Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Jun 19, 2009 5:36:50 GMT
Based on my current ratings, these are the top "genre" recommendations presented for me by Netflix:
Cerebral Movies
Independent Movies
Critically-acclaimed Witty British Movies
Suspenseful Crime Movies from the 1940s
Emotional Foreign Dramas
All of these terms are vague and meaningless, of course.
|
|
|
Post by ronnierocketago on Jun 19, 2009 13:55:10 GMT
I know, they're so arbitrary.
BTW Omar, you get that Netflix service with the Instant service? I love that shit.
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Jun 19, 2009 14:31:32 GMT
No, not at this time.
|
|
|
Post by ronnierocketago on Jun 19, 2009 14:44:19 GMT
Oh. Get the 2 DVD at a time service, Instant comes with it and you can watch some titles on your computer/laptop without having to wait for them. I mean lets admit it, there are some titles you might want to see, but not as much as others because you dont want to use up the delivery time time for them.
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Jun 24, 2009 21:18:35 GMT
Anyone has a recommendation for a (somewhat recent) documentary on how drugs are smuggled into US, right from the production in South America?
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Jun 24, 2009 22:51:43 GMT
Hmmmmmmmm Well, not really. But this sort of touches on it, or at least during a so-called "epidemic". Cocaine CowboysIt's recent, anyway.
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Jun 24, 2009 23:09:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ronnierocketago on Jun 24, 2009 23:46:48 GMT
More like more deserving, and more less deserving, will get their names dropped into the pot. I mean if this rule was around last year, I'm sure TDK, THE WRESTLER, and WALL-E would have survived the cut. or even possibly CHE for that matter. I like it.
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Jun 25, 2009 0:04:02 GMT
Hmmmmmmmm Well, not really. But this sort of touches on it, or at least during a so-called "epidemic". Cocaine CowboysIt's recent, anyway. Thanks, that looks good.
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
Post by jrod on Jun 30, 2009 5:16:23 GMT
Based on my current ratings, these are the top "genre" recommendations presented for me by Netflix: Cerebral MoviesIndependent MoviesCritically-acclaimed Witty British MoviesSuspenseful Crime Movies from the 1940sEmotional Foreign DramasAll of these terms are vague and meaningless, of course. I recently had a ridiculously long description to the effect of CRITCALLY ACCLAIMED CEREBAL MID LIFE CRISIS COMEDIES in short, I watch too much Woody Allen, if there could be such a thing.
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
Post by jrod on Jun 30, 2009 5:23:02 GMT
for every film I love (say, Wall E) that would have been nominated had there been 10 slots at the time there would have been something I despise (Dreamgirls). If anything, I think this will be an excuse for studios to make more mediocore Oscar bait (ie, most of the 2008 nominees). who really likes "the Oscar film" anymore. It sure as hell isnt people like us, and it sure as hell isnt the mainstream. I like most of the work Ive seen from Boyle, Van Sant, Fincher, and even Howard better then their respective 08 best picture nominees. thats fucked up. No Country and Unforgiven are the only Best Pictures I really love since the 70s. whole show is just kind of annoying. Maybe someday Ill stop watching
|
|
|
Post by ronnierocketago on Jun 30, 2009 12:38:52 GMT
for every film I love (say, Wall E) that would have been nominated had there been 10 slots at the time there would have been something I despise (Dreamgirls). If anything, I think this will be an excuse for studios to make more mediocore Oscar bait (ie, most of the 2008 nominees). But more may actually get in. consider a small war movie that's hitting the circuits that's getting great reviews: THE HURT LOCKER. It's the would-be comeback of Kathryne Bigelow, who once upon a time directed NEAR DARK and POINT BREAK. nobody can call those two Oscar bait. With the old rule, would it get in? Maybe, but with its summer release schedule, it could easily be forgotten in favor of the Oscar bait later this year. Now its got a better if not guaranteed shot. Come on, wouldnt it be cool if the director of POINT BEAK got a BP nod? ;D As it is with the BP nominees, we get maybe at BEST one or two that probably actually deserve to be there. So the way I see it, we'll inevitably get more Oscar bait awarded...but meanwhile more worthy get in. Hell unless other shit pull off a surprise, UP may make it. If this rule had been in effect in 2008, THE WRESTLER, TDK, GRAN TORINO, and WALL-E probably would have been invited as well. Would either of them have won? Who knows...but I would have probably given more of a shit in watching the telecast. who really likes "the Oscar film" anymore. It's like politics. There that initial candidate in a primary you support, who may or may not get nominated for the general election. If your "guy" doesn't, you probably tend to support the eventual nominee. Thats probably how the Oscars work with some folks. It sure as hell isnt people like us, and it sure as hell isnt the mainstream. I like most of the work Ive seen from Boyle, Van Sant, Fincher, and even Howard better then their respective 08 best picture nominees. thats fucked up. No Country and Unforgiven are the only Best Pictures I really love since the 70s. whole show is just kind of annoying. Maybe someday Ill stop watching Certainly I liked BENJAMIN BUTTON and MILK, but are those two the "best" works of their directors? Well no. If anything, BB (which supposedly Fincher contracted to do so that Paramount/Warner Bros. would fund his ZODIAC) felt like Fincher doing his own take on the mainstream/Oscar bait project. And at times, it works. But its nothing special or extraordinary or worthy of the Fincher name like FIGHT CLUB or ZODIAC or SEVEN. As for MILK, the biopic element was much less relevant and important than Van Sant making a politics lesson to his fellow gays, and in general to people. If you want something (i.e. rights), then get organized. Earn respect from the establishment powers, etc.
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
Post by jrod on Jun 30, 2009 18:29:34 GMT
i guess in addition they are planning on moving the lifetime achievement award to a dinner days before the ceremony. kinda lame, I like that part.
They are making the requirements to get into the Best Song category much more stringent as well. Personally I dont care how many nominees there are, but they need to get rid of the fucking performances. they are usually awful, and when the general complaint is that the show is too long, I dont know why it is necessary to devote about 30 overall minutes to the award that is only about the 12th most prestigous of the night.
|
|
|
Post by ronnierocketago on Jun 30, 2009 20:16:31 GMT
They do that shit for the ratings...and sell more records. Usually.
Hell, most people don't know this, but usually the lifetime achievement Oscar is given to people who get it on the condition that they appear on TV.
Consider Marlon Brando. Now you would think MARLON BRANDO would deserve such a honorary Oscar right? I mean the fucker earned I would think. But they never gave him one. Why? Because he refused to appear on TV, the Oscar telecast, to accept it.
Thus they never gave him one.
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
Post by jrod on Jun 30, 2009 21:24:37 GMT
I think its more or less a make up call award....ie Robert Altman and Peter O Toole. Brando won for On the Waterfront and the Godfather.
|
|
|
Post by clownation on Jul 1, 2009 0:41:15 GMT
Hi guys. I did a search of the boards and saw no mention of this. Phillips Electronics has launched a new TV that features a 9:21 aspect ratio. (They call it 21:9 but for me it makes more sense as height:width.) That works out to 1:2.33, almost exactly the same as projected 'scope. To promote/demonstrate the TV they commissioned a wide screen commercial. I found it very impressive. Television commercials have a history of being early adopters, if not funders/developers, of new film technologies. I'm not sure how they did some of this one. The elements seem strictly photographic but ... well see what you think. It's called 'Carousel'. They designed it to run as a continuous loop (carousel). It could be called 'I Got Yer Bullet-Time Right Here' Here it is on YouTube.Here it is on the Phillips site with credits, several choices of resolution and some cute web gimmicks. I thought it was very cool. And certainly worth 2 minutes and 19 seconds. later, clown
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Jul 1, 2009 0:51:13 GMT
ummmmmmmmmmmm.....................
WELCOME BACK!!!
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Jul 1, 2009 1:10:17 GMT
I love the way the camera flows through space in the ad. And 21:9 is interesting. Is that the aspect ratio of cinema screens?
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Jul 1, 2009 1:40:40 GMT
Wow, Clownation! It only took three and a half years for you to make a post.
|
|
|
Post by clownation on Jul 1, 2009 1:47:24 GMT
I love the way the camera flows through space in the ad. And 21:9 is interesting. Is that the aspect ratio of cinema screens? In the US, before 1954, 1:1.33 or 3 to 4. The same as old-school TVs. Because of TV Hollywood tried some things TV couldn't: 1:1.85 (usually called 'flat' because it uses a spherical lens. That does make sense, honest). The 'normal' wide-screen now is called 'cinemascope' and is 1:2.35. They tried many wide-screen arrangements. For me, the weirdest and most ambitious was Cinerama that required four projectors, three for picture, one for sound, running in exact frame by frame sychronization and exactly aligned horizontally and vertically, to present 3 images as a single, very wide contiguous image. And they still had to change projectors every eighteen minutes. Huge list of potential problems and engineering challenges. Anyway here's the Wikipedia page which has real image examples. clown
|
|