Chat Thread 37: Diss Wants to Be Involved

Liam · Post by **Liam** » Wed May 16, 2012 9:18 pm

JeffCvt wrote:It has a lot of action, and for the most part, people don't get killed. I like the way they do that a lot.

People get blown up or whatever in dramatic shots and every main char present watches in shock, but then at the end of the arc they come back out of nowhere with hardly any explanation.

Except it's a flashback, then they're dead meat.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Wed May 16, 2012 9:35 pm

One piece is a bit boring. It's probably the longest anime/manga series ever! It just isn't interesting enough that I would want to go through all of that. I can't really stand animes like One Piece and Dragonball because the fighting seems to be so formulaic and repetitive. I have to say, I'm not very impressed with the art style either... the general baddies are pretty pathetic and some of the main characters (Usopp) are so useless, it frustrates me even more whenever they add another useless member to the cast. I don't really understand what is so appealing about this anime...

JeffCvt · Post by **JeffCvt** » Wed May 16, 2012 9:40 pm

I don't watch it religiously or anything.

I think that anime like Naruto have good fight scenes, but just too much "casual" death. Too many people in the background who don't live to see another day and it is never addressed that they did die.

One piece doesn't have that and I like the animation. That's just me though.

DanTwelve3 · Post by **DanTwelve3** » Wed May 16, 2012 10:47 pm

People being killed in the background always gets me. It is hardly ever addressed in Hollywood movies, and I always feel like I'm the only person that cares. Seriously, how many people died in the background of Avengers or Transformers 3?

The Grey Wolverine · Post by **The Grey Wolverine** » Wed May 16, 2012 11:24 pm

I just think to myself, "Well, that would suck if it was real." I mean, I feel emotion during movies, but I find it pointless to get so emotional about background characters, I try and stay invested in the main plot and characters, the only time I have ever been like, "NO! NO! NO! DON'T DIE!" Was when in Saving Privet Ryan at the Normandy landing, when EVERYONE WAS GETTING GUNNED DOWN!

KJOokami · Post by **KJOokami** » Thu May 17, 2012 1:11 am

RandomGeekNamedBrent wrote:This dragon better. Much better. anyone get the reference?

I was gonna make a post vague enough to deny being wrong if it turned out you weren't actually making a reference like I thought you were making, but seeing the transparent text, I'm pretty sure I get the reference you were making. (Is that sentence confusing enough?)

You must think you're All That to be making a reference like that.

On the topic of background characters in big, Hollywood, action flicks: as I understand it, the reason they don't tend to acknowledge deaths of background characters in the same way they acknowledge deaths of characters who are more vital to the plot is because most movies like that require dozens, if not hundreds or thousands of deaths (and implied deaths) in order to evoke an emotional response from viewers. And to even make a note of each and every person who happens to get hacked, mangled, blown up, knocked off a cliff/skyscraper, munched, or otherwise revoked of their living privileges in the background would simply take up way too much time and would just generally slow down the pacing of the film to unbearably boring levels.

So yeah. In movies like that, there's usually at least a scene or two where the main characters mourn (verbally or through facial expressions) all of those deaths at once, but there's no conceivable way to give them each their own treatment without extending the movie to unacceptable lengths or taking out the majority of those background deaths (and with them, a huge chunk of the emotional struggle for the main characters who are trying to save those people).

fantasticmrKabz · Post by **fantasticmrKabz** » Thu May 17, 2012 1:12 am

The movie rendition of Cormac Mcarthy's The Road was really depressing. There wasnt that many background characters but the ones that were there suffered horribly. Well they probably got the better end of it seeing as how it was worse to be alive in that world.
You guys reminded me of a depressing movie thus making me feel depressed. You monsters!

Thu May 17, 2012 1:13 am

KJOokami wrote:You must think you're All That to be making a reference like that.

It was actually the Amanda Show, but close enough.

KJOokami · Post by **KJOokami** » Thu May 17, 2012 1:18 am

RandomGeekNamedBrent wrote:It was actually the Amanda Show, but close enough.

Dang. I feel like I've failed my childhood something fierce. XD

I forget now; was Amanda ever a regular on All That?

Thu May 17, 2012 1:30 am

yeah, she was. That's why it's close enough.

Post by **Sleet** » Thu May 17, 2012 1:30 am

Yes. Amanda Bynes was an All That cast member before she got her spinoff. Then Drake Bell and Josh Peck, from The Amanda Show, got their spinoff, Drake and Josh. Then Miranda Cosgrove from Drake and Josh got her spinoff, iCarly.

KJOokami · Post by **KJOokami** » Thu May 17, 2012 1:35 am

Miranda Cosgrove was also on All That for a short time, if I remember correctly. She was the one who won that nation-wide contest to become a new cast member, right?

Edit: Or maybe *that* was Amanda Bynes, now that I think about it.

Thu May 17, 2012 1:41 am

Amanda was one of the cast members from the original run of All that, starting in Season 3. Miranda Cosgrove was never on All That. The winner of R U All That, was named Christina Kirkman. source

Nyaliva · Post by **Nyaliva** » Thu May 17, 2012 10:08 am

I know this was a while back but I wanted to comment so everyone ignore this if you want.

KalloonWhite wrote:"to construct a new paradigm by hypothesizing the dichotomy of the light wave/particle relationships to supradimensional non-corporeal, malicious existence exuding into the observable plains and how it permeates corporeal ideas of positive and negative morality and its numerous permutations, through... based on that theory, in order to establish a feasible hypotheses to plot empirical data we must... The retreating figure in the drizzling rain, on a dark and cold road and other metaphysical metaphors... bending time and reality! And there you have it!!"

They've actually discovered that all sub-atomic particles act as both particles and waves by the De Broglie Equation: wavelength = Planck constant/relativistic momentum.

Oh and lol wut?

Post by **Sleet** » Thu May 17, 2012 11:49 am

RandomGeekNamedBrent wrote:Amanda was one of the cast members from the original run of All that, starting in Season 3. Miranda Cosgrove was never on All That. The winner of R U All That, was named Christina Kirkman. source

I hate how they cleaned out the cast for the second run. The second cast was much worse.

Seth · Post by **Seth** » Thu May 17, 2012 11:52 am

Sleet wrote:I like metal enough that I can appreciate some of the humor in Metalocalypse. But I still wouldn't call it a good show. It's a generally bad show that has more-than-infrequent good moments.

blasphemy

DanTwelve3 wrote:People being killed in the background always gets me. It is hardly ever addressed in Hollywood movies, and I always feel like I'm the only person that cares. Seriously, how many people died in the background of Avengers or Transformers 3?

Same here, I mean it doesn't detract from my enjoyment of a movie but I can't help but sit there like, "man they just blew up 10 cars, must suck to be those people"

JeffCvt · Post by **JeffCvt** » Thu May 17, 2012 1:29 pm

I don't mind when there is implyed death for people in the backround, but when is actually shows them being killed is what gets me. It just seems like they are focusing on killing people instead of the storyline of the movie.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Thu May 17, 2012 3:12 pm

Nyaliva wrote:I know this was a while back but I wanted to comment so everyone ignore this if you want.

KalloonWhite wrote:"to construct a new paradigm by hypothesizing the dichotomy of the light wave/particle relationships to supradimensional non-corporeal, malicious existence exuding into the observable plains and how it permeates corporeal ideas of positive and negative morality and its numerous permutations, through... based on that theory, in order to establish a feasible hypotheses to plot empirical data we must... The retreating figure in the drizzling rain, on a dark and cold road and other metaphysical metaphors... bending time and reality! And there you have it!!"
They've actually discovered that all sub-atomic particles act as both particles and waves by the De Broglie Equation: wavelength = Planck constant/relativistic momentum.

Oh and lol wut?

That was essentially an abuse of the thesauraus to elongate the meaningless text. Why was it comparing the wave particle duality of light to morality? I kind of understand what it is trying to say, but it was done in such a horrible manner that instead of the words bringing deeper meaning into the analogy, it detracts the reader from understanding what it is actually saying. The whole point of the paragraph was to appear to be an intellectual while making a preposterous claim. Instead of sharing ideas in a descriptive and understandable way, the paragraph did the exact opposite of that. The paragraph attempted to incorporate higher vocabulary and in its attempt, abandoned the usage of correct grammar and logical rigor.

MapleRatty · Post by **MapleRatty** » Thu May 17, 2012 4:08 pm

JeffCvt wrote:I don't mind when there is implyed death for people in the backround, but when is actually shows them being killed is what gets me. It just seems like they are focusing on killing people instead of the storyline of the movie.

but sometimes the death can be important to the later plot, or they just put it there to get reactions.

JeffCvt · Post by **JeffCvt** » Thu May 17, 2012 5:22 pm

I mean, I get that.

But some just seem to have needless death for the sake of death or something.
Well, it's my opinion, and I want to get off of the topic of death now. It's getting kind of weird talking about it. (Even in anime and movies)

0404 · Post by **0404** » Thu May 17, 2012 5:23 pm

The Grey Wolverine wrote:I just think to myself, "Well, that would suck if it was real." I mean, I feel emotion during movies, but I find it pointless to get so emotional about background characters, I try and stay invested in the main plot and characters, the only time I have ever been like, "NO! NO! NO! DON'T DIE!" Was when in Saving Privet Ryan at the Normandy landing, when EVERYONE WAS GETTING GUNNED DOWN!

but we still play FPS all day long...

JeffCvt wrote:I mean, I get that.

But some just seem to have needless death for the sake of death or something.
Well, it's my opinion, and I want to get off of the topic of death now. It's getting kind of weird talking about it. (Even in anime and movies)

I do want to get out of this topic too... miserable and too controversial that my mind can't handle it. glommy...
--------------------------
what is space Odysey about?

CaptainPea · Post by **CaptainPea** » Thu May 17, 2012 5:45 pm

It's about a lot of mysterious black boxes and how we go to space to investigate

I'm not trying to bash it by simplifying it that much, it's just difficult to summarize because there's not really a main character and the plot scales several millenia and there's one act that's purposefully incomprehensible and a large portion of the film is spent on a subplot (not that that's a complaint- I think the HAL stuff is more interesting and memorable than the "central" conflict).

I'd recommend seeing it at least once though, most people tend to have a relatively strong opinion of it. It's very slow paced and leaves a lot unexplained, which I think some people find genius and others find tedious.

The Grey Wolverine · Post by **The Grey Wolverine** » Thu May 17, 2012 7:12 pm

JeffCvt wrote:I don't mind when there is implyed death for people in the backround, but when is actually shows them being killed is what gets me. It just seems like they are focusing on killing people instead of the storyline of the movie.

Unfortunately, with Michel Bay sadly making an impact on movies like he has, we will see more of this.

texascat018 wrote:
The Grey Wolverine wrote:I just think to myself, "Well, that would suck if it was real." I mean, I feel emotion during movies, but I find it pointless to get so emotional about background characters, I try and stay invested in the main plot and characters, the only time I have ever been like, "NO! NO! NO! DON'T DIE!" Was when in Saving Privet Ryan at the Normandy landing, when EVERYONE WAS GETTING GUNNED DOWN!
but we still play FPS all day long...

Indeed. Now, in stuff like Fallout, there is backlash to killing random people. A certain group might try to kill you, people will despise you, in F3 regulators or Talon Company Mercenaries would murder you, and you could get shot on sight, but in FPSs, its usually "kill, kill, kill, reload, take cover repeat."

sonic id furreh!!! · Post by **sonic id furreh!!!** » Thu May 17, 2012 8:23 pm

texascat018 wrote:
The Grey Wolverine wrote:I just think to myself, "Well, that would suck if it was real." I mean, I feel emotion during movies, but I find it pointless to get so emotional about background characters, I try and stay invested in the main plot and characters, the only time I have ever been like, "NO! NO! NO! DON'T DIE!" Was when in Saving Privet Ryan at the Normandy landing, when EVERYONE WAS GETTING GUNNED DOWN!
but we still play FPS all day long...

i don't

0404 · Post by **0404** » Thu May 17, 2012 8:45 pm

CaptainPea wrote:It's about a lot of mysterious black boxes and how we go to space to investigate

I'm not trying to bash it by simplifying it that much, it's just difficult to summarize because there's not really a main character and the plot scales several millenia and there's one act that's purposefully incomprehensible and a large portion of the film is spent on a subplot (not that that's a complaint- I think the HAL stuff is more interesting and memorable than the "central" conflict).

I'd recommend seeing it at least once though, most people tend to have a relatively strong opinion of it. It's very slow paced and leaves a lot unexplained, which I think some people find genius and others find tedious.

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...
just watched it, and ummmmmmmmmmmmmm. ahhhhhh daaaaaaaaa, I...I was partially able to pickup some lunatic literature but...nahhhhhhhhh I think I don't even know what it is trying to tell..
ahhhhhhhhh

Post by **Sleet** » Thu May 17, 2012 11:52 pm

Space Odyssey was fantastic. Not to mention the predictions of the future were really accurate, for the most part.

0404 · Post by **0404** » Fri May 18, 2012 11:17 am

Liam · Post by **Liam** » Fri May 18, 2012 2:42 pm

Sleet wrote:Space Odyssey was fantastic. Not to mention the predictions of the future were really accurate, for the most part.

You mean like today every call is a videocall, commercial space flights for the middle class by PanAm, manned expeditions to the Jovian system and strong AI?

Psykeout · Post by **Psykeout** » Fri May 18, 2012 3:18 pm

It's everybody's favorite canironist, Psykeout, back from the grave.

Liam wrote:
Sleet wrote:Space Odyssey was fantastic. Not to mention the predictions of the future were really accurate, for the most part.
You mean like today every call is a videocall, commercial space flights for the middle class by PanAm, manned expeditions to the Jovian system and strong AI?

I was in the Jovian system just yesterday

Fri May 18, 2012 3:19 pm

Psykeout wrote:It's everybody's favorite canironist, Psykeout, back from the grave.
Liam wrote:
Sleet wrote:Space Odyssey was fantastic. Not to mention the predictions of the future were really accurate, for the most part.
You mean like today every call is a videocall, commercial space flights for the middle class by PanAm, manned expeditions to the Jovian system and strong AI?
I was in the Jovian system just yesterday

So that's where your grave was?

Psykeout · Post by **Psykeout** » Fri May 18, 2012 3:23 pm

it was mighty uncomfortable I don't see how potatoes spend all their time like that.

CaptainPea · Post by **CaptainPea** » Fri May 18, 2012 3:47 pm

Especially when the special effects show up, then it gets really difficult to be dead

Liam wrote:
Sleet wrote:Space Odyssey was fantastic. Not to mention the predictions of the future were really accurate, for the most part.
You mean like today every call is a videocall, commercial space flights for the middle class by PanAm, manned expeditions to the Jovian system and strong AI?

Considering our track record for predicting the future, I'll take what I can get. They did predict that computers would become more advanced and that space travel would remain incredibly arduous and slow, so they got some broad strokes right, which is more than most predictions of the future can say.

Psykeout wrote:canironist

okay

Psykeout · Post by **Psykeout** » Fri May 18, 2012 4:17 pm

it's an obtuse way of saying Canine Ironist

CaptainPea · Post by **CaptainPea** » Fri May 18, 2012 4:22 pm

Psykeout wrote:it's an obtuse way of saying Canine Ironist

I thought it meant you were capable of ironing and frankly I'm disappointed

Post by **Dissension** » Fri May 18, 2012 6:39 pm

I'm capable of ironing.

The Grey Wolverine · Post by **The Grey Wolverine** » Fri May 18, 2012 7:10 pm

I love bad translations.

: 426533_184428731663220_174769352629158_243386_823598445_n.jpg (18.07 KiB) Viewed 8845 times

MapleRatty · Post by **MapleRatty** » Fri May 18, 2012 7:31 pm

what... Im going to die of laughter now...

McFly · Post by **McFly** » Fri May 18, 2012 7:35 pm

The best translation ever.

Liam · Post by **Liam** » Fri May 18, 2012 8:11 pm

JeffCvt · Post by **JeffCvt** » Fri May 18, 2012 9:39 pm

I once saw a picture with a weird translation.

A cow had just mooed and it had a subtitle with "moo" in it.
Then it said "Director's note: Moo means Moo"

I wish I could find it, but I wouldn't even know where to start...