wow, it's NOT directed by Michael Bay!
maybe they replaced the explosion budget with decent writing?

The short film upon which this is based is *related=https://videosift.com/video/Prospect-The-Best-Low-Budget-SciFi-Shortfilm-Ive-Seen

Prospect - The Best Low Budget SciFi Shortfilm I've Seen has been added as a related post - related requested by RFlagg.

It's so disheartening to see how relatively cheap it would be to put a base on the moon but countries like the US and China would rather spend 5-10x that amount on their defense budgets. The US alone could fully fund a moon base project by reducing their defense budget by 5-10% and that money could probably even be found simply by eliminating all the mismanagement, misappropriation, and waste that occurs with military spending.

I find it interesting that you capitalize that word. I might say I tend to hold liberal policy positions, but I wouldn't use Liberal in the manner you used Conservative. Little "c" conservative isn't a party, it's supposed to describe a general approach to policy, and historically was associated with Republicans and specific policy positions. They were for states' rights, balanced budget / reducing debt, personal property rights, fair trade, etc. The current Republican party has abandoned all of this, but its members still refer to themselves as "conservatives" somehow. Maybe that capitalization is what I had been missing - they're Conservatives now, not conservatives. They can define that proper noun form of the word in whatever way they want.

Let's reverse the budgets of the DoD and the DoE -- let the generals hold a bake sale to buy another B1 bomber.

Seems like there is a little too much impossible camera work going on. I suppose you could argue that's an artistic choice, and maybe the nature of trailers exaggerates it, but I definitely agree with the impression that it's got that video-gamy, early 2000's CGI vibe to it.

And bug eyes is definitely just creepy. The anime thing doesn't work on this side of the uncanny valley.

All the same... big-budget action, sci-fi kung-fu fighting future-cyborgs... meh, I'll see it more or less by default.

Apparently, they were really clever with their budget. The unnerving tracked camera was achieved by simple strapping an iphone to the actor and digitally tracking its location.

What would you recommend for an alternative here? There are inevitably going to be seniors who don't have family available to help them, and who reach a point where they're unable to care for themselves. I can only think of four options at that point:
1) Hope there's a local charity that is willing to take care of them, has adequate funding to do so, and isn't abusive. If this is unregulated there's a high likelihood of abuse occurring, and if it is regulated then you have government involved, which appears to be something you'd oppose. There's also the issue of unequal access - if it's charitable then it's inherently not mandated, so it's nearly certain some people will not have any such charity in their area (see #3).
2) Somehow have private, non-charitable entities handle it? I've no idea how this would work, as any non-charity is pretty much by definition motivated by profit, and a profit motive plus caring for the elderly is certain to lead to abuse (perhaps not in all cases, but I'd expect it to be quite common).
3) Nothing / good luck, oldies.
4) Government intercession.

In this case, a safety net facilitated by the government strikes me as the best of the available options. The problems highlighted in the video seem likely to stem from insufficient oversight and planning. I'd wager that's due to lack of funding, as this is exactly the sort of program which would be seen as a low-risk target when budget cuts come around, at least from an electoral perspective. After all, if the people impacted by this are those who don't already have people in their life who care for and can advocate for them, and being put under guardianship removes their voting rights, then where's the harm to a politician in reducing the funding?

It seems to me that a well-funded guardianship program, with proper oversight in place, would have the best chance of minimizing the suffering of elderly individuals who can no longer care for themselves. I can understand the libertarian preference for minimal governmental interference in the lives of the public, but this strikes me as a case where that simply doesn't work. If you can think of a viable option #5, or can make a case for 1, 2, or 3 being legitimately more helpful than a well-run option #4 (which is clearly NOT what's discussed in the video), I'm absolutely open to considering it. At the same time, implementing #4 in a way which doesn't leave it vulnerable to budgetary volatility is also a not-insignificant challenge.

Damn, I'm procrastinating really well tonight. That was long.

Jesus, Bob, you can't be that dumb....you....just...can't. You repeat debunked conspiracy theories on a video about mentally challenged republican conspiracy theorists?! Why not go on to complain about the illegal alien voters and the fish people infiltrating the intelligence communities too?

Spy-a person who secretly collects and reports information on the activities, movements, and plans of an enemy or competitor.
Informant-a person who shares information.

The details gathered from informants were given to Republicans last week, and they left the meeting supporting the Muller investigation, a turn around from before the meeting, but all those republicans must now be liberal Trump haters just lying, right? *facepalm

Plenty of Trump/Russia related information is already public, just not undeniable proof of pure DJT collusion.....yet. (There is enough to prove he is either involved or a brain dead slug of a leader, as only a brain dead slug could possibly not notice every person on the campaign talking and doing business with Russia) Hide and wait.
The Clinton/Whitewater investigation lasted 5+ years and found nothing improper in the deal, you can start whining again in 4 years that it's taking too long to prove his crimes, but absolutely not before.
No one (except the Russians) spied on Trump, but we absolutely should have considering the international ties every person in his campaign had with our enemies that they consistently lied about/hid.
Stop lying, and stop repeating orange Kanye's obvious lies. Asking his people questions is, in no way whatsoever, spying or embedding spies....just didn't happen.
The Fed's DID spy on Clinton, and found no crimes. Odd you aren't outraged by that clear spying on a candidate.....oh wait, you are outraged that they didn't go farther with her.

Conservatives are getting fed up because they can't admit they elected a consummate con man who has destroyed our international standings, our ability to negotiate, the budget, the debt, and civility, and having it shoved in your face makes you mad. You're fed up because he does at least one unpresidential thing daily and it's reported/tweeted.

After >8 years of insane (Kenyan Muslim), ridiculous (pizza gate), non stop (still going on) Obama bashing, you must be incredibly embarrassed that your team can't take 1/4 of what they dish out. Sad little snowflakes.

Beware going to the polls unless you want to be turned gay....and heads up, mail in ballots are impregnated with a virus that turns you into a Muslim.

Simply not true. Will you get some directors using cookie cutter sound templates? Of course... bad ones. Hell, Bay reuses entire shots in his movies (often in the same damn franchise).

But good filmmakers will hire good sound designers and they will create good sound with what they have available.

Computers are a tool, nothing more. Digital sound is no different to digital imagery... people say they hate it, but they only hate BAD examples of it.

Can foley survive? Short term, maybe; long term, unlikely.

Fundamentally, it'll come down to the same question as any other technique in any commercial artform... cost vs quality. If foley remains the best way to get a sound, you will find people willing to pay for it. As digital sound creation gets better and better, there WILL come a point where no-one can tell the difference.

If you don't believe me look at guitar amplifiers. For decades, guitarists have preferred old vacuum tubes (known as valves) to generate the sound they want in a guitar amp. Digital (commonly referred to as solid state) amps are cheaper and generally pretty crap.

But these days, even people who love valve amps (and I include myself in that) have to admit that it's almost impossible to tell the difference between a genuine valve amp and a good computer model of the same (side note for guitar techy people... I know modelling != solid state).

And that's not just in playback, it's in live performance too. A kemper or an AxeFX FEELS like a valve amp, and you can vary the settings like a valve amp.

I believe that foley will ultimately go the same way. People like Wes Anderson will continue to use it, but for most filmmakers on a budget, they'll go with the sound creation software.

I'm glad they went this route.

There's a certain attitude that says that only cute, indie games about children with big heads lost in a scary world can be art (shamelessly stole that from Zero Punctuation), but big-budget action games are disposable nonsense.

And there certainly ARE plenty of good, clever, indie games and insanely dumb, tone-deaf, "press f to pay respects" AAA games.

But you can have violence be a part of your story and still be a good story. Hell, your story can be about violence and what it does to you. Spec Ops: The Line is a great example of this.

It's disingenuous to say that video games are nothing but sadistic murder simulators, but it would be equally disingenuous to pretend they're all sweetness and light.

The first God of War is as brutal and sadistic as they come and it's a great game. "Hatred" sets out to be the most brutal and sadistic game ever but it's terrible.

Exec #1: Don't forget, we need to please the SJW and PC crowd... Let's make Smith a chick. Who can we get on a budget?

Exec #2: Hmm, Parker Posey?

Exec #1: Brilliant!

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.