In reply to this comment by smibbo:
so far..... no (thank gahd)
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/oldboy/news/1648167/

Yeh, it says that in the comments already, that Justin Lim isn't involved anymore. But someone else might still do it...

I believe you But the tiny bits ive seen have given me the impression that its visual imagery will be great, and im looking forward to experiencing that in the context of the whole movie. if that makes sense.

In reply to this comment by smibbo:
trust me, this clip is not only NOT a spoiler in any way, it's almost a kind of lagniappe - a bit of "aw neat!" just to pull you into it. You won't alter your experience (maybe make it better?) by watching this clip. Other than introducing the planet Mercury, there's no dialogue either. It's just mercury floating by.

In reply to this comment by Thylan:
I want to see it enough to upvote and not watch, clip till i have.

lawl.

In reply to this comment by smibbo: Don't see a one of them being empathetic towards me and MY point. Odd that.... but enough ranting for one day!

LJ? I don't think so... not sure what the acronym stands for. This is the first web community I've ever really been a member of, so if it's web related, I'd say it's unlikely. Pleased to meet ya though!

In reply to this comment by smibbo:
I know you from LJ don't I?

Thank you for being the only other XX on here with a head on your shoulders. I'm going crazy reading everything.

Look, I never stated that ugly or non-beautiful people do not get any of these same negative treatments, or harrassments... nor did I associate however it is you think I perceive myself with the incidents I reported. I merely offered up my experiences with the matter as a confirmation that the things referred to (mostly the more serious issues mentioned by oxdottir and persephone in their blogs, the harrassment, objectification, etc) are, in fact, not fun.

I also do not think, even for a moment, that men do shitty disgusting things based solely on something I do or the way I look, nor have I ever condoned it, or rationalized their behavior as such... if you would actually read my comment below you would see that. I'm sorry your own outlook on things has prevented you from looking at this any other way, or that you think I'm trying to undermine your experiences with my own, but that was not my intent.

All I meant with that post was for people to stop assuming that the girl in the video was crying for absolutely no good reason, because, I think at least, that she was crying because she perhaps had had similar exposure to sexual harrasment, and I wanted to offer this up as a possibility (because really, having only seen that short clip, none of us can know what she was really crying about). And I would think that anyone who has dealt with sexual harrassment or objectification (pretty or not, or whatever) would agree not to jump to conclusions about her tears because the damage done is very real, very hard to discuss, and very worth crying about.


In reply to this comment by smibbo:
the sexual harrassment you describe happens to ugly women too. it is very insensitive to make the association between your good looks and degrading treatment by men; its NOT a "looks" thing, its a FEMALE thing. I guess i'll keep saying it and you and the other pretty women will keep devalueing my point. I guess its hard for yall to believe ugly women gt harrassed too? They do. Because degrading and devalueing a woman is something "man" does for power and intimidation, not because you're so damned hot he can't help himself. They do it because they are cowardly jackasses, not because you look so great, no matter what they tell you. You give them a kind of "excuse" when you believe they do it for your looks. Stop believing that please, stop giving them that kind of "out" and please stop devaluing other women's experiences by constantly saying that because you're beautiful you get assholes bothering you; all us women get those assholes.

In reply to this comment by raven:
I agree with Kate that it is wrong to assume that the girl in the video is crying over nothing, or she is doing so just because she is beautiful... granted, that bit was lumped together with the other pretty minor complaints by everyone else, but I would think that the mere fact that she is crying is probably indicative that whatever it was she experienced was indeed pretty terrible... because as she said, some comments just do not make you feel pretty, they make you feel objectified, and even dirty.

I'm not talking about the basic, "You're very pretty" kind of compliment, but the kind that borders on, or is, sexual harrassment... you can't know unless its happened to you how terribly frightening and disgusting it is to be trapped in a elevator with a man who can't help but stare lecherously at you, and then ventures to say (true story), "I'd like to fuck you if you let me" Out of the blue, just like that, its terrifying, does not make one feel pretty but rather dirty somehow, and yes, it does bring out tears. Or there are even sometimes worse incidents involving coworkers or fellow students, where the objectification is continuous and after a while it becomes more than tiresome but rather stressful to have them all keep track of what you wear everyday, whether or not it shows off anything, or have them (rather publicly) get a pool going to see which of them will get to fuck you first (not kidding, guys, who are seemingly otherwise professional sorts, do actually do this kind of shit), which makes you begin to hate yourself and not want to go into school or work everyday. I'm not suggesting that this does not happen to those who aren't considered "beautiful" (whatever that cultural construct might currently be), but its damaging, and I can completely relate to where that girl is probably coming from.

Not special sympathy. Just a little empathy, which you and the likes of 'ol Deedub seem incapable of. I don't want to keep this up with you, because I feel for you, in your current state, so let's just agree to disagree, hey?


In reply to this comment by smibbo:
it sounds very much like you are saying being attractive garners special sympathy because the attractive could be attacked and subjected to harm. But if someone is ugly, don't worry about it, they aren't subject to unwarrented attention? Ironic because saying that right there makes you seem completely beliving of the myth that sexual predation is based on looks. Which sounds rather narcissistic. Being subjected to sexual predation of any kind is horrible, I know, it's happened to me even though I'm ugly! surprise surprise. I have plenty of empathy and sympathy for the victims of sexual predation. But don't act like I should hold special sympathy for the beautiful because they might be subject to it.
In reply to this comment by persephone:
You could start to think a little deeply about this statment and ask yourself why life is hard for different people. Then you could try to put yourself in the shoes of women who have been attacked and appreciate that being attractive doesn't always bring good things, or nice attention. Then you will have come a long way in understanding what it means to be someone else. Or not.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
Life's hard. Being good looking isn't.

I commented on persephone's profile before I read this. You're much more eloquent than I.

I agree with you 100% on this one.

In reply to this comment by smibbo:
Not at all.... What I've been tryin to say (very badly I admit) is this:
It is one thing to say "negative attention, or even just TOO MUCH attention can be a negative experience no matter who you are"
it is quite another to say "I'm upset because I garner too much attention and it gets negative" unless you're a supermodel or rock star or something. Standing out in a crowd happens whether you're exceedingly pretty OR exceedingly ugly. Negative attention is a problem regardless of what you look like. This insistance that negative attention is such a problem for PRETTY PEOPLE is insulting to others who have the same problem but aren't pretty. It's like you're saying "well we have men stalking us because we're so damned beautiful" - um excuse me, but you have men stalking you because you're female. How do I know this? Because ugly women get stalked just as much.
Can you see how blindingly narcissistic this looks? To lay some special claim on harrassing behavior just because you're pretty? This is a feminist issue and I deplore it being devalued down to only being pertinant to the pretty ones. What happens when the next time some not-so-fortunate-looking female speaks up about her harrassing ex-boyfriend? Is it a far leap for others to disbelieve her claims because, after all, she's not that pretty... why would a guy stalk her?
No one likes harrassing and intimidating behavior. No one enjoys it. But many many women have it happen to them. To turn this into an issue about looks is devaluing.
By the same token, no one likes being objectified. And it happens quite frequently to UNpretty women too. To imply it's a difficulty only for the beautiful is demeaning and demoralizing and subverts the issues of power-play inherent in objectification.

In reply to this comment by persephone:
So it sounds like you're saying unattractive people deserve empathy and understanding, but attractive ones do not. Is that what you're saying? They've got it so good, they don't know up from down, so why should anyone listen to their story? By offering my experiences, I was trying to garner some empathy for the negative side to lots of male attention, especially to the inexperienced, naive and unprepared idiot that was me. You think it made me feel good about myself, to have guys do what they did? A little boost, or something?

It's somewhat reassuring to me that I'm not alone in having a chip on my shoulder about stuff. I'd say you have a decent sized one yourself, only different stuff, no?

So it sounds like you're saying unattractive people deserve empathy and understanding, but attractive ones do not. Is that what you're saying? They've got it so good, they don't know up from down, so why should anyone listen to their story? By offering my experiences, I was trying to garner some empathy for the negative side to lots of male attention, especially to the inexperienced, naive and unprepared idiot that was me. You think it made me feel good about myself, to have guys do what they did? A little boost, or something?

It's somewhat reassuring to me that I'm not alone in having a chip on my shoulder about stuff. I'd say you have a decent sized one yourself, only different stuff, no?

...and comments like this.

In reply to this comment by smibbo:
I swear its vids like this which glamorize drugs LOL

Your Mama!

In reply to this comment by smibbo:
That's a really juvenile response; I neither said that nor implied such. If you think accepting the "personal morals are not basis for societal laws" de facto brings "no laws at all" then you're thinking far too simplisticly to discuss politics or law.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
You're right. We should just let everyone do whatever they want. Laws are pointless.

Right. I get ya now. Valid point. So, what would have been better, to be crystal clear this is a video made of still images?

In reply to this comment by smibbo:
I understand what you are saying and its academic; average persons (especially less versed in science and more likely to be cynical of global warming claims) hear "satellite pictures" and think camera recording actual "as seen by the naked eye" images. By using a barely technical definition of "image" and "photograph" you subvert the suspension of disbelief and invite nit-picky criticism which undermine the base argument of global warming claims. That's all I am saying.

In reply to this comment by bamdrew:
Hey, so stumbled on your comments in reply to my comments, and I'll just stick one point in there...

This footage is very much a video composed of satellite images.

A still image is data. It is photons of a certain wavelength being recorded at a certain time from a certain location/direction. What they recorded with their satellite were images shot by a camera that records a specific spectrum of light, just not the spectrum we see. Each day of these pictures was pasted onto a model of a globe (with land masses, etc), and each of those globe-days were then played in sequence to show, in a meaningful way, what that camera had taken pictures of.

Its not simulated in the sense that there is added data based on calculations, the image is simulated in the sense that data from the images is pasted onto a model of a globe to illustrate the changes with respect to landmasses and everything (the satellite wasn't suspended out there and snapping only the video's angle). Its all 'data' exactly like the data recorded with a consumer digital camera (which is usually filtered and responsive to the electromagnetic spectrum between 380 and 800nm, whereas their camera captured microwaves with wavelengths somewhere around 1mm to 1cm). Nothing sinister going on here!


In reply to this comment by smibbo:
it is especially hurtful in respect to the whole global warming argument: show doubters footage like this while telling them it's "satellite video" will immediately lose points because it's clearly NOT a video. By being misleading you hurt the base supposition. Fence-sitters and the unconvinced will feel insulted and even MORE unconvinced. I too am astounded that people still want to deny global warming's dangers and it's things like this that make it harder to get people to open their eyes.

Hey, so stumbled on your comments in reply to my comments, and I'll just stick one point in there...

This footage is very much a video composed of satellite images.

A still image is data. It is photons of a certain wavelength being recorded at a certain time from a certain location/direction. What they recorded with their satellite were images shot by a camera that records a specific spectrum of light, just not the spectrum we see. Each day of these pictures was pasted onto a model of a globe (with land masses, etc), and each of those globe-days were then played in sequence to show, in a meaningful way, what that camera had taken pictures of.

Its not simulated in the sense that there is added data based on calculations, the image is simulated in the sense that data from the images is pasted onto a model of a globe to illustrate the changes with respect to landmasses and everything (the satellite wasn't suspended out there and snapping only the video's angle). Its all 'data' exactly like the data recorded with a consumer digital camera (which is usually filtered and responsive to the electromagnetic spectrum between 380 and 800nm, whereas their camera captured microwaves with wavelengths somewhere around 1mm to 1cm). Nothing sinister going on here!


In reply to this comment by smibbo:
it is especially hurtful in respect to the whole global warming argument: show doubters footage like this while telling them it's "satellite video" will immediately lose points because it's clearly NOT a video. By being misleading you hurt the base supposition. Fence-sitters and the unconvinced will feel insulted and even MORE unconvinced. I too am astounded that people still want to deny global warming's dangers and it's things like this that make it harder to get people to open their eyes.

In reply to this comment by smibbo:
downvote not just for title but for insisting the stupid title stays and having a LAME excuse. If it was hysterically funny or something, I would overlook it but it isn't worth keeping if you're going to be that way about it.

Thanks for pointing out that I can change the video title after posting, I'm still adjusting to the new platform. I have no problem acquiescing here, because the title wasn't mine to begin with!

thyme and nutmeg ! how could i have overlooked it ! thank you SO much !!!
In reply to this comment by smibbo:
I would try one or two of the following:

thyme
nutmeg
shallots
leeks