326

(373 replies, posted in Off Topic)

But even that argument has flaws, which came first, the feeling of the god or the knowledge of the god? We're all born atheists and are essentially brainwashed into the religion of our parents or guardian. So arguably, thinking begets the feeling, as your frame of reference for the world and life influences how you process things. A person who believes in the supernatural is much more likely to encounter the supernatural. A person who believes in a god is much more likely to see their hand at work.

I confess to a reluctance to see religious matters as coming from the heart, I see such framing as an attempt to empower the religious/spiritual side of knowledge and imbue it with some sort of protection from reality.

It's all the brain my friends.

I see it more as a joke on the insistence that fucking should be inserted into the word at all.

328

(373 replies, posted in Off Topic)

It is for all intents and purposes, a mature way of saying "I don't care". But since "I don't care if it makes sense or is made up, that's my position" generally isn't a good thing to say in a discussion, "that's my faith" or similar is a better tact. The worst part is, and forgive me for my cynicism, is that it can be seen to be synonymous with "confidence" and "trust" (which aren't really the same thing) - both entirely reasonable concepts that we employ all the time in our lives.

It's clever, I'll give it that.

329

(10 replies, posted in Off Topic)

330

(373 replies, posted in Off Topic)

331

(373 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Why would there be a god or gods at all? I'd argue that the notion of the divine, powerful being is an entirely human construct.

In recent years (like the last couple hundred years) a new concept has arisen of "god as the universe" (pantheism), but I've long felt that this was a somewhat arbitary way of describing things, since a nonpersonal and nonanthropomorphic god isn't really a being so much as an idea, and that calling it god was really some way of saying to theists 'hey, I'm not all bad'. Most are essentially atheists by another name.

Considering that the atoms in our bodies were formed in the core of stars, and that when we die, our atoms return to a part of the cosmos, the universe is our creator and our afterlife. I find that to be a beautiful thing, and spiritual I guess, but I wouldn't call it god in any traditional sense.

332

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

333

(68 replies, posted in Off Topic)

334

(68 replies, posted in Off Topic)

335

(68 replies, posted in Off Topic)

From Dusk til Dawn:
"If you try to run, I've got six little friends and they can all run faster than you can."

Interesting, although any language is going to be full of these, due in great part to the inate laziness of speakers and the inevitability of omitted words. In fact, the second meaning you prescribe to your example is actually derived from omitted words and isn't accurate (the full sentence being something like "which relatives do you want to have visit?"). It's a contracted sentence that could mean the same but really just reflects poor grammar. The reason why when wanna is used, the meaning is clearer, is that it is a contraction of the original meaning, and is not also a contraction of the secondary meaning (which as above is a misreading).

Much of language works on subtle clues here and there, and regardless of the isolation of a spoken or written statement, there would always be a context that would lead us to read or hear a certain meaning. Indeed, I would argue that it's impossible to not have context of some kind.

338

(346 replies, posted in Off Topic)

339

(372 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I enjoyed both Battleship and Battle Los Angeles immensely (the latter a bit more so). I'd love to see a supercut of these two spliced together.

340

(45 replies, posted in Off Topic)

From Iron Man 2:

Rhodes: "Wow. I think you should lead with that one next time"

341

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Have you listened to the WAYDM commentary for the Mist yet PorridgeGun? It's one of the good ones. Favourite quote comes from Trey I think, something like "Darabont couldn't punch you in the gut in person so he made this movie".



I forgot that I also saw RIPD on the plane as well. Bit of a weird film, apparently trying to be funny but never quite hitting the mark, but it kept me awake at least (which is more than I can say for Red 2, which I missed a chunk of). I grow tired of Reynolds' apparently one-note performance though, which seems the same in every film I've seen so far.

In the wake of Pacific Rim, which I confess has been on my mind a lot of late, I've been watching old Gundam (specifically the short 08th MS Team series, which I had seen years ago and love, and Char's Counterattack, a film which was surprisingly brutal) and also caught up to date with the Falling Skies TV series. Ignoring the characters' disregard for light, noise and cover discipline I really got into it and I'd say it's worth checking out if you're into either post-apocalyptic or alien invasion shows.

I may have mentioned this before somewhere, but I can't help but be amazed at the prevalence of distrust in our stories about aliens. If aliens ever did show up, we would arguably be so influenced by the movies and TV we've seen that we'd have great difficulty knowing what to think of them and their intentions.

342

(100 replies, posted in Off Topic)

So is there more than one monster planned in this film? I'm not sure 'Godzilla fights other monsters' bodes well for a serious and poignant story. Wouldn't that essentially turn Godzilla into a protagonist?

343

(24 replies, posted in Episodes)

Thanks for the heads up about the Skeptoid podcast, very informative. My father has recently become interested in 9/11, specifically building 7, so it was good to hear Brian Dunning's thoughts on that.

344

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I was away in Japan for a couple of weeks and the long flights allowed me to catch up on a couple of movies, one of which was White House Down. I liked it, it was fun. I'm not entirely sold on Channing Tatum, he's not quite as charismatic as Bruce Willis was in Die Hard (the film's obvious template) but he's competent enough.

The Lone Ranger - kind of a mixed bag I thought, with some neat ideas that are drowned amidst the dominance of Depp's bizarre performance as Tonto. There's a tone problem as well, most of it is light hearted cartoon fun, then we get dark dramatic turns that seem out of place.

The Wolverine - a big tentpole comic movie ostensibly aimed at young men that turns into a predictable love story throughout its entire long second act. Weird choice. I did find it interesting what they did with his mutant power, but it seemed they didn't really do much exploration with it on a character arc level. I saw a cut plane version so the action seemed rather tame, and although there was some nice shots towards the end, I found I had lost interest.

Red 2 - what a cast, and this ironically kept ruining the illusion that I was watching a story unfold. 'Hey! it's so and so!' I'd never seen the first, but it didn't seem entirely necessary to enjoy the sequel.

345

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

346

(649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Oh man, I missed Star Wars. I'm a "that's a Blastech E-11 rifle, you know" level fan. Looking forward to listening to this one.

347

(93 replies, posted in Off Topic)

348

(93 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Logic consistency, AKA making sense, isn't a nitpicking area. If you can't see why a character is doing something, or why they are doing something in a particular way, then that breaks immersion and is also reflective of bad storytelling - equivalent to someone having to interrupt the campfire story to clarify something. Without coherence in story and setting, then it's just keys dangling in front of your eyes making noises and catching the light. These are the same sorts of problems that face Prometheus and countless other big blockbusters, from Battleship to Star Trek to Man of Steel. Laziness is laziness, regardless of how good it looks.

The problem here is that the lack of thought out into the world building influences the choreography, and the choreography does not match the serious tone of the movie, i.e. mankind is fighting for its very survival. If we had a kung fu movie where the final duel between hero and the villain that murdered his parents lacked the intensity and emotion we would expect, or a lightsabre fight just went on and on, we would lose interest.  Fights between giant robots and monsters actually become boring. I find this to be a problem when it's the main attraction. I point out issues stem in the story because I see their effects on the battles to be detrimental.

I so wanted to love this one, I'm a huge fan of mech anime. But I'm not really entertained watching a man punch a zombie over and over (in a serious movie about the apocalypse). 


To be clear, I really have no problem seeing that people have found it enjoyable, parts of it had me squealing in delight! But let's not claim that it's a good story and features great worldbuilding, or that it's fine except for a few nitpicks. That's delusion.

Also, nitpicking is pointing out that the kaiju couldn't possibly have flown that high on its wings and that Gypsy wouldn't have been going fast enough to experience re-entry burn up, or that creatures that size couldn't possibly exist in the first place.

349

(372 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Trey wins!

350

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)