I found some people talking about it in a forum, and one stated "It shoots a blend of paint from smashed and mixed paintballs."

Seems fairly legit really - still counts a paintball gun as long as it uses the same ammo.

My question is how does the MF get so dirty between this movie and Star Wars. The movie is set somewhere between 11 and 14 years before Star Wars: A New Hope. 10 years doesn't seem nearly long enough for the level of grime. Even if Solo doesn't keep as good care of it as Lando did, which is fitting of both characters... or Lando has lots of fake stuff to keep it looking clean and neat, as it is apparently close to 60 years old by the time of New Hope (not sure if that is still canon though), and that stuff is removed or falls off, revealing the ship's true nature, and this might fit with Lando's character, trying to make himself seem cleaner and better than what he was. Perhaps part of his con.

Would be funny if during a mid/after credit scene we see the fake clean stuff start falling off, and Solo commenting about how Lando was a dirty cheat.

EDIT: Seems there is a possible explanation and possible spoilers, Han wanted the ship to blend in so let it get dirty or made it look dirty...
https://screenrant.com/millennium-falcon-solo-movie-new-design/

Really? Explain why. It's in there, as clear and codified religious law.
If old testament morality and laws were out the window, then everything is permitted because new testament essentially says Jesus made sin obsolete....but he also said clearly that ALL previous religious laws stand and anyone telling you different is an evil liar.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven."
Sure sounds clear to me, wear blended fabrics, get stoned to death as an infidel, refuse to stone them, your an infidel too, now you get stoned.

You need me to tell you why slavery and murder are wrong? I guess so, since your moral guide says they are proper, even required.

Treating others like you would have them treat you, the golden rule....what Jesus told you is the most important rule.
Do you want to be raped, sold into slavery, stoned to death, or even just told constantly that you're immoral, evil, and going to hell? If not, stop doing it, and definitely stop pretending that not what the bible commands of you.
That covers it, and covers why trying to impose your narrow idea of religious morality on others is wrong, according to your own moral code.

Well, then you must find slavery moral, as well as the murder of any non Christians, while those who wear cotton poly blends or eat at red lobster or mow on Sunday are clearly irredeemably immoral.
Those are the moral requirements your God gave you, and which you believe you are judged on.

How many infidels have you stoned to death. If it's zero, you're also totally immoral and going to hell, right?

If not, because Jesus erased your sin, then there is nothing immoral for Christians and abortion and child rape are totally fine?

Short answer, no, not if they make cakes with messages.

Because there's no way to tell if it's really a firmly held belief or just douchbaggery, and it's far more likely to be the latter (examples of that above), no. The next step might be no cakes for blacks, because they're unclean descendants of Cain, or Jews because they don't serve Jesus, or people wearing blended fabrics because they should be stoned to death, and certainly no cake for atheists.

If you have a public business, serve the public, otherwise partner with your church and limit your customers to like minded people instead of singling out certain groups to publicly deny service....or move to a religiously intolerant country where your intolerance is allowed and not antithetical to the national morals.

My 2 cents....
It might be, but that's not their position.

Religiously, as I read it, it's not much different from wearing a cotton poly blend or working on Sunday, also immoral according to the bible, but realistically the bible is just used as an excuse for them to attack things they don't like.
No American has been murdered or even ostracized by evangelicals for wearing blended fabrics or mowing on Sunday even though it's incontrovertible that the bible says they should be, but many have been murdered for being gay, and millions ostracized. Proof enough to me that it's not about what the bible says, that's just an excuse to attack what they hate or fear.

Compared to greed, the love of money, homosexuality seems barely mentioned, yet there's no outrage about the elevation of greed in our culture, it's celebrated.
Same for idolatry, forbidden by direct commandment from God not some interpreter, so if you've ever worshipped at a church with statues of any kind, including the cross or stained glass, God hates you far more than gays and demands we stone you to death.

Jews don't try to legally outlaw pork for everyone, not even other Jews. Christians have made homosexuality illegal for everyone, repeatedly.

I completely disagree with you about being inspired by her is like being inspired by Hitler. Hitler's philosophy was a complete sham on every level, and contradicts itself numerous times. Objectivism's foundation works well on many levels. Personal aspiration, bettering yourself, valuing logic and knowledge over emotions, those types of things are valuable to an extent.

Objectivism is ultra-logical in the end, very much the same as Social Darwinism. Fundamentally, those ideas have value in some situations and settings. A business for example, in the end, if an employee is not doing his or her job, it's not necessarily the business's job to figure out why unless it's within their self-interest to do so, and they shouldn't have to think that stuff through in every single instance. They should have the flexibility to fire someone in that instance without a second thought about the social ramifications.

It ultimately is a societal problem though that this employee be taken care of as a member of society, which is where Objectivism falls on its face, among other areas. Another one is Objectivism really has terrible implications in many aspects of parenting, to put it mildly.

I was personally inspired by Ayn Rand in high school quite honestly. She made me care about philosophy, about achieving the most I could achieve via hard work and self-determination, to learn how to critically think and use reason, to be OK to not conform necessarily to group think, etc. Just like every ideology, it's not perfect, and following it to a T just doesn't work, just like any other ideology and philosophy we may encounter and blend into our own as we age and grow. But it made me want to learn more, achieve more, and think more.

You can do a lot worse than that, IMO, you know, like Fascism. :-)

jimnms, having seen the movie, I can see why people are reacting this positively to it. Have you seen it? Where you have or havent, consider the following.

You are right that this isn't the first black superhero movie. If you ignore comedies starring goofy concept heros, the list of movies narrows. Then, consider movies with black super heros who are not anti-heroes (Spawn, Blade). Why this distinction? Anti-heroes are great, but they aren't characters for a general young audience to aspire to. To notice that the majority of main character superheroes in movies are either partially a joke or a dark/brooding/scary/threatening/antisocial hero might be a drag. especially when you compare it to the pool of white super heroes who aren't (most of them). That's important.

First movie with a mostly black cast? No, but how many such movies arent about slavery, inner city gangs, extreme poverty, surviving racism, genocide or third world conflict. How many are almost purely optimistic blend of science fiction and the beauty of African culture? How many imagine what an African country unmolested by colonialism might look like in the future, where its citizens were allowed to reach their highest potential in terms of culture, government and technology? This is in part what the Afro-futurism science fiction genre is about and its a very rare genre to make it to film.

Especially a film that has a budget of $ 200 million dollars. That budget is important. It says that at this point in history, the largest (maybe?) movie studio recognizes that the public wants to see black characters in this light. That's a big deal too.

And considering how well this movie is doing at the box office, Black Panther is a signal of whats to come. More stories about inspirational black characters told at this kind of block buster scale.

Does that make a bit more sense? I'm sure there are other reasons; one being its a really good movie! Hope this helps.

I love the show overall. Krill bothered me a little bit though, because it felt a bit too MacFarlane-y to me.

Taking The Orville as an homage to Trek (TNG specifically?), it struck me that any Trek character that would be asked to infiltrate a hostile alien group would take that task very very seriously. They'd learn enough culture / language / etc. to pass cursory examination, and they'd know to limit attention being placed on them as much as possible. That's just sort of taking your fiction/material seriously.

The Orville's (Captain!) Mercer and Malloy were basically just screwing around on their infiltration mission though. They knew very little going in, which is somewhat excusable since in there is solid story justification for it in that they are doing very early recon because humans in general know very little about the Krill. BUT, if that is the case then it would be doubly important to just try to fade into the background and not draw attention, and they didn't really do that at all. Long, "funny" answers to questions instead of being terse, not trying to blend in behavior-wise, etc.

I don't mind MacFarlane's humor, and even think that it adds a little something that is very often lacking in Trek. But only when it is story-appropriate, and it kind of jarred me out of the moment on that particular episode. It was still an OK episode, but that just hurt the immersion for me, I guess.

what you saw was a mesh with a skin shader rendering in real-time so that's how fast it renders. didn't look terribly hi-res, the real advancement here is the quality of the skin shader(for realtime) and the fidelity of the facial rig, having proper face target shapes all blending together to get complex movements with skin compression/stretching/wrinkling at this level have historically been out of reach for anything but pre-rendered cgi.

They can probably drop libraries of mocap data on this with face markers that match those manipulation points you see in the video, and animators can use them to animate, or clean up/change the motion capture data.

and the skin textures/pore detail/face model are not a technological achievement as much as the work of a skilled artist, and the deformations are the result of someone who really knows their anatomy.

since there is no animation in this video, no performance, it's hard to judge how realistic it feels. the real trick is always seeing it animated.

Frozen banana chunks + chocolate, nuts or berries, or whatever you want, and a drop of vanilla extract. Blend the shit out of it. Best 'ice-cream' you'll eat and you'll lose weight eating it.

Do You Folks Like Coffee?
Real Coffee,
From the Hills Of Colombia?

The Duncan Hills awake you
From A Thousand Deaths.
A Cup Of blackened Blood.
(Die, Die)
You're Dying For A Cup.

Guatemala Blend,
Ethiopian,
French Vanilla Roast.
(Die, Die)
You're Dying For A Cup.

Prepare For Ultimate Flavor!
You're Gonna Get Some... now
And Scream... For Your Cream

[Solo]

Duncan Hills,
Duncan Hills,
Duncan Hills Coffee.

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of photorealistic / realistic-behaving games as he describes and which actually work, but I don't know how many current genres / game styles would really "feel right" if presented that way. I don't think I'd want to play an especially violent game that looked fully real, while cartoony or otherwise clearly non-real I'm totally down with. Sports might be interesting, but doesn't really seem a necessary improvement. Survival horror would seem to be a good fit - a fully realistic-feeling presentation of something like Silent Hill or Amnesia has a certain sick appeal. Perhaps particularly in VR. Ideally in The Void.

Oooh shiny! But the real question on my mind is, will it blend?

I don't know that Carlin's voice would be the right one, but doing so wouldn't necessarily be an issue for the character of Blaine. Seems reasonable to have a computer simulation of a particular voice rather than a voice actor specifically acting out each line. I'd argue however that if we're going to resurrect someone to voice Blaine, let's go with Alan Rickman. Just the right blend of civilized / polite and deadly serious / menacing.

Edit:
I've been a fan of the books from sometime between 3 and 4, and love most of the story. The last three books lost me some, as they felt quite different in tone. Even Wizard and Glass felt a bit of a miss, though it was a solid story in its own right. I frequently avoid watching trailers for films I know I'll see, so as to avoid spoilers and being mislead if the trailer happened to be poorly made. I plan to see this movie, and originally came here for the comments exclusively; having read them, I chose to watch it. I get the impression that the actors treat the characters well, and they feel like good interpretations. McConaughey's Walter is hard to read with what little we see here, but I've generally liked him in other things.

My biggest worry is that visuals all seem too clean, and the more sci-fi direction bothers me some. To me Mid-World always seemed like a character itself. An ancient thing, being stretched thin, fighting to hold itself together and losing. High tech doesn't feel right there, like the extreme entropy would have rendered it all non-operative. There was some tech here and there in the books, but most of it was broken or breaking down.