1,601

(219 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Jeffery Harrell wrote:

Can martial arts be art? I think any martial art that's "art" would as accurately be called "dance."

Then you possess an incredibly limited and antiquated notion of what Martial Arts actually are.

I know practically nothing of taxidermy, but I know enough to know that I don't know enough about it to make a value judgement one way or another.

1,602

(219 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Wow, Teague....you have all the answers.

I love how Martial ARTS can't be art.

1,603

(219 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I'm gonna walk back my previous statement on intention.  I think what I was trying to articulate was desired intention.  I think so much of art has been a result of unintended consequences that it does affect the scope of debate.

1,604

(219 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I think both sides of this argument need to spend some more time deliberating with themselves of the concept of art versus intrinsic value.  For many, art is value.  I take the stance that since value is subjective to begin with, then therefore the definition of art is subjective.  If its subjective, then video games are art.  So is the Mona Lisa, so is the Jonas Brothers 3D, so was Jake Shears form the Scissor Sisters wrapping himself in a trash bag on stage and reinacting an abortion taking place from the fetus' point of view.  I strongly prefer some to others, but I recognize that all are art.

1,605

(219 replies, posted in Off Topic)

DorkmanScott wrote:
Astroninja Studios wrote:

I dunno...this whole deliberate thing is a hang up for me.  I believe a lot of great art is accidental.  To me its the end result that matters, not the intention.  Vasquez Rocks is a work of art to me, and that is in no way deliberate.

Oh, now this I can't agree with.

I don't see art in nature. I see tremendous beauty and awe in nature. But though I'm still struggling with the best way to articulate what "art" is, I would say that I think art does require intention. It does need to be the conscious creation of a conscious agent. It is artificial.

Otherwise the word "art" goes beyond having a nebulous meaning, and becomes a word with none at all, because it refers potentially to everything. (Quite a lot like the word "God," as Brian has pointed out.)

Maybe nature is a bad example.  But I do firmly believe that intention of the art we try to create is not always the art we end up with, but its no less art.  So much of art is happy accidents.

1,606

(219 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I dunno...this whole deliberate thing is a hang up for me.  I believe a lot of great art is accidental.  To me its the end result that matters, not the intention.  Vasquez Rocks is a work of art to me, and that is in no way deliberate.

1,607

(219 replies, posted in Off Topic)

BrianFinifter wrote:

Well, without a clear definition, the rest of the conversation is a complete waste of time.

Like I said, art is probably the most problematically defined word of all time and the questions of "what is and isn't art" and "is this or is this not art" are all about the ramifications of the definition you choose.

To beg the question without the definition is just useless.

Agreed.  So if we're all smart enough to recognize that the we cannot categorically say what art definitely IS, then we should not be so quick to say what art definitely ISN'T.  If Games don't feel like art, they don't have to be.  But don't say I cannot believe that. 

I think Art can appear in any medium, at any time, wether on purpose or not.  Someone mentioned the mugger's scenario as being absent of art because the intent is to survive.  I disagree.  It can be art PRECISELY because of that.  That specific moment in time, the muggers, that person defending, all meet in congruence to create the art of that moment.

If the literal definition of art is  "any deliberate application of skill and imagination to create something which is meant to be evaluated primarily on aesthetic terms," then how do you account for people with severe autism, like Stephen Wiltshere who can draw New York City skylines from MEMORY to exact detail.  He did this because he had no other way to communicate.  The application is not intentional and not done to be judged primarily on aesthetic purposes.  Is it any less art?

Or Christy Brown, the subject of My Left Foot?  Is his stuff any LESS artistic?  This is what happens when you try to take something so subjective and define it so clearly.

1,608

(219 replies, posted in Off Topic)

TrowaGP02a wrote:

If a hundred artists create art for FIVE YEARS, how can the result not be art?

^This.

And for the record, I have a deep respect for Ebert and have for a long time.  I often disagree with him, but the man loves film like few others and has done a lot of good not only for film criticism but film preservation and advocacy.  His opinion on this and Kick Ass infuriate me to no end, but he still has my respect.

1,609

(2,061 replies, posted in Episodes)

TrowaGP02a wrote:

I think if you're gonna do a singular movie it's gotta be something foreign, getta little spice in there.

The Host, Ping-Pong, Crouching Tiger, Run Lola Run, The Bicycle Thief (kidding)

I know Ive mentioned it, but Dorkman and I want to do a Crouching Tiger/Karate Kid double feature next time I sit in for someone other than Dorkman (its sad that the anniversary show was the first time I had DiF'd with Mr. Scott).

1,610

(2,061 replies, posted in Episodes)

Real Genius is a favorite of mine, as is Big Trouble

1,611

(219 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I cast a fairly wide net in defining art, and am an avid gamer, so I have no problem saying games are art.  In fact, they are art on a couple levels.

Making a game, is definitely an artistic process.  The creators are designing a very literal journey to take a person on, and through mob encounters, level design, and progression of story they are manipulating the players (or, patrons) emotions and feelings, like any good art should do.

The other aspect to this is the art the player creates through playing the game.  If you're like me and consider things like athleticism to be art, then you can understand this.  For instance, I don't have to know much about Basketball to understand that Magic Johnsons no look pass was an artistic expression.  You don't have to be a fighter (but it helps) to watch Genki Sudo fight and recognize that he is a performance artist while fighting.  In this sense, any kind of performance can be interpreted as art.  So when I see a kid making amazing combos in Street Fighter 4, or someone do a brilliant timed run in Left 4 Dead 2, that is an art unto itself.

1,612

(2,061 replies, posted in Episodes)

I've said it before and Ill say it now.  I want a "Noir Month" and Chinatown needs to be a part of this.

1,613

(208 replies, posted in Episodes)

Jeff, I'm not saying its the cleanest of story points, Im just saying its the least offensive.  I love the film too, in spite of its many flaws.  There's tons of fuzziness abound.  But on the whole I enjoyed the movie a great bit.  But the Pike thing didnt irk me in the same way.  Nothing more, nothing less.

1,614

(208 replies, posted in Episodes)

My broader point is that Star Trek fandom by and large tends to have rose colored glasses when it comes to its own logic. 

Trey is largely right about Battlefield comissions.  They are far more common than one would think.  Keep in mind, Kirk was promoted to acting Commander by Cpt. Pike himself, BECAUSE he was the only one who figured out the signal.  The same Cpt Pike who pulled his record and saw a near genius IQ in Kirk, and after Kirk fulfilled his goal to finish SF Academy in 3 years, vs 4.

Looking at the weight of ALL of these things, I too, if I were in Pike's position, place an exceptionally talented graduate as the #2 in charge while Im away, under the leadership of an even more intelligent and seasoned Officer (Spock, in this case)

Point being, they're are plenty of logic gaps to rightly criticize, (the black hole thing is laughable to me) but that is the least of my issues.

1,615

(208 replies, posted in Episodes)

DorkmanScott wrote:
Astroninja Studios wrote:

*slowly raises hand*

I seem to recall a certain 17 year old in TNG get promoted from the rank of ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to ACTING ENSIGN, and have a semi permanent bridge position solely on the fact that his Dad was dead. 

In my opinion, there's a precedent for Starfleet hasty promotions, so this did not bother me at all.

I don't know much about Trek, but I'm fairly certain that invoking Wesley Crusher is not the way to resolve an argument.

Which is kinda my point.  Wesley Crusher throws everything out the window.  Keep in mind we're talking about a gosh golly gee-whiz youngster who ends up becoming an insufferable asshole, and then eventually a SPACE DEMI-GOD. 

...and people want to complain about Kirk being promoted to captain destroys the sanctity of Trek?

1,616

(21 replies, posted in Off Topic)

How is it that the religion thread is more civil and even tempered than the Star Trek thread?

......


Actually, it's not that surprising.  Never mind.

1,617

(21 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I'm not big on labels, but you would not be wrong if you labeled me as a Soto Zen Buddhist.

While I could go on and on about why I practice Buddhism (which in my mind isn't a religion, but whatever) I'll sum up the differences between that and most religions as a contrast between faith and doubt.

I was raised Protestant, and minored in religion in college.  In my life and in my studies the common denominator in the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition is the concept of reward for faith.  Have faith in God an his chosen messenger (Moses, Jesus, Mohammed) and you will be rewarded.

What I find interesting about Zen in particular and Buddhism in general is that its not based in faith, but in doubt.  The whole point of our Zazen practice is to question, literally, everything.  Question authority, question society, question our community, our very understanding of the world around us.  But more important than any of that...question yourself.  Hold yourself accountable, don't let yourself off the hook.  This is especially hard since our own internal psychological defenses enable quite a bit of self delusion to protect our ego.  Through Zen we question that, and in doing so, aim to destroy this fallacy we have come to understand as, "self."  If this sounds a bit like Tyler Durden's, "You are not a precious snowflake routine," that's because Palahniuk basically took a lot of Zen and formed that character around it (the ritual of leaving the space monkeys at the doorstep and berating them for two days straight before letting them in the house is straight out of a Rinzai Zen ritual for accepting new monks.  I've literally seen it happen).

The Gautama Buddha's dying words to his students were, "Be a lantern unto thyself."  He understood that everything needs to be questioned, even himself.  This appeals to me.  Anything or person that says, "THis is the definitive answer!" tends to set off BS alarms in my mind, and the fact that Zen doesn't claim to KNOW anything definitively feels honest to me.  Zen practice is less about discovering the truth, then pursuing it.

So yeah, while most religion rewards blind faith, Zen rewards contemplative doubt.

1,618

(208 replies, posted in Episodes)

*slowly raises hand*

I seem to recall a certain 17 year old in TNG get promoted from the rank of ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to ACTING ENSIGN, and have a semi permanent bridge position solely on the fact that his Dad was dead. 

In my opinion, there's a precedent for Starfleet hasty promotions, so this did not bother me at all.

1,619

(2,061 replies, posted in Episodes)

The second trade paperback of Preacher, called, "Till the End of the World," is in the same league with Alan Moore or Frank Miller.

1,620

(2,061 replies, posted in Episodes)

Preacher was a huge influence on my writing, and I own the entire run.  Trey, I was one of the people who have recommended not only Preacher, but anything Garth Ennis writes.

Kyle, I never said I wasn't into westerns, I said I wasn't into SPAGHETTI westerns, and there is a difference.  I love me some Peckinpah, though.  I want my Cowboys caked in blood, whisky, and Tuberulosis, which is how Peckinpah made them.

1,621

(2,061 replies, posted in Episodes)

It is?  Huh.  Still never saw it and it was never a comic book I was ever into.

1,622

(208 replies, posted in Episodes)

BrianFinifter wrote:

If you look carefully, you will see that nowhere have I made the argument that this "isn't Star Trek."

Maybe not in this thread Brian, but I do remember watching the DVD at the labs with you and specifically remember hearing you say at one point, "This isn't Star Trek."

So while you didn't say it here, I feel this is at the heart of your critique and it comes through wether you intend it to or not.

1,623

(68 replies, posted in Episodes)

I like Randy Savage.  His WM3 with Ricky Steamboat is one of my top 5 Pro Wrestling matches ever.  Nice to meet you to.

1,624

(208 replies, posted in Episodes)

I understand Brian's logic...to a point.  I am in no way going to engage anyone on the science of original Trek to JJ Trek because its pointless and I frankly don't give a shit.  More broadly, I would just say, look at the name.

Star TREK.  The emphasis was always on the TREK to me, not the Star.  At the end of the day what worked for me about TOS and TNG was the characters as they both TREK through space and TREK on their own path in life.  I feel JJ got that very well with the primary three characters of Kirk, Spock and Bones.  Yes, TOS tackled a lot of bold social issues and brought science to the forefront of a weekly television show.  That's awesome.  But it's not the reason I loved Trek before and its not thereason I love it now.  I love the characters, I love their journeys.  I love the sense of exploration and adventure. 

Were there a few clunky plot devices?  Sure.  But like a lot of movies, I'm willing to move beyond that if the film as a whole works for me, and this one does.  I would go on to say that JJ understands whats great about Trek better than anyone since Ronald Moore, and certainly better than it had been handled in the last 10 years or so.

1,625

(68 replies, posted in Episodes)

Kyle wrote:

Here's another point.  Just because you have insight into a project or genre or something doesn't mean you're a good Down In Fronter.

Eddie is a great example.  If DIF ever does the Karate Kid or Drunken Master or some shit I want Eddie there.  He has all the awesome kung fu insight be he's also very entertaining.  He fits the DIF mold- you listen to Eddie talk for two hours and he's immediately a new friend in your head. 

Trey's Abyss commentary wasn't awesome because he worked on the Abyss, it was awesome because he worked on the Abyss and he's a hilarious asshole.  I love you Trey, you know what I mean.

There's a certain amount of charisma required to DIF, and the core four have it in spades- as does Eddie, as does Ryan.  If you have someone with personal insight who fits in well with the team and brings more to the table than raw factoids about the project I could find with a little research, by all means bring them.  If you do The Wrestler without me I'll kill all of you.  But just be a little selective about who you let on the air, because I DIF for friends in my head, not to find out the dirty secrets of the Best Boy on Legally Blonde 3.

Wow, man.  Mighty kind of you.

And yes...Dorkman and I have long discussed doing Karate Kid and Crouching Tiger in the same session.