Where did you hear it's ending? As hard as it is to imagine a S3 watching S2's finale, it's not officially cancelled (but nor renewed).

Even if so, I'm not sad. I don't mind any good series ending of its own terms, when it reached a story arc's natural conclusion. And S2's finale certainly felt like a Tartakovsky story's endpoint.

An incredible series, even better than Samurai Jack. Looking forward to new (ad)ventures from Taratkovsky, his storytelling chops is insane.

They should have hired a writer. A more creative storytelling playground in games doesn't exist.

I believe we evolved communication to help our tribes. "Sabertooth lion over there!" "those berries give you mad gas, bro!" "hey, let's try to be civil with the neanderthals"

And so, we're wired to believe what people say, especially the ones who appeal to our hopes and fears. It takes conscious effort to doubt a good storyteller.

And such is religion.

Using a white board or having a character flat out say the information are both bad storytelling. A better filmmaker would have been able to convey such information organically. At least the saying it flat out approach could have been worked into the movie as an old emergency warning broadcast, or early on in the outbreak when people could conceivably still be ignorant.

Also, I didn't think the weakness to hearing aids was that blatant. It was certainty better than the water vulnerability of the aliens from Signs. It just felt silly that the all the world's militaries with all their armor piercing weapons couldn't do much to these monsters but a wounded mother with a shotgun and her child could.

Aesop may be a myth, not a real person but a compilation of other storytellers and fabelists. It's not clear either way apparently.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesop
I believe it's likely a man named Jesus existed, largely as described, I just discount all the supernatural and religious stuff. Minus that, I agree with his basic teachings as I understand them.

What makes Aesop's fables objectively good imo is (as I remember them, it's been decades) they aren't self serving or selfish lessons, they are altruistic and civic minded lessons mostly, explaining how doing right for others is beneficial to all, including ones self in the long term even when not in the short term. To be sure, they aren't all about morality, but those that were (as I recall them) were good lessons all.

I didn't dislike the new Ghostbusters. Of course it couldn't surpass the original, but I felt the SNL casts were fun to watch on the big screen and they had fun making it. I wanted to turn my brain off and see something fun with my wife next to me and it delivered enough. Is it better than a free SNL episode on TV? No. But is it worth a ticket? Yes, to support these actresses & production, IMO. God knows we need more "fun rides" movies than the "another-month-another-Marvel/DC-superheroes-punch-fest" routine we've settled into for a couple of years now.

I don't mind the SJW aspects of any Hollywood production. I rarely get bothered by SJW-undertones, bad accents, historical/source material accuracy if the movie/TV is good/fun/meaningful. When I spot them, I can mentally compartmentalize and say "OK, moving on..." and focus on the plot, acting, theme and the storytelling. What I am bothered by, is when a production went way over-board to be stereotypical and predictable. Is Ocean 8 overselling SJW? I don't feel it. At least, I don't go look for it to criticize for the sake of it.

However, from the trailer, it doesn't have that Ocean 11 signature slickness to it, though. Love Sandra Bullock to death as I am, she's no replacement to Clooney in terms of magnetism here. And Cate & Anne being overly typical Cate & Anne... that I am sick of. But it is a crime-genre movie that I can get my wife to the theater to watch together because of the cast, this the original O11 & Godfather type of movies can't.

I'm torn.
On the one hand, more Blade Runner would be awesome.
On the other hand, these god damn member berries keep getting their disgusting sticky juice all over my childhood memories.
I'll reserve judgement on this particular nostalgic 'redux', but I really fear that's all it will be. Hollywood is completely devoid of independent thought or original storytelling these days. Part of me hopes this movie loses $200000000 so they'll quit rehashing classics.
I totally expect another Treasure of the Sierra Madre to come out in the next few years with way more explosions, more grisly deaths and action, and everything that made the original great missing.

Best storytelling of Jesus EVER! I like an angry pissed off Jesus.

Good Story good storytelling.

I disagree that it cannot be adapted to film. It could be done with a director that can function in a storytelling environment, which Snyder simply cannot do. The problem with Snyder was covered very well here recently, *related=http://videosift.com/video/Nerdwriter-Fundamenal-Flaw-Zack-Snyder-Batman-v-Superman
He was exactly the wrong director to have film this. I would have went with Del Toro or Whedon, but even they have their flaws.

Now, if the question is, can an adaptation be done that Alan Moore will feel 'suits' his vision? Probably not. He is an artist, in very good ways, but also in some very bad ones. He has a specific idea of how his creation must flow, which means he will never be satisfied with a medium outside of the graphic novel or comic.

Personally, I think one of the few un-adaptable works would be Gaiman's Sandman, but that's just my opinion.

Your video, The Mechanics of Storytelling pt.2- Scarcity, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, "Show" don't "Tell" - The Mechanics of Storytelling, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I finally watched it a while back and this does indeed seem pretty accurate.
In particular for me though the storytelling was fairly incoherent, seemingly only a poor construct intended to connect the story between a few major plot points, with far too many contrivances. It's a similar problem to the slipshod storytelling that crops up quite often in TV shows.

Very thoughtful up to 2:41, then the storytelling starts.

Whats wrong with individual states setting their minimal wage?
The federal minimum wage, by simple logic, should be the minimum wage in the state that can support the lowest minimum wage. Otherwise that state is f**cked.

Minimum wage should be low enough to have marginal effect on middle class income. Raising it over a certain threshold will hurt the middle class by suppressing economic activity (imagine a minimum wage of 30, 50, 100 dollars - what would happen? Now scale back, at what point is the minimum wage sane?). This threshold will differ greatly from area to area and from time to time so setting a good permanent global minimum wage is impossible.

Is the middle class now earning minimum wage?

"Grow purchasing power organically" - f**k you, words!

The "study" that proves my point without specifying "details" like where, when and by how much this increase in minimum wage was studied.

The Seattle example is great - it shows that local government can do this better than a federal rate, it kicks in over time in a limited area and can be scaled back if it starts to backfire.

Raising minimum wage - in some places, sometimes its good, sometimes its not!

Alternative ideas have to be tested, not pronounced "right".