search results matching tag: top 10

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.005 seconds

    Videos (384)     Sift Talk (47)     Blogs (37)     Comments (571)   

Drunken Fighting - Jackie Chan

ChaosEngine says...

I love this movie. Can you imagine the uproar if someone in the west tried to make a movie where the hero gets his "power" from being drunk?

And in case anyone didn't realise that Jackie Chan is awesome... required watching:
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Jackie-Chan-How-to-Do-Action-Comedy
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Top-10-Jackie-Chan-Stunts
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Jackie-Chan-Picks-a-Fight-with-Bruce-Lee-and-Loses

Train Car Accident Shocking video

Top 10 Worst Strategy Games (w/ Timestamps)

⚽ Ronaldinho ● Top 10 Goals ⚽

Top 10 Penalty Goals By Goalkeepers |HD

Funny dogs compilation 2016

Top 10 Most Horrible Deaths Caused By Video Games

Funniest Dog Videos August 2016

Dallas Officials Report On Shooting Of 11 Officers By Sniper

newtboy says...

And instantly the right wing starts doubling and tripling down on armed violence rather than any attempt to de-escalate. It seems at least some of them are just itching for a race war.
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Ex-politician-on-Dallas-This-is-war-Watch-out-Obama

NOTE: So far this year, police have killed 608 citizens, and 26 officers have been killed on duty. (http://killedbypolice.net/) That means it's nearly 30 times more likely that an officer will kill a citizen than it is that a citizen will kill an officer, yet cops claim THEY have the most dangerous job?!? They aren't even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs, and are INCREDIBLY more safe than those they have contact with.

Side note: All night the media/police have said clearly that the one dead attacker in Dallas was killed by a self inflicted gun shot wound....but the truth is he was killed by an explosive attached to a police robot....a mechanical suicide bomb. Why did they lie about it all night? They clearly knew it was a bold faced lie.

Ima Llama (Sift Talk Post)

SDGundamX says...

Reddit video, Break-dot-com, and those kind of sites are good for a few videos. Just look for hot or popular videos on those sites that haven't been Sifted yet. You've been on the Sift long enough to probably to recognize the kind of stuff that will get Sifted compared to the trashier videos. Anything from Last Week Tonight will get Sifted, but you've got to be quick on the draw (as in, online immediately after the episode airs) in order to get a clip up before someone else does. But it's a guaranteed Top 10 video if you do manage to snag it first.

Submit your 3 vids a day, use beggar's canyon if a video gets to 7 or 8 votes (discard stuff that only gets 2 or 3), and I'd guess that within a month you'll have your bronze. Then you can kick back and not submit anything ever again if you don't feel like it.

World Most Dangerous and Advanced Military Technology

World Most Dangerous and Advanced Military Technology

Bill Nye Bets Climate Denying Meteorologist $20k

BicycleRepairMan says...

Note that he bets 2010-2020 will be THE hottest decade ever recorded, and not just among the top 10 hottest decades. This is how we know the warming is significant, the more data (ie longer timespan) , the more clear the trend is. Individual years might not be THE warmest, just because they are the latest, but if you measure in decades, this is almost certainly the case. it would be an even more slam-dunk case if you bet with centuries. This is also why deniers sometimes literally use snowballs to prove GW isnt real, because if you go for local weather on a particular day, you can "prove" anything, but the amount of data in your "research" is insignificant.

Cop Harassing The Wrong BMX Bikers Gets Shut Down

newtboy says...

When they are in the top 10 most dangerous jobs in America, you might have a point...but they aren't, and yet they are paid better than nearly every dangerous job on the list of dangerous jobs.
They CLAIM to have the most dangerous job in America, but it's simply not true. In fact, in an interaction with an officer, it's 10 times more likely that the officer will shoot the citizen than it is the other way around, so if danger is the pay rate metric, cops should pay US.

No, he saw NOTHING, someone who doesn't know they are allowed to ride there complained to him.

Again, if danger is the metric, cops are paid WAY too much, far more than the more dangerous jobs out there, and they also get benefits and many have special laws that allow them to do things normal citizens can't and offers protections that normal citizens don't have (like free lawyers, a blue wall, friends that will harass anyone making a charge against one, free FULL medical, vacations, bullet proof vests, Kevlar gloves, weapons, free vehicle(s), double pay-overtime, etc.).

No, it IS a median wage task, with approximately median risk, or less. If they don't want to do it for that money, don't take the job. It's NOT a job that's worth >$111 an hour + benefits. Animal care workers have a much more dangerous job, and they make <$20K per year. In fact, of the top ten most dangerous jobs, only airline pilot pays better than being an officer, which is NOT even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs.
http://www.bankrate.com/finance/personal-finance/10-most-dangerous-jobs-us-11.aspx

robbersdog49 said:

When they're exposed to the median risk of workers in America then I'll agree with this.

But they aren't. It's their job to deal with the most dangerous people, the most dangerous situations. This cop in the video is a bit of a dick to these kids but maybe he's been watching them get in the way of other people and make a nuisance of themselves, who knows? Maybe he goes about talking to them a bit wrong, but to be fair I don't see an awful lot wrong here.

But if a fight breaks out nearby and someone pulls a gun everyone else there gets to run away. But that guy in the blue uniform is expected to get involved and sort it all out. That's not a median wage task.

Hollywood Whitewashing: Last Week Tonight, Feb2016

MilkmanDan says...

"Automatically ok"? Not necessarily. But in cases where it makes sense, at a stretch even "plot sense" for the character to be there; yeah, I think that is OK.

The Last Samurai isn't a documentary. But, the general historical justification for Tom Cruise's character being in Japan is pretty much valid. Meiji was interested in the West -- clothes, technology, weapons, and military. He actually did hire Westerners to train his army, although from what I read it sounds like they were German, French, and Italian rather than American. Still, the movie portrays the general situation/setting with at least *decent* broad-strokes historical accuracy. LOADS of movies deviate from even this degree of historical accuracy *way* more without drawing complaints; particularly if their main purpose is entertainment and not education / documentary.


Your hypothetical reverse movie makes some valid criticisms. Even though it would have been historically possible for a Westerner to be in Japan at the time -- even to be involved with training a Western-style military -- it would be unlikely for such a person to get captured, run into a Shogun that speaks English, become a badass (or at least passable) samurai warrior, and end up playing a major role in politics and significantly influencing Emperor Meiji.

My defense against those criticisms is that, for me at least, the movie is entertaining; which is kinda the point. Your "Union Samurai" movie might be equally entertaining and therefore given an equal pass on historical inaccuracies by me.

The whole characters as a "lens through which the audience can appreciate a culture/history outside their own" issue is (slightly) more weighty to me. I don't think those are often necessary, but I don't feel like my intelligence is being insulted if the movie maker feels that they are in order to sell tickets.

I love the Chinese historical novel "Three Kingdoms". A few years ago, John Wu made the movie "Red Cliff", mostly about one particular battle in the historical period portrayed in that book. For the Chinese audience, Wu made the movie in two parts, summed up about four and a half hours long. For the US / West, he made a version trimmed to just over two hours. Why? Because he (and a team of market researchers, I'm sure) knew that very few Westerners would go to see a 4+ hour long movie, entirely in Mandarin Chinese (with subtitles), about a piece of Chinese history from ~1800 years ago that very few in the West have ever heard of or know anything about.

I think the full 4+ hour long movie is great. In my personal top 10 favorite movies of all time, ahead of most Hollywood stuff. But I also understand that there's no way that movie would appeal to all but a tiny, tiny fraction of Western viewers in that full-on 4+ hour format. But, even though I personally think the cut-down 2 hour "US" version is drastically inferior to the full cut, I am glad that he made it because it gives a suitably accurate introduction to the subject matter to more people in the West (just like the "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" and "Dynasty Warriors" videogames do), and makes that tiny, tiny fraction of Western people that know anything about it a little less tiny. While being entertaining along the way.

For other movies, sometimes the best way that a filmmaker can sell a movie to an audience that otherwise might not accept it (at least in large enough numbers to justify the production costs) may be to insert one of these "lens" characters for the audience to identify with. I don't think there is inherently anything wrong with that. It might not work for movies that are taking a more hardline approach to historical / contextual accuracy (ie., if Tom Cruise showed up in "Red Cliff" in circa 200AD China), but outside of those situations, if that is what the studio thinks it will take to sell tickets... Cool.

The Last Samurai is, like @ChaosEngine said, a movie primarily about an outsider learning a new culture (and accepting his own past). He serves as that lens character, but actually the hows and whys of his character arc are the main points of interest in the movie, at least to me.

I'm sure that an awesome, historically accurate movie could be made dealing with young Emperor Meiji, Takamori (who Katsumoto seems to be based on in The Last Samurai), and the influence of modernization on Japanese culture at the time. It could be made with no Western "lens" character, no overt influence by any particular individual Westerner, and be entirely in Japanese. But that movie wouldn't be The Last Samurai, wouldn't be attempting to serve the same purpose as The Last Samurai, and very likely wouldn't sell as many tickets (in the US) as The Last Samurai (starring Tom Cruise!) did. That wouldn't make it a worse movie, just an apple instead of an orange.

Babymech said:

Wait what? Is it automatically ok if the skewed / whitewashed role is written into the script? You do know that this kind of skew doesn't come about by the kkk kidnapping black actors at gunpoint in the middle of filming and replacing them with white ones?

If a Japanese director were to make a movie about the civil war, but chose to make it about a Japanese fighter who comes to the US, becomes the most kickass soldier of the Union, makes personal friends with Lincoln, and convinces him to stay the course on emancipation... that would be pretty weird, even if the argument went that this was the only way a Japanese audience could identify with this obscure historic time.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon