a fairy-tale like god, then stop believing there is a better side to humanity if we could "just leave religion in the past."

And to the person who commented on the "men like you..." say it with me, every man like every other man created the bomb. And by your logic, it was God's plan and will that an automic bomb be made... and by that logic, God made the automic bomb through our hands to murder little babies...

Religion had the last 10,000 years to accomplish that. Science has had a few hundred. Fuck you if you think being better than religion is worth gloating about. nothing personal ofcourse

*edited

I recently discovered god in the form of two half empty beer bottles and some packaged crispbreads I thought had been consumed at some other point is space and time. When I realised that every single moment since the big bang had been leading up to me eating this cripsbread and swilling the flat beer kept chilly by the fresh autumn air of our inner suburban backyard typing this message to a nameless faceless internet that can never love me like my mother did and strung out on the acid in my spine.... well it makes you think doesn't it?

Despite an aversion to violence, when she says "punch me in the face", I wish I was. In reality, at some point, punching her into a faceless pulp would cease to be satisfying, but in my fantasies I just pressure-wash the mess into the gutters and let the small portion of the world with brains thank me for my good work.

>> ^Psychologic:

I definitely question those things... not whether they exist, but what their underlying mechanics are. As far as I am aware, the exact nature of gravity (for example) is still uncertain.
Likewise, I am not proposing that the climate is not changing. I do want to understand why it changes though, and I have to get beyond that before I can even begin to know whether or not I agree with projections for the future.
If I had to pick sides for some reason, then I would side with the consensus. I have no reason to doubt it. That wouldn't satisfy my intellectual curiosity though... I like to know how stuff works. If someone asked me whether or not I could explain how much of an effect humans have on the climate then I would have to answer "no", and that bothers me.
Disagree with the video all you want, but don't think that it represents me. It's just something I posted to start a discussion.


Great points! Glad to hear that this video does not represent your views, and big ups for intellectual curiosity for how things work.

"Sides" are my problem.

There aren't two sides to this debate. There is science, and there is corporately funded propaganda. Science starts with data and works forwards towards a conclusion; the corporate skeptics start with their conclusion and work backwards to try and find only the bits of data that support the previously decided upon conclusion. There is zero intellectual curiosity behind this 'skepticism', and their really isn't any genuine skepticism either, just profit motive.

Notice how this corporate effort manipulates and flatters people. If you embrace their ideas, they are quick to compliment you for your freethinking, your independence of thought, your wise skepticism, and your ability to see the truth through all the partisan hackery. Never mind that half empty Kool Aid pitcher on the table or that quivering bladder full of purple sticky stuff, because you are an individual goddamit!

This is called identity politics, because the ideology is basically stapled to your ego. It's very effective, because you can't change your mind on the issue without also sacrificing the fantasy of your own bold, rugged individualism. Not only that, but your old skeptic friends will consider you just another sheep in the herd, a patsy, a monkey, another drone in the matrix, blind to larger conspiracy that surrounds us all.

If you want to satisfy your intellectual curiosity on climate change, go to the source. Science isn't some faceless authority that hands down arbitrary judgments (like the Supreme Court). Science is made up of intellectually curious individuals who want to know how things work. They carry out their debates through research and editorialize with peer review. At the end of the day, the ideas that have not been disproved are allowed to remain, while the ideas that have been disproved are discarded. Is this not a fucking beautiful system?!

Thanks for the opportunity to articulate some of these thoughts in writing. I'm upvoting the video for the discussion.

(not sure why the formatting is so strange on this comment)

Just thumbing through the list, there are some good movies there. I was looking for a foreign film called Man Facing Southeast, didn't find it, but came across A Man Escaped on there. Classic! While watching it, think about how Speilberg shot the adults in ET (without faces and heads). Bresson does the same in this movie (obviously his version came first), and it works well to make the Nazis faceless automatons.

I know it's not on the list, but you should certainly check out Man Facing Southest if you can find it. Come to think of it, that's a metaphoric story of Christ very much like ET. Well look at that! Two movies with similarities to ET in one post. Ain't I cool?

>> ^budzos:
Yeah once you get accustomed to the voice there is actually some fun content here. I for one LOVE First Contact despite the many flaws in the story. The borg queen was a really stupid idea, if you ask me. The faceless, personality free borg as force of nature is much more awe-inspiring.



I've always thought that too. The way I think of it there were two distinct versions of the borg, the grey borg (the original), and the green borg (this movie plus all the crap that happened in voyager).

What made the borg scary in the first place was not just that they were powerful mechano-corpse people, but that they were inscrutable. There is something unsettling about an emotionless and relentless enemy that cannot be reasoned with or manipulated. And you couldn't easily define them as evil, since they weren't vengeful or malicious, just devoted to their own form of logic. With this movie they got rid of everything that was distinctive or interesting about the borg. And just turned them into cyber-zombies at the command of some slimey lich queen.