Are you fucking kidding me, @bremnet & @Chaucer?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/harp
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/harp
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harp
http://www.websters-dictionary-online.org/definitions/harp

It's also called a harp.
Get over it, and/or fuck off!

Also, why am I defending the title of the YouTube video?

>> ^seltar:
Wikipedia - The harmonica, also called harp....
>> ^Chaucer:
Those are called harmonica's. A Harp is a stringed instrument that is quite large.

Thank you
In reply to this comment by Deano:
*quality

>> ^seltar:

Wikipedia - The harmonica, also called harp....
>> ^Chaucer:
Those are called harmonica's. A Harp is a stringed instrument that is quite large.



Someones trying to be esoteric and exclusionist.

Wikipedia - The harmonica, also called harp....
>> ^Chaucer:

Those are called harmonica's. A Harp is a stringed instrument that is quite large.

Those are called harmonica's. A Harp is a stringed instrument that is quite large.

http://www.harptwins.com
I'm sorry, but they're hot. Pretty nice with all the harp crap, but we all know why they are selling.

>> ^spoco2:

>> ^criticalthud:
>> ^spoco2:
Well they're depressive individuals.
Really, what was the point of that? I got bored with it I'm afraid as it was harping on its same point 'people in power are bad' over and over... quite tedious.
And yup, when you browse their gallery of shots from the movie with their wanky descriptions of them, it only further enforces what a load of largely pointless dribble this is.
Quite pretty, nicely animated, to be sure, but what is the POINT?

i think the point a lot of art is to open the door to your interpretation.

Hmm, not really here. They're pretty fricken blatent with their symbolism. Problem is, they just keep on with the symbolism for 7 minutes after they've made the point. And there's no story to interest over the top of it, it's just a bunch of symbolism, and that's it... doesn't make for interesting viewing. Show the 'evil' government and 'evil' society and 'evil' religion and then show how to rise against it, or rise above it, or protect yourself from it... OR SOMETHING.
But all this does is go
"Hey, the government is crap"
"So's religion"
"Society as a whole sucks arse and is over sexualised"
...
...
"Nope, that's it, I've got nothing else, just thought I'd say that"
That's such shallow rubbish. You could either show some way to combat the crap, OR, maybe show the deeper root cause of these things, show the simple core problem that feeds those things, and so maybe offer a way to combat them that way.
All this does is say 'We're really depressed about shit'
Art that leaves it up to your interpretation can actually be taken a number of ways... this not so much.


thanks for sharing your critique

>> ^criticalthud:

>> ^spoco2:
Well they're depressive individuals.
Really, what was the point of that? I got bored with it I'm afraid as it was harping on its same point 'people in power are bad' over and over... quite tedious.
And yup, when you browse their gallery of shots from the movie with their wanky descriptions of them, it only further enforces what a load of largely pointless dribble this is.
Quite pretty, nicely animated, to be sure, but what is the POINT?

i think the point a lot of art is to open the door to your interpretation.


Hmm, not really here. They're pretty fricken blatent with their symbolism. Problem is, they just keep on with the symbolism for 7 minutes after they've made the point. And there's no story to interest over the top of it, it's just a bunch of symbolism, and that's it... doesn't make for interesting viewing. Show the 'evil' government and 'evil' society and 'evil' religion and then show how to rise against it, or rise above it, or protect yourself from it... OR SOMETHING.

But all this does is go
"Hey, the government is crap"
"So's religion"
"Society as a whole sucks arse and is over sexualised"

...
...

"Nope, that's it, I've got nothing else, just thought I'd say that"

That's such shallow rubbish. You could either show some way to combat the crap, OR, maybe show the deeper root cause of these things, show the simple core problem that feeds those things, and so maybe offer a way to combat them that way.

All this does is say 'We're really depressed about shit'

Art that leaves it up to your interpretation can actually be taken a number of ways... this not so much.

>> ^spoco2:

Well they're depressive individuals.
Really, what was the point of that? I got bored with it I'm afraid as it was harping on its same point 'people in power are bad' over and over... quite tedious.
And yup, when you browse their gallery of shots from the movie with their wanky descriptions of them, it only further enforces what a load of largely pointless dribble this is.
Quite pretty, nicely animated, to be sure, but what is the POINT?


i think the point a lot of art is to open the door to your interpretation.

>> ^spoco2:

Well they're depressive individuals.
Really, what was the point of that? I got bored with it I'm afraid as it was harping on its same point 'people in power are bad' over and over... quite tedious.
And yup, when you browse their gallery of shots from the movie with their wanky descriptions of them, it only further enforces what a load of largely pointless dribble this is.
Quite pretty, nicely animated, to be sure, but what is the POINT?


I totally agree but I found the animation to be more than pretty. Great expression, motion and mood. I watched it over and over for the presentation, but not so much for the meaning - which as you say is a bit overdone. The quality of the animation is top notch - in the realm of excellence.

Well they're depressive individuals.

Really, what was the point of that? I got bored with it I'm afraid as it was harping on its same point 'people in power are bad' over and over... quite tedious.

And yup, when you browse their gallery of shots from the movie with their wanky descriptions of them, it only further enforces what a load of largely pointless dribble this is.

Quite pretty, nicely animated, to be sure, but what is the POINT?

>> ^vaire2ube:

The War on Drugs is a War on People... or quite literally, a War on Freedom.
Who else hates our freedom as much as the DEA?? Ask Daniel Chong... Bin Laden has nothing on what the DEA did to him.


I agree, but let me devils advocate for a second. Everyone has heard of sin taxes, extra taxes placed on things like cigarettes to discourage their use. These things fly in the face of freedom as well, they just don't send you to jail, just the poor house. The scary part about sin taxes isn't the tax itself, even though it is bad, but it is the justification it then grants the government in the matters of regulating what you consume. There is the FDA on the other side of that argument as well. Lets say Mary Jane gets legalized, you can bet your ass the stuff you grown in your back yard STILL isn't going to be legal. You are going to need some kind of licence, some sort of standardized testing procedure to make sure you aren't poisoning yourself...ect ect.

My point is, harping on the drug war is fine, and it is right to do so. But there are SO many different agencies and areas the government tells us what do and what not to do. IN that, the drug war is just an extension of those things. If you still want the FDA by the logic, that the drug war is a war on people, I don't think it will stand the test. Instead, you have to take a MUCH less ideological position of "more people want to do it than don't, so it is the exception in regulator matters". That is the problem you get into when you start trying to make everyone safe...there isn't such an actual idea as safe. Safe is a completely subjective idea...some people feel safe skydiving...fuck that noise.

As a crazy libertarian, I am fine with most government agencies shutting down. To that end, I do think life wouldn't change to much. The entities in the government evolved from our desire for them to exist. They would all most likely come to be in the private sector as well, a consumer reports of food, ect. And with places like the sift and redit, I do think the second age of the information age is going to place a LOT of pressure on governments and challenge their ability to deal with challenges. The internet might unlock a democratic meritocracy in certain instances, and for that I am very hopeful. </rant>

Caution: Spoilers galore.

I found the House of the Undying scene to have a fittingly creepy mood, even though it was changed a lot. The scene with Drogo seemed to me to be stolen directly from the Accepted tests that Aes Sedai novices go through in The Wheel of Time, but it was a powerful scene nonetheless. I think they missed an opportunity when Dany exited north of the wall to show her a glimpse of the dangers coming from the north. What I missed most compared to the book was the vision Dany has of Rhaegar playing the harp and talking to some woman about his son, which is an important scene for a certain popular fan theory.

What annoyed me most in this season was how the story of Jon Snow and Qhorin Halfhand played out. You didn't really get to see how Qhorin became an important mentor to Jon Snow. Even worse: It was not pointed out clear enough that Qhorin practically ordered Jon to kill him in order to be able to infiltrate the wildlings. Instead it looked like Jon just killed him out of self-defense.

But there were more things I liked than disliked. Theon's battle speech scene was hilarious, and they pulled off Jaqen's face-changing really well. I also liked Luwin's demise; it shocked me how he was just stabbed out of hand, even though I knew he would die. I fear it might be a bit cryptic to non-book readers why Winterfell was suddenly burned down, though. There was also some brilliant acting from Sophie Turner as Sansa when she learns she doesn't have to marry Joffrey after all.

All in all, I liked most of the changes in this season. Some of them even made the story better than in the book, at least for the TV medium.