I suspected this was a viral ad, setup by Bud. Otherwise called 'fake' by some people.

It is mostly the position of the debris field of cans and boxes that does it for me. Going way past the bridge.

But I just read a news article about it provided by the youtube link.


http://projects.daytondailynews.com/cache/galleries/News/Local/062809beertruckweb/

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/semi-dumps-beer-cans-boxes-on-highway-180907.html?showComments=true

LOL HAHAHHA I can't stop laughing at this!

This thing was made by two people with a budget of $500. In light of all the awesome things in it, anyone that complains about the acting overwhelming all of its achievements is a poser. And it certainly didn't stop Hollywood from kicking down their doors. There is shit acting in movies all the time. Half of it was the poor audio dubbing. I read an article about these guys getting repped at C.A.A. (biggest agency in the world) by the same guy that reps Christopher Nolan. They also got repped by Anonymous Content one of the most respected commercial production companies in the world. David Fincher, Ang Lee, Joseph Kosinski, Alfonso Cuarón, all make commercials there.

"This is what home owners need. This is what consumers need. We need more cowbell too."

This isn't a 4th trailer. This is just the previous trailers and the viral videos edited together. You can hear the music repeating itself a number of times when the person editing it needed some music.

Also it has official stills from the movie at the beginning. That wouldn't be in a trailer.

I always laugh at people that can't tell the difference between shaky cam and handheld.

I love handheld in films. It creates a sense of reality and immersion that I think is great. Children of Men is a great example. Saving Private Ryan overall as well. Well composed shots that are simply handheld. Many films have had handheld shots over the years. Alien part 1 had a good number of handheld shots in it. Aliens as well. A bazzilion other films.

This is different from shaky zoomy crazyness. Paul Greengrass and others do tend to use a lot of long lens shakyness that can be a tad overboard. Michael Bay transformers action as well.

No one seems to understand this now though. Everyone jumps on the "i hate shakycam" wagon the moment they see a handheld shot. I don't want handheld to go away.

She definitely has the 'im so hot, everyone wants me vibe.' Which is a serious turn off to me. I like actresses to have some skill with their hotness, and don't come off as little highschool popularity seekers. Her main goal in Hollywood seems to be to further objectify herself and ride it all that way. She doesn't have the acting chops that Angelina Jolie had at her age, so I guess she is being a keen business thinker in the 'best way to make money out of this' kind of way. I find she veers too close to porn star for my taste. Sure it's 'hot' kinda, but comes with as dose of stupid.

I find her mostly hype. Her career will probably be short lived. Maybe as long as Jessica Alba's which is now coming to an end.

>> ^Raaagh:
>> ^yourhydra:
its STUPID BITCHES like these who give girl everywhere a bad rep.

You and the people who upvoted this comment are fucking lacking.


Why? Because you're a fucking idiot? These brats and girls like them DO give normal woman a bad rep. I suppose that is not bloody obvious to you. Unless of course you just hate woman and assume ALL girls are like that. I'm a guy, and I can't stand pieces of SHIT who don't have a clue/ a hope with girls, and think that all girls are the dumb vacant fuck ups you find at clubs. Now I'm assuming a lot from your comment, heck you could be a girl yourself, but WTF.

You could also be commenting on the 'its' and the 'girl'. Yes state that people are 'lacking' over typos or not noticing them? Make you feel good? Yeah you fucking rock don't you? Go fuck yourself.

: | x2

i love this cat! i like the way his head moves at the end, ahahah

>> ^arvana:
The title is not saying anything against Russians, blondes, or women.  It just happens that the subject of this video is all of those things.
>> ^yourhydra:
maybe the apparently smart and capable MEN should have taught her to use the gun before giving it to her?




No, yourhydra is correct. She has not been trained properly and those guys were fucking idiots. The title is 'Duck!! it's a russian blonde'. Implying everything that comes with idiotic dumb blonde jokes. So yeah of course that is what the video is about, that is obvious. But it still suggests stupidity on her part when it's the dumbasses who brought her there and gave an untrained civilian a ak47 who are to blame.

>> ^gwiz665:
The illusion of intelligence does not confirm it.
People tend to anthropomorphize their pets, but that does not make them "people".



Your ability to type about intelligence do not confirm you have any. Yourhydra never states that animals are "people" nor that they are equal in their behaviors, and emotions. You even invoke religion which has nothing to do with this subject, and is not a very good analogy since religious fundamentalists are usually the people most opposed to the idea of animals having emotions. And unlike religious fantasy gods and stories, animals DO exist and interact with people. Observations can be made, and scientific method used in studies of the subject.

We are nothing but animals, we have emotions. If we all die another species may evolve and take over the Earth. But I guess they might not have emotions since that is a 'humans only' thing. I roll my eyes.

I've had two cats, and two dogs. I'm not a pet psycho/living with a million animals, nor I am one of those pet owners who attributes human like motives behind their pets everyday actions. I view house pets as wonderful less evolved additions to a family that can help warm up a house, offer company, and provide a creature to love. I don't view them as people replacements. But I think anyone who argues that animals cannot have emotions of any kind, not even less evolved basic emotional reactions, are arrogant, extremist, buffoons. Their emotional reactions and ability to understand their situations may not be as advanced as ours, but they exist.

Recent studies have shown that basic morality exist in some animals. Animals feeling unjustly treated, behaving angrily when other animals in a group receive treats and they do not. WTF would it do that for if it was biological robot? Since that is what people who argue against emotions are essentially saying animals are in the end. Why would it get 'angry' or create an illusion for the outside world to see so they can perceive it as 'angry'? Our morals and emotions most likely started out this way as well. Basic and simple.

No one can prove that others humans aside from themselves truly have sentience, but they'd be a damned idiot if you seriously tried to. This is the same thing in my mind.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article5733638.ece

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/science/20moral.html?_r=1

http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/NewsCentre/67668.htm