I doubt you'd be seeing this rubbish on Grand Designs

It's a scary and stupendously stupid mindset. There is the rich, greedy shit way of looking at it:

* I can get impoverished countries to work for me for pittance, making me even more stinking rich. I don't give a fuck if that means I'm paying those workers essentially slave labour costs. They'll do it for that, so I'll use them.

VS the sensible, rational, compassionate way of looking at things:

* You know, I can STILL make obscenely huge profits WHILE paying people a good wage and giving them good working conditions here in Australia. My companies will STILL be worth BILLIONS I will still become more disgustingly wealthy, BUT I will also be providing good lives for thousands of people.


That a person can have zero need for money. ABSOLUTELY ZERO need for any more money, be the RICHEST IN THE WORLD and yet not think "I'm in a position I can mike life better for thousands of people, I could probably afford to give these people raises". But instead think "Why are these fuckers not working harder to make me richer for less money, fuck them all"

Absolutely, utterly, disgusting piece of rubbish she is.

Although that was made very evident during her battles with her children to stop them getting any of her money, she's bred vile creatures, and doesn't want them to get any of 'her' money.

>> ^spoco2:

That was sensationally cute, adorable and awesome.
Also, other than TFotC + Murray, I recognised no-one else in that, none whatsoever.
I guess the same would be for an Australian Red Nose Day song and the rest of the world not knowing our local celebrities.


That's because some of them are a bit rubbish tbh.

But the guys from the Phoenix Foundation are great.

>> ^robbersdog49:

I thought this was just a bit of septic bashing until I went to america and saw the rubbish they put in their cars for myself. Even supposedly high end cars just have crap interiors! A bottom of the range VW Up has a better quality interior than any american car I've ever been in.
To the americans here; why do you guys ever buy them? Surely it must annoy you too?


Because Japanese cars have poor quality interiors, too, and those are the only other cars worth buying.

I thought this was just a bit of septic bashing until I went to america and saw the rubbish they put in their cars for myself. Even supposedly high end cars just have crap interiors! A bottom of the range VW Up has a better quality interior than any american car I've ever been in.

To the americans here; why do you guys ever buy them? Surely it must annoy you too?

Actually it's not rubbish, it's siliconish..

thats rubbish

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

>> ^JiggaJonson:
@EvilDeathBee "reaching" ain't there yet. Still looks like a cartoon to me (probably bc I play too many games). And nomatter how good it gets, it will always look like the actors are talking to/interacting with empty air. Say what you will about animatronics and puppets but meeting a puppet's eyes is never a problem for actors.

Completely disagree. Did you seriously think Prometheus looked "cartoony"? Also, the CGI Yoda in the Blu-Ray Episode 1 was so much better than the rubbish puppet from the theatrical release (regardless of how shit the film is). No matter how good a puppet or animatronic is, it will always be limited in what it can do and especially how it animates.
And if and actor has trouble meeting the eyes of a digital character, that's poor setup, poor direction, poor editing and even poor acting. As I said, it's knowing when to use CGI and when to use puppets/animatronics/models. All can be blended to work well together, depends on the shot.

Ok, so the Yoda puppet was pretty shit, but I think I still prefer it to the CG one. Whether something is believable seems pretty binary to me. Its not as if either version really does a good job of hiding the man behind the curtain. Some CG I am totally fooled by. Backdrops, a lot of special effects but when it comes to something organic, something thats going to be the focus of the camera CG never really holds up. I've seen tech demos of CG faces, and tbh, I can't really tell the difference. I think the problem often is blending this CG in with the rest of the scene. Our brains seem very good at detecting inconsistency in lighting etc, too often CG elements really seem painted on top and it spoils the illusion. A lot of animatronic stuff matches CG in terms of its animation, but because its actually in the scene it never jumps out at you.

But hey, maybe one day our films will be made entirely in front of bluescreens. Pehraps the performers won't even have to wear makeup or costume, it'll all be superimposed on afterwards. For the moment I still think animatronics has the edge in realism.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

@EvilDeathBee "reaching" ain't there yet. Still looks like a cartoon to me (probably bc I play too many games). And nomatter how good it gets, it will always look like the actors are talking to/interacting with empty air. Say what you will about animatronics and puppets but meeting a puppet's eyes is never a problem for actors.


Completely disagree. Did you seriously think Prometheus looked "cartoony"? Also, the CGI Yoda in the Blu-Ray Episode 1 was so much better than the rubbish puppet from the theatrical release (regardless of how shit the film is). No matter how good a puppet or animatronic is, it will always be limited in what it can do and especially how it animates.
And if and actor has trouble meeting the eyes of a digital character, that's poor setup, poor direction, poor editing and even poor acting. As I said, it's knowing when to use CGI and when to use puppets/animatronics/models. All can be blended to work well together, depends on the shot.

Honestly, I never understood the ending until I learned how others interpreted it.

http://www.kubrick2001.com/

>> ^spoco2:

And in the end. I am one of those people that finds 2001 to be an unsatisfying movie. It has some awesome moments, some iconic shots and scenes, but overall it is a bit rubbish in it's conclusion.
From listening to Arthur C Clark, it would seem that's because they didn't have a good story to begin with, and I think it shows. It seemed to be a case of 'we've got these ideas that'd be good to make a movie out of'... and they just went ahead with making that movie before actually creating a workable narrative from those ideas.

And in the end. I am one of those people that finds 2001 to be an unsatisfying movie. It has some awesome moments, some iconic shots and scenes, but overall it is a bit rubbish in it's conclusion.

From listening to Arthur C Clark, it would seem that's because they didn't have a good story to begin with, and I think it shows. It seemed to be a case of 'we've got these ideas that'd be good to make a movie out of'... and they just went ahead with making that movie before actually creating a workable narrative from those ideas.

>> ^ant:

Ford in 24 and Alias.
Oh and Norton in many TV shows and movies: http://www.flickr.com/photos/antd00d2/sets/72157623240652724/ ...


Yeah, see, I don't mind things like that so much. It's not so bad when it's just products being IN the show. It's when the characters start spouting marketing rubbish about the products, OR the placement of the product is SO pronounced that it makes you pause. If it's just that a character is using computer brand X or driving car brand Y, that's fine.

It's crap like this that is really becoming WAY too prevalent in shows that makes me really sad.

Well, I expected it to be complete rubbish, and ofc following China was always going to be a tough ask. Still, I was pleasantly surprised. I really liked the Industrial revolution bit, the music was great. Great Ormond/NHS dragged on a bit and fuck me I wish they'd put Paul Mccartney out to pasture already. Another tired rendition of Hey Jude? I'd rather they'd given the mic back to Dizzy Rascal tbh.

So yah, some good, some bad.

Oh, and NBC didn't air the class Abide With Me bit because they didn't realise it was about the bombings? herp-derp.

That is actually a pretty good idea, and could be used as a metaphore for life ! ALWAYS HAVE A BACKUP plan in case shit happens.
In reply to this comment by messenger:
Life hack for leaky bags: Sick of cleaning out your garbage can after it springs a leak? Line your clean bin with two bags, one inside the other. When you take the full one out, if it rips and nasty garbage juice comes out, just put it back and take both bags. If not, throw out the full bag and put a new empty bag in. Voila. Clean bin forever.

-- Credit where credit is due: me>> ^spoco2:

The rubbish bags at the bottom of the rubbish bin is great until the one you're using gets a rip and spills liquid from the rubbish over all of your new bags.

Life hack for leaky bags: Sick of cleaning out your garbage can after it springs a leak? Line your clean bin with two bags, one inside the other. When you take the full one out, if it rips and nasty garbage juice comes out, just put it back and take both bags. If not, throw out the full bag and put a new empty bag in. Voila. Clean bin forever.

-- Credit where credit is due: me>> ^spoco2:

The rubbish bags at the bottom of the rubbish bin is great until the one you're using gets a rip and spills liquid from the rubbish over all of your new bags.