search results matching tag: slow motion

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.003 seconds

    Videos (736)     Sift Talk (8)     Blogs (81)     Comments (897)   

SFOGuy (Member Profile)

Indoor Synchronized Skydiving - Prepare to be Blown Away

Speed Hitting: 100 Hits in 1 Second

noims says...

You mustn't have watched the whole thing. It was in slow motion. It was all right there. You could see it all happen.

I want to be him when I grow up.

lucky760 said:

He can't be serious.

There's no way he did all that stuff in 1 second.

I'm calling shenanigans.

Watchmen - Adapting The Unadaptable

Mordhaus says...

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie for what it was as well. Jackie Earle Haley was an amazing Rorschach and while the other characters weren't as strong, they did fit into the roles. However, it was not as powerful as the comic version and Snyder did fall into his slow motion 'moment' vs 'scene' trap. If you compare what Jackson did with the Lord of the Rings, Jackson had to trim some of the source material but he stayed true to the 'feeling' of the books. If you were a diehard fan of the books, you might not care for his interpretation, but he did give you the majority of the work. Snyder didn't really do the source material justice and while some of that may lay with the script, it still is his fault to a point.

He is a very bombastic director if given a mostly action based movie to work with. As soon as you take him out of that comfort zone, he tries to apply the same formula and that can kill movies that require a defter hand to work all of the nuances.

Jinx said:

I enjoyed the movie. I read the book first, but only because I saw the trailers and wanted to see the movie, but I was advised to go to the source first. Perhaps because it was all fresh to me etc, that when I saw Zac's "moment montage" I was able to fill in the gaps.

I guess it depends on your definition of adaption. I feel that implicit in adaption is transformation or evolution. The story is in the telling no? Can you cut the story out, leaving behind all context, and still call it "Watchmen"?

The homage to Batman's suit is perhaps not literally true to the source material, but I think in some ways it is kind of true to the spirit of it. Here's Watchman, the graphic novel, was playing with our preconceptions of what makes a superhero comic book. Perhaps Snyder's intention was to use motifs of superhero movies in the same way Watchmen used preconceptions of its medium. maybe.

Mordhaus (Member Profile)

Wasp interrupts slow mo selfie video

Wasp interrupts slow mo selfie video

Wasp interrupts slow mo selfie video

Jonathan Pie on Brexit

ChaosEngine says...

Well, Johnson was a puppet, shafted by the very people who put him in the position he found himself in. Gove seems to think he's Francis Urquhart/Underwood, but isn't actually that good at the game.

As for Farage, a race-baiting idiot who is so awful that you have to cover what he says just because it's a political car crash in slow motion..... hmmm, that reminds me of someone else... nope, can't put my finger on it. Maybe it's something to do with small hands?


Jinx said:

As for blame...hmm. Can't say I'm particularly sad to see Cameron go, but you do get a feeling of "better the devil you know" when you see the other contenders. This referendum would have been up for play at the next election regardless too. Boris and Gove were the greater opportunists by far. You want rash and reckless? Look no further - Power at any cost. I think the greatest blame is with the media. Not just the tabloids either, even the BBC gave disproportionate coverage to Farage - its the classic chicken-egg thing of them simultaneously wanting to cover what is popular whilst also having massive influence over what is popular.

Smarter Every Day - HOLDING AN EXPLOSION at 20,000 fps

Smarter Every Day - HOLDING AN EXPLOSION at 20,000 fps

Zawash (Member Profile)

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Retirement Plans

RedSky says...

Good point. I admit I'm mostly quoting The Economist's recent article on it, since I haven't compared them myself:

"Meanwhile, fees as a percentage of assets under management have dropped from 0.68% in 1983 to 0.12% today (see chart). This compares with an industry average of 0.61% (or 0.77%, when excluding Vanguard itself). Fees on its passive products, at 0.08% a year, are less than half the average for the industry of 0.18%. Its actively managed products are even more keenly priced, at 0.17% compared with an average of 0.78%."

http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21700401-vanguard-has-radically-changed-money-management-being-boring-and-cheap-index-we

Also: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21700390-rise-low-cost-managers-vanguard-should-be-celebrated-slow-motion-revolution

Totally agree with you on diversifying across index funds (as safe as fund managers are in theory compared to other financial institutions, I would never assume any financial company is 'safe') and of course staying under $250K FDIC insurance level.

heropsycho said:

In fairness, Vanguard funds are not almost always the lowest. I'd say they often are, but Fidelity beats them enough of the time that it's close between them.

With that said, I am in agreement with you that I would prefer Vanguard because of their ownership model. But as I accrue assets in my IRA's, I may open IRAs with Fidelity as well, as each of your retirement accounts' balances are ensured per account for up to $250,000. I would trust Fidelity as well, so I might diversify my index funds between fidelity and Vanguard for the insurance and other reasons.

newtboy (Member Profile)

Slow Motion Bicycle Race Crash



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