News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Rate the latest movie you've seen.

Started by GalacticBusDriver, February 16, 2013, 12:37:09 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

SGOS

#3600
Quote from: trdsf on October 19, 2018, 03:20:16 PM
Coinstars are in all the Krogers around here.  I always check them to see what's in the reject tray - I've gotten steel cents, silver dimes, all sorts of foreign coins that way.
Silver dimes?  Yes, I suppose some are still around.  Most have been taken out of circulation by hoarders.  I bought a tub of "junk silver" one time just to see what kind of an investment it was.  I bought quarters, but you can buy them assorted.  They come through the Post Office in plastic tubs with "MACHINE PARTS" stamped all over the container.  But when I went to pick them up the postal clerk said, "Oh, silver coins, huh?"  Like it was some big secret. 

I'm still befuddled about how worthless the money we use actually is.  There is some value in copper pennies and I suppose also in nickels and dimes, but when you get into the big bills is just paper and ink.  I've been told our money is backed by the US government so it actually has more value than the junk it's made out of.  But is this the same government that controls inflation, lies to me, and redistributes my tax dollars to wealthy campaign donors?  I'm still expecting it to collapse, and when it does there are going to be a lot of losers.

And if it is backed by the government, shouldn't I be able to trade my paper dollars in for something of value?  I suppose they would just pay for it using the same garbage I was trying to get rid of.  Or maybe some guy would say, "Here, you can have one of these savings bonds."  Like that helps a lot.  I should be able to get something useful like light bulbs or shovels.

Gawdzilla Sama

Money is just our agreed upon way of keeping score.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Baruch

#3602
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on October 20, 2018, 08:49:47 AM
Money is just our agreed upon way of keeping score.

And I deny any agreement.  Neither your currency nor your credit are good here.  I will agree only if you bow the knee to my hegemony (see SWIFT).
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: SGOS on October 20, 2018, 08:38:57 AM
Silver dimes?  Yes, I suppose some are still around.  Most have been taken out of circulation by hoarders.  I bought a tub of "junk silver" one time just to see what kind of an investment it was.  I bought quarters, but you can buy them assorted.  They come through the Post Office in plastic tubs with "MACHINE PARTS" stamped all over the container.  But when I went to pick them up the postal clerk said, "Oh, silver coins, huh?"  Like it was some big secret. 

I'm still befuddled about how worthless the money we use actually is.  There is some value in copper pennies and I suppose also in nickels and dimes, but when you get into the big bills is just paper and ink.  I've been told our money is backed by the US government so it actually has more value than the junk it's made out of.  But is this the same government that controls inflation, lies to me, and redistributes my tax dollars to wealthy campaign donors?  I'm still expecting it to collapse, and when it does there are going to be a lot of losers.

And if it is backed by the government, shouldn't I be able to trade my paper dollars in for something of value?  I suppose they would just pay for it using the same garbage I was trying to get rid of.  Or maybe some guy would say, "Here, you can have one of these savings bonds."  Like that helps a lot.  I should be able to get something useful like light bulbs or shovels.

Taxation backs the dollar (or any other currency).  You are required to pay taxes.  And required to do this in a particular currency.  This creates a demand for the dollar etc, every time you pay a tax, which is every time you make an economic exchange (see sales taxes or VAT).

So ultimately it is the power of the government, to put you in jail, or to wage war against our competitors, that makes the dollar valuable.  Because really, without the police, almost nobody would pay taxes.  Similarly ambitious and greedy people would be all over you, without any defenses, like Sweden and its refugees.

So yes, you can convert your digital or physical cash into purchased goods and services.  But at a price, determined by the government, under regulations determined by the government.  Unless the government lets you, your digital or physical cash is worth zero.

Ultimately however, the government can't allow you to keep gold or silver, because there is a perpetual shortage of these useful metals ... at least useful for government purposes.  In the end, the government can demand taxes in gold or silver, to pry any private metal wealth out of private hands.

Naive politics, naive economics = typical voter.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on October 20, 2018, 08:10:16 AM
The system would save having to load paper money into the machines.

The greatest saving is for the government to take what you have, and give nothing back.  That will come, accelerated by the digital Trojan Horse.  Negative interest rates and forced savings anyone?
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Mr.Obvious

Just watched doctor strange. One of the three movies I still had to see before avengers 3. The other being thor ragnarok and black panther. (Spiderman homecoming came after, right? Or before?)

It was... okay? Cumberbatch is fun to watch. The acting by the other's wasn't stellar but not bad either. Mikkelsen was a better villain in Hannibal than here though. Or in casino royale. Much more believeable too. I don't know... Maybe if I'd grown up with Doctor Strange, it'd have appealed to me more? Never even knew of him until this film. And 'magic' superheroes have always been less interesting to me. That's why Thor, while his attitude makes up for a lot, is my least favorite of the original avengers. I like him, but someone has to be ranked last. That's right, under black widow and hawkeye. Hawkeye rules.

But idunno. This is not a point i've come up with, but it's true, I feel. In the early marvel movies, and even the batman movies before their joined universe, being the dark knight and batman begins, were better than these movies. IMHO. They felt more 'believeable and tense'. Perhaps because now we've already seen so many and they all follow the same basic structure. But also because in all of these new flicks, the hero has to save the entire planet or universe from total annihilation. And that get's old and unreal fast. The stakes are so ridiculously high that there are no stakes because we know the world's not going to get destroyed. Avengers one earned that by bringing all of them together, but now one hero in the new movies does what the entire avengers assemble would have to pull together to do. So why even have the avengers if you could have had a doctor strange just reversing a nuclear blast? Why need the entire avengers army to save New York from an airborn invasion, when just cap, black widow, fury and angel-suit dude can take down three heli-carriers?

Compare it to the early movies. Spiderman movies did a lot wrong. But in the first one, spidey just fights a psychopatic batman (goblin, but yeah, you know...). Thor has to reclaim his honor and his kingdom by usurping a usurper. Hulk just wants to be left alone. Iron man has to duke it out with the man that wants to stab him in the back. They were smaller movies, but they were better for it. Now, every other movie tries to be Avengers.
But me... Perhaps: The lady doth protest too much, methinks
I mean, I'm still watching them all.
"If we have to go down, we go down together!"
- Your mum, last night, requesting 69.

Atheist Mantis does not pray.

Hydra009

#3606
Quote from: Mr.Obvious on October 25, 2018, 04:32:05 PMNever even knew of him until this film. And 'magic' superheroes have always been less interesting to me.
Same.  My knowledge of Doctor Strange was him appearing in a crossover where some dangerous magical entity has to be banished and he says "By the hoary hosts of Hoggath!" or some nonsense and saves the day.  Whoopee.

But the Doctor Strange movie was a pleasant surprise for me because:

1) I really liked the introduction of magic into the MCU.  It's more like well...surgery than hocus pocus.  Miraculous things are achievable, but only through a great deal knowledge, willpower, and focus.  Stark would call this sort of magic a previously unknown form of technology, and I dunno how inaccurate he'd be about that.

2) I liked Mister Doctor's character growth.  He's utterly unlikable at the start (probably too much so, since it's hard to feel bad for his early misfortune) but he's pretty thoroughly humbled and achieves not only self-mastery but cultivates empathy for others, open-mindedness, and a sense of responsibility.   Yeah, yeah, I know this has been done to death in Marvel movies, but it's a nice message.

3) I absolutely love the special effects work.  The fractal effects, rotating scenery reminiscent of Inception, the fire hula-hoop portals - I love that stuff.  And the chase scene with reality manipulation and counter-manipulation reminded me a lot of Mage: The Ascension.

4) I freaking LOVE how Doctor Strange was first introduced to magic.  That scene had me at the edge of my seat.  Jodie Foster from Contact, eat your heart out.

SGOS

#3607
Quote from: Mr.Obvious on October 25, 2018, 04:32:05 PM
Just watched doctor strange. One of the three movies I still had to see before avengers 3. The other being thor ragnarok and black panther. (Spiderman homecoming came after, right? Or before?)

It was... okay? Cumberbatch is fun to watch.
Deciding on a favorite Marvel hero is a dilemma no smaller than choosing which of your favorite ice cream toppings is the best.  It's all wonderfully delicious, but somehow we feel compelled to rank them.  But Dr. Strange is my favorite, and I think Hydra hit upon the thing that resonated with me the most.  I loved the magic.  The others all have special abilities, but Strange's clever magic seems to set him apart.  It's not magic spells that he creates but the unique things he conjures and how creatively he uses them.  Bending space time by walking through a portal was nifty, but in subsequent films he devises new ways to use the old portal gambit.  If he wants to get rid of an annoying enemy, instead of running through a portal to get a way, he throws the portal over the annoyance, and the annoyance ends up someplace far away.  I thought that was brilliant writing on Marvel's part.

Tony Stark was at one time the most arrogant of the lot, but Dr. Strange may top him.  However, Strange's arrogance is completely different, which is another great example of good creative writing by Marvel, although much of the credit should probably be shared by the actors, who can define a character's personality with devices of their own.  Stark swaggered and bragged, but Dr. Strange's arrogance has kind of a "bored with it all" quality.  He doesn't seem to be interested in impressing those around him.  He doesn't waste as much time showing off.  He just does what he needs to to.

If he needs a strand of hair from Thor to do some magic that Thor needs, but Thor is too defiant to let Strange touch one of his precious hairs, Strange doesn't do the, "Oh yeah?  We'll see about that," thing.  He just dematerializes in an instant, then rematerializes behind Thor, plucks out a hair and is gone before Thor knows what happened.  It's all about getting the job done, and his behavior and decisions come instantly out of nowhere and always catch me off guard.  His arrogance manifests itself through his obvious boredom with the defiance of others.  I love that guy's attitude.

Of course there's more to him than just that.  He suffers from internal conflicts like the others, but it seems to be to a lesser degree.  But we all have our favorites, and there's reasons to admire any one one of them over the others.


Gawdzilla Sama

The old Dr. Strange was a special type of egotist, he was amusing himself without concern for others, and using others for his amusement when available. He wasn't in love with himself, it was much more than that, he was alone in his universe.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

SGOS

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on October 26, 2018, 09:20:34 AM
The old Dr. Strange was a special type of egotist, he was amusing himself without concern for others, and using others for his amusement when available. He wasn't in love with himself, it was much more than that, he was alone in his universe.
Actually, that's a fair description of the Dr. Strange I know.  When he fucks with someone, he seems uninvolved, but I have this strong sense that deep down he's chuckling about it.

drunkenshoe

I didn't know anything about Dr. Strange other than his name before the movies and I have no idea how acuurate, but I liked the character Cumberbatch portrayed. He is indeed fun to watch. That man has a weird, asexual appearence that molds into any character he plays.   
"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

SGOS

Quote from: Hydra009 on October 25, 2018, 05:05:34 PM
3) I absolutely love the special effects work.  The fractal effects, rotating scenery reminiscent of Inception, the fire hula-hoop portals - I love that stuff.  And the chase scene with reality manipulation and counter-manipulation reminded me a lot of Mage: The Ascension.
IMO This is one of but a handful of movies that gets a worth while boost from 3D, and much of it comes during the these specific special effects scenes.  Most 3D films don't gain much from the 3D technology, and some arguments claim they suffer a negative distraction.  If all 3D movies besides the pitiful small handful got the same significant enhancement from the technology, I would buy a 3D projector and add it to my home theater room tomorrow.

Mr.Obvious

Quote from: drunkenshoe on October 26, 2018, 12:42:53 PM
I didn't know anything about Dr. Strange other than his name before the movies and I have no idea how acuurate, but I liked the character Cumberbatch portrayed. He is indeed fun to watch. That man has a weird, asexual appearence that molds into any character he plays.

Yeah, maybe. But on the other hand, there wasn't much difference to me inbox he playe this role, opporde to how he played Sherlock. Indeed, at times it seemed like they'd just handed his Sherlock a bunch of superpowers.
Now, i'm sure his portrayal of Sherlock, and The succes it garnered, helped to make them choose for him. But still, your riled Should be discernable. They weren't really to me.
"If we have to go down, we go down together!"
- Your mum, last night, requesting 69.

Atheist Mantis does not pray.

Gawdzilla Sama

I liked most of the 3D movies I've seen. I could live with the rest.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

SGOS

Being in 3D doesn't stop me.  If I show up at the theater and the next showing of the movie I want to see is in 3D, I'll buy the ticket.  On the other hand, I wouldn't go out of my way to see most 3D movies if other options were more convenient.