251

(3 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I read the book first and later saw the musical and also thought the stage version was much more satisfying than the book.

It was a number of years ago that I read the book, but I remember being frustrated more for things not getting wrapped up than for Elphaba's death. I wasn't actually clear that she was dead, considering the last few lines. Fiyero is presumably killed off page but that's never confirmed. What was up with the scarecrow's lack of origin story twist when everyone else got one? Was the fish Madame Morrible? Nor's story isn't finished, though I hear she comes back in the sequels. I felt like I was supposed to see some sort of overarching theme metaphor thing with Yackle and the mirror and the time dragon clock, but it never quite gelled for me beyond equivalents of "life isn't fair", which strikes me as a bit of a cop out.

I also think a lot of the differences are because the book was a parallel to the L. Frank Baum book and the musical was a parallel to the 1939 movie. The musical had more heavy handed themes, bolder greys, clearer relationships, fewer loose ends and awesome music. I prefer things wrapped up with bows on top, and the musical did a really good job of combining and simplifying characters to make it all tie together really neatly.

Saw Bridesmaids on the premise that it was "The Hangover but with women". It was not. The Hangover was about (mostly) normal people in absurd situations. Bridesmaids was about an insecure self-centred person making things worse for herself and others in otherwise relatively normal situations. Cats were barely saved, and only late in the movie at that. The romantic interest dude really could have done better.

253

(32 replies, posted in Episodes)

Good old Canadian Content rules... The CRTC actually decided a few years ago that the internet is exempt (thank goodness) because there isn't a limited amount of internet "broadcast space". They also recently ruled that ISPs don't have to fund Canadian artists like traditional broadcasters do because ISPs have no control over what they're "broadcasting". Despite what the lobbyists here claimed would happen, the sky has not fallen and there are statistics indicating that, for example, YouTube has more than its share of "Canadian content" without encouragement. Amazing roll

As for Hulu, I think it has more to do with renegotiating all the distribution licences, as we have our own set of distributors up here [Citation]. Pandora and Spotify aren't here yet at all and Netflix streaming exists here but has a far far more limited selection.

254

(32 replies, posted in Episodes)

There was a debate early in the commentary about whether Hulu is available in Canada and I can confirm that it is not. They've been "working on it" for ages.

However, I hear that this post can be read internationally. Just sayin'.

255

(1,649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

! Another Double Fine game? On PC? Yes please!

256

(16 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Other than DIF I usually walk to:
Audiobooks from the library
Radiolab - science and philosophy and other interesting things
Consumerism Commentary - personal finance
Escape Pod - short sci fi stories
Age of Persuasion - on advertising
White Coat Black Art - on medicine

Inside baseball was entirely inside baseball to me until I realized it was a metaphor and not a reference to some movie I'd never heard of.

258

(19 replies, posted in Off Topic)

For the LCCs I found limesurvey rather adaptable. All the other polling software options I looked at were too basic. Specifically I was looking for something that could rank options, but limesurvey also does multiple choice and you can set it up to allow non-answers. If anything, it might be overkill.

259

(33 replies, posted in Episodes)

Yeah, swearing allegiance to stuff/people is a USA thing. We in Canada just have the Queen on the money and sometimes she visits so we have a party.

260

(40 replies, posted in Episodes)

It truly offended me that Aang's arc was changed from "kid who wants to be a kid slowly learning how to be the responsible saviour of the world" to "kid who is totally emo and eventually gets over the fact that everyone wants to worship his awesome innate abilities". The show made a big deal that the abilities the characters gain are earned, not just there, and none of that was in the movie.

Also the dearth of humour.

Huh, another Les Mis movie? Someday they will get it right...but I'm not convinced that Hugh Jackman and Russell Crowe are the men to do it. Damn.

Edit: I just noticed they're actually doing the musical version, and I would totally go see Hugh Jackman in the musical version. I'm officially interested. Can Russell Crowe sing?

262

(431 replies, posted in Off Topic)

http://phispace.net/lj/wc067.gif

263

(8 replies, posted in Off Topic)

bullet3 wrote:

Wait, why not just have your characters using an open source OS. Just install Ubuntu for the desktop, and you're good to go, you don't need any sign off for that. For phones, I can't say for sure. I would think that Android would be safe since its open source as well (and I can't imagine why google would care), but I'm not 100%

For the record, Ubuntu does actually own and enforce trademark on their branding just like any other company. Open source refers to the code, not the logos etc. But as others mentioned, sending off emails should be plenty, as I can't really see them having a problem with it.

264

(56 replies, posted in Episodes)

mellowrages wrote:

It does win the award for most unrealistic and least aerodynamic flying creature ever in film.

Did you just diss Appa? You do NOT diss Appa. At least, not TV series Appa, and he's just as unaerodynamic as he is in the movie. But awesome.

265

(173 replies, posted in Episodes)

And here....we...go

266

(173 replies, posted in Episodes)

Considering how much disagreement there is already on the vote, counting ranking all 17 would be excessive. Statistically better, but excessive. Not to mention that I suspect the higher ranked movies will all be done eventually, so the exact ranking is somewhat moot.

Incidentally, I also got a different count from docsub and redxavier, which I think is hilarious. Next time we want a ranked vote I volunteer to pull out the LCC voting page and throw some paint on it tongue

267

(173 replies, posted in Episodes)

Gregory Harbin wrote:
Teague wrote:

It wouldn't change the top six.

That's my point, it very well can change the top six.

Statistician Phi declares that Gregory Harbin is correct.

268

(14 replies, posted in Episodes)

Listened to this one for a second time, and I settled somewhere in between Ryan (and half Teague) and The Rest. I differentiate between acting performance, animation, and visual effects, but think that all three can be involved in various amounts to produce a character. The involvement of more than one does not negate the eligibility of the others, in my mind, though the extent to which each is involved can effect whether there is enough of another's involvement to be nominated.

I especially differentiate between acting performance and animation, where performance is done in a somewhat real time environment, where animation is not real time and can be revised. I see them as different and distinct arts. I would also argue that on-set puppetry is closer to acting performance than animation, hence inclusion with SAG. CG puppetry goes with animation.

In cases where an actor provided performance, animators changed the performance, and visual effects artists added the 'make up', the question to me is not whether they're each eligible, but whether their work had enough impact on the final product to warrant nomination. I suppose this could lead to bake-off situations for the acting performance categories, but to take Bryan's screenplay vs. ad-lib example, I suspect you have to show that your screenplay effectively made it to the screen. It's not that strange an idea.

While I'm sure there are cases where the resulting character is 50/50 actor performance and animator animation, I can't see the result getting nominated in both categories, as I doubt there would be enough of either to make the Oscars happy (where best usually = most). If the same person did the performance and the animation then they just covered two arts.

Examples!

Caesar - I would say that there was a lot of performance, very little animation, and a lot of visual effects. Serkis is eligible for performance nomination, the animators for animating, and the visual effects people for the visual effects. I'm not saying that any of those groups deserve nomination, just that they could be if they contributed enough to the result. In this case, the animators would probably not be nomiatable due to their comparatively minor contribution. As far as I'm concerned, whether or not Serkis was involved in the post-production of Caesar is irrelevant to his performance, which was complete when the cameras stopped rolling.

Elephant man - Same deal, with actor providing performance and make-up the 'visual effects'. I don't differentiate between post-production or pre-production visual effects/make-up. I could see a future where algorithms are pre-programmed to add the pixels to an actor's performance on the fly, just like make-up. Whether it was done before or after is irrelevant to me.

Teague's hypothetical crappy actor saved by animators - I could see the animators dragging out before and after and saying 'see, we totally did this and we're awesome'. Pixar would often brag that they had no motion capture involved in their animation. The actor could still be 'eligible' as he did do a performance, but nomination would be unlikely just like an actor cut out of a movie in editing.

Rango - Actors still eligible, as long as they can demonstrate that the actors' performance contributed significantly to the resulting characters.

Totally animated character with voice actor - Movies being a largely visual medium, I think you need some visual aspect to the acting performance to qualify as 'enough performance' for likely nomination. I'm not saying that voice acting isn't a performance, just that it might not be enough (best=most).

Awesome puppet performance - Tricky in cases where multiple people contributed to the performance, but hypothetically possible if they could demonstrate that one person really put the soul into the character on set.

Final note: I suspect there isn't an Oscar for 'best animated character' or even 'best animation' (the art, not the movie genre), which somewhat confuses my argument. I would rather see that category than Teague's suggestion of 'best composite character', and I would definitely rather it to the 'best animated movie' category/ghetto that exists now.

269

(209 replies, posted in Creations)

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

And done.

270

(1,649 replies, posted in Off Topic)


It's got thighs for Trey, but I'm just impressed by her defiance of physics and chaffing.

271

(1,649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I spent half of this video impressed at the tracking and the other half feeling silly for not thinking old-school enough.

272

(39 replies, posted in Episodes)

I don't have anything relevant to say about Iron Man 2, but Thor was worth seeing for Chris Hemsworth and his rather fetching biceps. I understand this argument may not be relevant to Trey.

Nielsen ratings aren't a measure of artistic quality; they're just a measure of popularity. I'm pretty sure the networks care about quality as far as it affects popularity, but it's a loose correlation at best. And correlation does not mean causation in either direction.

274

(198 replies, posted in Episodes)

FixedR6 wrote:
  • Best film nobody's seen?

1) Delete my post
2) Record an intermission on best films nobody's ever seen and include non-existent movies that are AWESOME
3) Release it next April

Sorry, profit probably doesn't come into it.

275

(2,061 replies, posted in Episodes)

A half hour discussion on statistical methodology? This is relevant to my interests!