Related
game 1 just finished and it was a great game, close game throughout. Just wanted to spread my excitement right now. [COLOR="#red"]GO CELTICS, BEAT LA!![/COLOR]
Let's See are the Celtics going to Follow in the Red Sox Shoes Or the Patriots Shoes? Excellent Jubilation or Crushing Defeat? Hmmm...
Boooooo! Go LAKERS!!
JimmyMcGee said:
Let's See are the Celtics going to Follow in the Red Sox Shoes Or the Patriots Shoes? Excellent Jubilation or Crushing Defeat? Hmmm...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well i'm obviously hoping they follow the soxs, but it was only game 1 and both teams were getting adjusted to the playing style of the other. Celtics d was slacking, LA's pick and roll was killing us but LA's d wasn't that great either. Putting garnett in the post up is something we need to do more of, can't wait till Sunday for GAME 2..
extraducksauce said:
Boooooo! Go LAKERS!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL, my feelings are the exact opposite. BOOOOO LA, GO CELTS!! i forsee us winning this series AND THE CHAMPIONSHIP in 6 games. 3 IN BOSTON AND 1 IN LA. WE'LL SEE SUNDAY.
I'm definitely for BOOOOOO BOSTON. Boston has no finals experience nor do most of the players on the team so that's a huge downside. This is Doc River's first Final's appearance and the Zen Master has won 10 (not to mention the many other times he was there but lost). Let's see, Raja Bell had his turn, Bruce Bowen, and probably the whole Boston team will get a shot at him, but Kobe will get through Once again, great offense ALWAYS trumps great defense. Lakers will win in 5...max 6.
kareem9nba said:
I'm sorry but you can bring KG, Alonzo Mourning, Tim Duncan, Raja Bell, (the list continues on forever....), and they still wont stop him. I'm not all over him, but since i'm a huge fan of the game (been playing since i was 7ish and now i play high school ball), seeing such a player like that is just amazing. One thing you should remember, great offense will ALWAYS AND FOREVER trump great defense. History proves it . . .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kareem9nba said:
I'm definitely for BOOOOOO BOSTON. Boston has no finals experience nor do most of the players on the team so that's a huge downside. This is Doc River's first Final's appearance and the Zen Master has won 10 (not to mention the many other times he was there but lost). Let's see, Raja Bell had his turn, Bruce Bowen, and probably the whole Boston team will get a shot at him, but Kobe will get through Once again, great offense ALWAYS trumps great defense. Lakers will win in 5...max 6.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you that Kobe is an amazing player - ask most people here in Colorado what they think of him as a person and you will get a far less complimentary assessment. That said, although I am a Boston fan I am also a Gasol fan, and my initial impression was that Kobe and Gasol would be too much for the Celtics, so I was pleasantly surprised when the Celtics took game one. The heroics of Pierce were inspiring. I am glad that it looks like it will be an exciting series (like the NHL final was!), and not a walkover. I would still bet on Lakers to win but I hope it goes 7.
[email protected]#!#!# celts sucks
Aznskill2k said:
[email protected]#!#!# celts sucks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for that productive post.
LOL
looks like i'm flying solo rooting for the celts! it's all good, i'm a bostonian and have been all of my life, so i guess you can figure out my view on this series is kinda, (or really) bias. One more day and i'll be back on this board. Hopefully still bashin' on LA. LOL, later guys.
newbie1221 said:
LOL, my feelings are the exact opposite. BOOOOO LA, GO CELTS!! i forsee us winning this series AND THE CHAMPIONSHIP in 6 games. 3 IN BOSTON AND 1 IN LA. WE'LL SEE SUNDAY.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
with that AWESOME Celts road record, we'll see about that.
Ughh, those refs pised me off so bad--i felt like smashing all of them into the wall. WTH were those gay calls? Apparently, Kobe has to be shot down in order to get a foul or smacked on the face where as Rondo or Allen just have to be tapped. Lakers will still take it tonight--even if those gay refs don't cooperate.
kareem9nba said:
Ughh, those refs pised me off so bad--i felt like smashing all of them into the wall. WTH were those gay calls? Apparently, Kobe has to be shot down in order to get a foul or smacked on the face where as Rondo or Allen just have to be tapped. Lakers will still take it tonight--even if those gay refs don't cooperate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i doubt they will take it tonight, boston d is on point tonight. Defensive boards and stops all day. Offense running the way it's suppose to, 11-0 run in the third with bryant on the court and no help from the refs, no bs call in second half so far. those fouls called on bryant first half, 2 of 3 he deserved running through celtics trying to break the screen? no good... Powe was killing the post in both halfs and rondo is doing a hell of a job running offense.
There's been a whole load of crap calls in the third. I'll say that the lakers are playing like crap as well. HORRIBLE SHOT SELECTION. BENCH NEEDS to step up and wth did Powe COME FROM!?!!? This just pissed me off.
kareem9nba said:
There's been a whole load of crap calls in the third. I'll say that the lakers are playing like crap as well. HORRIBLE SHOT SELECTION. BENCH NEEDS to step up and wth did Powe COME FROM!?!!? This just pissed me off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BOOOOHOOOOO... ahahaha
kareem9nba said:
There's been a whole load of crap calls in the third. I'll say that the lakers are playing like crap as well. HORRIBLE SHOT SELECTION. BENCH NEEDS to step up and wth did Powe COME FROM!?!!? This just pissed me off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The celts bench has a pretty good arsenal, mix of veteran and rooks that are ready at a moments notice. Powe, he finally got of the bench, he's always produced when needed. Only reason why he doesn't see much time is because perkins is mostly on the floor. And LA's D just isn't there. Up 20 pts going into the forth, BEAT LA!!!
Didn't like how it ended but the celts WIN!!! 2-0 BEAT LA!!!!
Well, if you're the Lakers, you're probably super pissed off, but then again feel some sort of relief. After playing one of the CRAPIEST games of the season and Boston playing amazingly, you manage getting the game to 2 points and a chance at the win. Not bad if you ask me. Had the refs not been so gay, LA would have had a chance to take the Finals back in LA. I still think lakers will get it in 6 (yes 4 straight).
kareem9nba said:
Well, if you're the Lakers, you're probably super pissed off, but then again feel some sort of relief. After playing one of the CRAPIEST games of the season and Boston playing amazingly, you manage getting the game to 2 points and a chance at the win. Not bad if you ask me. Had the refs not been so gay, LA would have had a chance to take the Finals back in LA. I still think lakers will get it in 6 (yes 4 straight).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well the celts played amazing D then got stupid in the forth and just let LA get the open looks they wanted and made. I'll give LA credit they have an array of guys who are spot up 3 point killers. Hitting 6 3's in the forth is just unacceptable.
LOL 4 straight? i dont think so. Boston takes game 4 and 6, Game over.
Don't worry even if LA comes back the Celtics will take one from the play book of the Patriots and find a way to cheat.
Besides the NBA is not a real sport. It has become entertainment more then anything. Honestly you could call a foul in the NBA on about every play. The refs make a huge deciding factor on the outcome of the game. To me....that is not a sport.
Hey guys, I would love to hear your opinions on my short film that i've made. This is my 2nd short film including my student short film from last year.
We spent about $300 for the whole short film, pre-production to completion. We didn't have much money to make the movie to begin with, so we went in and hoped for the best. The crew was very small too, but I guess we have to start somewhere
I encountered many problems, which you'd expect for such a low budget short film (especially actors), but I've learnt from those mistakes as I begin writing my next short film and hope for a much better output for the next one.
We got busted by the police for the traffic light scene with helicopters and all, but they were nice enough to let us go.
enjoy and let me know what you think
http://vimeo.com/18583050
PASSWORD: purgatory01
I'd appreciate it if you 'like' the page for extra support for our little crew of young film makers
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Aurolis-Pictures/333582799758
Psygnosis84 said:
Hey guys, I would love to hear your opinions on my short film that i've made. This is my 2nd short film including my student short film from last year.
We spent about $300 for the whole short film, pre-production to completion. We didn't have much money to make the movie to begin with, so we went in and hoped for the best. The crew was very small too, but I guess we have to start somewhere
I encountered many problems, which you'd expect for such a low budget short film (especially actors), but I've learnt from those mistakes as I begin writing my next short film and hope for a much better output for the next one.
We got busted by the police for the traffic light scene with helicopters and all, but they were nice enough to let us go.
enjoy and let me know what you think
http://vimeo.com/18583050
PASSWORD: purgatory01
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like you had some fun doing that! I would watch it, but I have to watch my download use for the rest of January... 10 days and we have used up 3/5 of our quota... and the movie file size is about 350mb I think it says, so tomorrow morning (off-peak ;D). Looks rather professional in the very first part!
Jonathon Grigg said:
Sounds like you had some fun doing that! I would watch it, but I have to watch my download use for the rest of January... 10 days and we have used up 3/5 of our quota... and the movie file size is about 350mb I think it says, so tomorrow morning (off-peak ;D). Looks rather professional in the very first part!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was very challenging, especially shooting the whole film guerrilla style with no permission from the council, but I guess that's half the fun
looking forward to your feedback/criticism
Jonathon Grigg said:
Sounds like you had some fun doing that! I would watch it, but I have to watch my download use for the rest of January... 10 days and we have used up 3/5 of our quota... and the movie file size is about 350mb I think it says, so tomorrow morning (off-peak ;D). Looks rather professional in the very first part!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
life is great living off a feeding tube isnt it
ot:
i think it was a bit too much of "dream in the dream" stuff , and i miss a happy ending , whys it called purgatory then ?
after purgatory folks end up in heaven but the ending story isnt what id call heaven
That was much more professional than what I was expecting. Good job.
Psygnosis84 said:
It was very challenging, especially shooting the whole film guerrilla style with no permission from the council, but I guess that's half the fun
looking forward to your feedback/criticism
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's more than half the fun! I have had some friends make very very short films, one of them they dressed up as a yeti and walked around the local streets So many cars stopped! I think one even started chasing them... still good times. I'll do my best in helping you with advice etc!
Will have a look and post later
Hmmm
Sent from my X10i
Psygnosis84 said:
Hey guys, I would love to hear your opinions on my short film that i've made. This is my 2nd short film including my student short film from last year.
We spent about $300 for the whole short film, pre-production to completion. We didn't have much money to make the movie to begin with, so we went in and hoped for the best. The crew was very small too, but I guess we have to start somewhere
I encountered many problems, which you'd expect for such a low budget short film (especially actors), but I've learnt from those mistakes as I begin writing my next short film and hope for a much better output for the next one.
We got busted by the police for the traffic light scene with helicopters and all, but they were nice enough to let us go.
enjoy and let me know what you think
http://vimeo.com/18583050
PASSWORD: purgatory01
I'd appreciate it if you 'like' the page for extra support for our little crew of young film makers
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Aurolis-Pictures/333582799758
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, firstly, you have a great camera-man! Those panning shots were smooth and I didn't see much if any shuddering etc. The focus is great, works especially well with the lights in the night, gives it some visual depth.
Music was soft and helpful for meaning in some scenes, and that keychain/locket was a good symbol for realising which car it was.
The actors weren't that bad in my opinion, way better than anything I could ever do Like others have said, it's more professional than I was expecting! The storyline was a bit confusing at times (or maybe it was me...) but I guess there's only so much you can fit into 16 minutes, so well done there.
Great job overall, keep up the good work! 'Liked' Maybe you should consider entering it somewhere, I'm not sure what's on in Sydney but it's worth a shot.
Just one thing though, why were you busted for the traffic light scene? Were you there for a while or something? I guess we only saw a tiny bit...
souljaboy said:
ot:
i think it was a bit too much of "dream in the dream" stuff , and i miss a happy ending , whys it called purgatory then ?
after purgatory folks end up in heaven but the ending story isnt what id call heaven
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
pur·ga·to·ry (pûrˈgə-tôrˌē, -tōrˌē)
noun pl. purgatories pur·ga·to·ries
A place or condition of suffering, expiation, or remorse: a purgatory of drug abuse.
purgatory; mental anguish or suffering
It's related to his past and the continued mental suffering he had every night. Especially the hallucinations caused by the pills he took to calm his anxiety attacks, which he didn't know were caused by the pills and was always stuck in this loop of events that haunted him, which is why the ending when Sandra's mother takes the pills from him, he is now able to deal with the past better because of the truth but also because the pills aren't there to bring back those hallucinations anymore to play with his mind again.
mikkohypponen said:
That was much more professional than what I was expecting. Good job.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks , glad you liked it
Jonathon Grigg said:
That's more than half the fun! I have had some friends make very very short films, one of them they dressed up as a yeti and walked around the local streets So many cars stopped! I think one even started chasing them... still good times. I'll do my best in helping you with advice etc!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha, I would've loved to see that!!
The one other thing I have to mention about this movie was the fact that the main character didn't know how to drive a car properly, he was very very bad actually. 'Smoke and mirrors' made him look like a very good driver in the end.
Jonathon Grigg said:
Well, firstly, you have a great camera-man! Those panning shots were smooth and I didn't see much if any shuddering etc. The focus is great, works especially well with the lights in the night, gives it some visual depth.
Music was soft and helpful for meaning in some scenes, and that keychain/locket was a good symbol for realising which car it was.
The actors weren't that bad in my opinion, way better than anything I could ever do Like others have said, it's more professional than I was expecting! The storyline was a bit confusing at times (or maybe it was me...) but I guess there's only so much you can fit into 16 minutes, so well done there.
Great job overall, keep up the good work! 'Liked' Maybe you should consider entering it somewhere, I'm not sure what's on in Sydney but it's worth a shot.
Just one thing though, why were you busted for the traffic light scene? Were you there for a while or something? I guess we only saw a tiny bit...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We got busted by the cops because we had one car sit in the middle of the road high beaming the main characters car (when his face lights up as the other car speeds up towards him). This was around 11pm and the neighbours probably thought were doing something illegal like preparing for a drag race (we were beaming each other for 10 minutes) All of a sudden the ground illuminates and we look up and see a helicopter shining a light towards us, a minute later police arrive :\
The story was confusing at times but I made it so you essentially had to look back at even the subtle stuff he did, such as taking the pills then immediately after seeing the ghost car and girl to get a drift of the story.
To ease the confusion a bit for everyone, he was chasing himself. I left it open in one of the sections when Sandra reveals her name. In the story the character say's he doesn't know her however if the pills were causing only hallucinations, then how does he know he name. I left this part open for the audience to think for themselves. Did he know her name because of her death being mentioned at school but had completely forgotten about her until that night when he finally chases his own car and meets the girl or was she really a ghost who came down to tell him the truth about her actions.
The story was too complex for a short film but I think it was only after seeing so many simple linear short films that I wanted to take a different approach.
About entering it into festivals. I'm worried that the film isn't "good enough" yet to be shown at film festivals because of the small problems here and there. I'm trying to create a short film that really stands out at the film festivals and I personally don't believe this film is there yet.
Glad you liked it
I'm watching it right now, seen half of it, slow streaming
pretty cool, love it
only you have one problem, the camera shadow appears look at the photo
husam666 said:
I'm watching it right now, seen half of it, slow streaming
pretty cool, love it
only you have one problem, the camera shadow appears look at the photo
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I noticed that, but I couldn't do anything about it because by the time the other car turns left, it doesn't leave much room to fit in that shot and to give it the same kind of impact. I wanted to cut on the action of the main character turning left to the motion of the car but unfortunately the street lights caused a shadow. In the end, it was a very small problem that I couldn't to cut out because the content of the material was more important than the shadow appearing.
Psygnosis84 said:
We got busted by the cops because we had one car sit in the middle of the road high beaming the main characters car (when his face lights up as the other car speeds up towards him). This was around 11pm and the neighbours probably thought were doing something illegal like preparing for a drag race (we were beaming each other for 10 minutes) All of a sudden the ground illuminates and we look up and see a helicopter shining a light towards us, a minute later police arrive :\
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be an experience! You should tell that story at parties and stuff But I guess if I was one of the neighbours I would be a little worried... still at least you got off safe!
The story was confusing at times but I made it so you essentially had to look back at even the subtle stuff he did, such as taking the pills then immediately after seeing the ghost car and girl to get a drift of the story.
To ease the confusion a bit for everyone, he was chasing himself. I left it open in one of the sections when Sandra reveals her name. In the story the character say's he doesn't know her however if the pills were causing only hallucinations, then how does he know he name. I left this part open for the audience to think for themselves. Did he know her name because of her death being mentioned at school but had completely forgotten about her until that night when he finally chases his own car and meets the girl or was she really a ghost who came down to tell him the truth about her actions.
The story was too complex for a short film but I think it was only after seeing so many simple linear short films that I wanted to take a different approach.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought the pills may have had something to do with it! But I was still tired when I was watching it, so it didn't click then But when you say it like that, it does fall into place, so maybe it's a better plot than I thought
And different approaches are always good
Jonathon Grigg said:
That would be an experience! You should tell that story at parties and stuff But I guess if I was one of the neighbours I would be a little worried... still at least you got off safe!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Believe it or not, that single traffic light scene was the hardest part of the whole film. We were running against the time especially having to deal with a public road and waiting for the road to clear on both sides for the other car to drive straight through... oh my goodness, what a nightmare hehe.
I thought the pills may have had something to do with it! But I was still tired when I was watching it, so it didn't click then But when you say it like that, it does fall into place, so maybe it's a better plot than I thought
And different approaches are always good
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks hehe, yeah the plot appears to jump here and there but hopefully if the viewers pay attention to the small stuff that happen, then maybe the bigger picture makes more sense.
Hey guys.
I started watching this from its first episode. I like the "what is actually going on here? " feel to it. I stopped watching it every week though cuz now, out of a thirteen episode season, only 2 episodes are dedicated to the bigger picture of the show. The there's 11 filler episodes which is just a man in a dog suit, ****ting on elijahs character for 30 min.
Which is my main problem with the show. I don't wanna watch 30 episodes of a guy acting like a dog just to get to the few episodes that explain things.
I have a few theories though now that I've caught myself up with season 3....
Wilfred is ryans guide through a sort of purgatory due to the over dose being successful. However, I don't like that theory since it's the first thing people think of.
The one in leaning toward the most is, he's like the trickster gods throughout religion.
He creates mayhem, because he enjoys it.
There's two ways that could go though, one, it benefits Elijahs character in some way... Or two, it doesn't. But with the last episode of season 3, with the drawings and his dad and the symbol and the statue....I think it's obvious that he's some metaphysical type of entity.
The statue had the typical Joker type face on him too.
Then there's Bruce. Who im beginning to think is some animal too. Maybe a cat. But I don't know why he wouldn't have a costume on too. But I don't think Bruce is a person in the real world.
I like the concept of this show a lot. However, I hate that the main concept is usual only covered in the first and the last two episodes of each season.
Contemplating getting the S5....
SaintCity86 said:
Hey guys.
I started watching this from its first episode. I like the "what is actually going on here? " feel to it. I stopped watching it every week though cuz now, out of a thirteen episode season, only 2 episodes are dedicated to the bigger picture of the show. The there's 11 filler episodes which is just a man in a dog suit, ****ting on elijahs character for 30 min.
Which is my main problem with the show. I don't wanna watch 30 episodes of a guy acting like a dog just to get to the few episodes that explain things.
I have a few theories though now that I've caught myself up with season 3....
Wilfred is ryans guide through a sort of purgatory due to the over dose being successful. However, I don't like that theory since it's the first thing people think of.
The one in leaning toward the most is, he's like the trickster gods throughout religion.
He creates mayhem, because he enjoys it.
There's two ways that could go though, one, it benefits Elijahs character in some way... Or two, it doesn't. But with the last episode of season 3, with the drawings and his dad and the symbol and the statue....I think it's obvious that he's some metaphysical type of entity.
The statue had the typical Joker type face on him too.
Then there's Bruce. Who im beginning to think is some animal too. Maybe a cat. But I don't know why he wouldn't have a costume on too. But I don't think Bruce is a person in the real world.
I like the concept of this show a lot. However, I hate that the main concept is usual only covered in the first and the last two episodes of each season.
Contemplating getting the S5....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, but I have to disagree. To me, Wilfred is Ryan's saviour. Yes everything looks bad, but he always helps him. There have been no end of episodes that start out with Wilfred saying something seemingly innocuous, but then when he repeats it again at the end of the episode it all makes sense and it turns out he was right all along.
I think Wilfred is Ryan's guide and possibly Ryan has been dead all along, like a 6th Sense meets Jacob's Ladder kind of world.
The American version has that long-running back story, but other than that it's staying pretty true to the original. Did you ever watch the Australian one? I'd highly recommend it, and it has nothing to do with the American storyline so it won't spoil anything. You can clearly see the evolution from that to the US version, and that evolution is the attempt to explain Wilfred. The Australian one is pretty much a buddy programme, with a farting, swearing dog.
I love Wilfred and can't wait for the 4th season to start!
Yeah but that's the part of the show I don't like. If he is some metaphysical gaurdian Angel, then why is most the season him acting like a stupid dog. I think they should stay true to the deeper storyline about what's really going on.... Instead of only dedicating 3 episodes to the story, and filling the rest with fart jokes. One things for sure, Wilfred is not being honest. And so far, it seems he's getting worse and worse. For the better eventually...idk
Contemplating getting the S5....
The purpose of this thread is to both provide others with ideas of what to watch and perhaps build interest in shows that you may have not previously considered.
List (in your own words):
The shows that you are currently watching
What the are about
Why you like them
Black Mirror (Contains profanity)
About: A dystopian future drama/sci-fi series in which humanity has become enslaved in itself. Each episode is basically it's own show and has some sort of bizarre twist.
Why I like it: It's bizarre, you don't really know the twist until the end and it is a fresh take at TV. Nothing is outside the realm of possibility on this show. (Netflix is renewing this one)
The Transporter (Contains nudity)
About: Based on the movies, it a series of mini-stories of Frank's life as the transporter
Why I like it While it isn't the same actor as the movie (Jason Statham), it is entertaining never the less. It's a bit cheesy but the plot lines are interesting and the special effects aren't bad.
X-Files
About: Mystery stories about the bizarre and aliens.
Why I like it: Really really cheesy by todays standards but its nostalgia.
Hemlock Grove (Contains profanity)
About: To be honest I have no fricken clue but see below
Why I like it It has a bizarre feel to it, almost like American Horror story'ish but better
LillyHammer (Contains profanity & Nudity)
About: A comedy mob story about a mobster who goes into hiding in Norway and tries to live a quite life but don't go as planned.
Why I like it It's got Steven Van Zandt from the Sopranos and it is just a funny awkward humors show.
Marco Polo (Contains profanity & Nudity)
About: Netflix's verison of Game of Thrones but taking place in Asia. That about sums it up.
Why I like it It's a different take on Game of Thrones (which I have never seen because I don't have HBO)
Orange is the New Black (Contains profanity & Nudity)
About: A girl who made all the right choices to live the high life find that they were wrong once she's grown up. Goes to prison and learns that life is very different.
Why I like it It's interesting to see how different interaction is on the inside and the characters she encounters. Crazy Eyes is hilarious too.
House of Cards
I just binge watched all 3 seasons of House of Cards this Labor Day weekend. It was pretty good and I recommend it. Political drama with scandals, getting ahead, etc etc
Very reflective of our current political scene with the lack of ethics etc, but holds your attention with amazing acting, especially by Kevin Spacey who was an awesome actor in his own right before the show.
Definitely recommend, and you can get all 3 seasons on Netflix, with season 4 coming in 2016 (filming now)
Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt
This show is funny as hell. And not that lame humor you see in most shows like Big Bang Theory and Friends etc (no offense if you like those shows) but more subtle and "intelligent" humor, somewhat like 30 Rock but even a bit different and better I think.
The plot doesn't matter too much, but it's some girl who was in a bunker for years while some dude had them in there because they thought the end of the world happened, then she comes out to see the world etc, but it's really funny and definitely recommended. Season 1 is on Netflix to binge watch, season 2 coming in 2016.
__________________________________________________
Both shows I mention are actually owned by Netflix, who in my opinion has hit home runs with their original broadcasting.
@SyCoREAPER - you've got me interested in Black Mirror now, never even heard of it and have been looking for a new binge watching show to compliment my Sunday NFL couch sitting!
I watch very little TV, I will go a month without watching literally anything then spend 3 days literally do nothing but binge watching a show, so these Netflix shows are really good for that purpose.
kentuckymike said:
Can you share how to unblock netflix for a specific country?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really on topic for this thread, but I think you can only do it with a VPN possibly... probably better to discuss it in another thread though.
If you've seen the movie, go ahead and share your thoughts here. I'll go first. Obviously, I understand this is just a movie, it's made for the entertainment value, but I can't help picking it apart.
Overall, I think the movie did what it was supposed to do - a "feel good" flick about America. The nostalgia was nice. But, my experience as a Marine veteran as well as knowledge of military aviation raised a lot of issues for me.
First...The SR-72/Aurora/Darkwing project. It's plausible that someone like Maverick could indeed become a test pilot, but most such projects are run under the Air Force, at the end of a pilot's career. It would have made more sense to put this at the end of the movie, although he would have a literal snowflake's chance in hell of surviving a Mach 10+ disintegration. The human body cannot withstand supersonic ejection; the force of the air stream can literally rip your body apart. Maverick would have been pink mist. Also...You crash a multi-billion (if not trillion) dollar prototype, chances are you'll never fly again.
This brings me to the bar scene, where apparently no one knows who he is, and he eventually gets thrown out by Hangman and the other pilots. The problem with this is, someone like Maverick would have quite the reputation; everyone there would have been buying him drinks, not throwing him out on his ass. Not to mention anyone in the military knows you don't put your hands on an O-6.
I do like the line where he tells Penny "Being a fighter pilot is what I am". This is true for pretty much every career pilot I've known - their whole life revolves around it, and when it's over, they have a lot of trouble finding a sense of purpose. It's tough to know you're staring at the end of something you've done (and loved) your entire adult life, wondering what the hell do you do now?
The element of TOPGUN itself, the Navy's Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor program, was rather lacking. The pilots were all graduates of TOPGUN, sure...but the idea that only they could perform the mission doesn't make sense. In reality, the military would simply use whatever assets that were the closest and most capable. But, assuming all this...Why are all these pilots struggling against G's like 2nd week flight school boots in the G trainer? They're fighter pilots, not truck drivers. They should be well used to handling high Gs with composure. Then Phoenix crashes her jet...Bird strikes are a thing, engine flameouts are a thing, but she apparently forgot all the boldface procedures. Chances are she'd still have at least limited power even with a fragged motor, and there's no reason she'd lose control of the jet. Still, she crashed it, and they still somehow sent her on this high risk mission. In reality, that wouldn't happen...She wouldn't necessarily be grounded, but she'd be off the team after that. And why are they flying out of NAS North Island? TOPGUN has been at NAS Fallon since 1996, and it's just a waste of gas to fly back and forth that far. That being said, they could have been training at MCAGCC Twentynine Palms, also out in the middle of the Mojave desert. Also, why are two admirals running TOPGUN? And what's the point of Hangman? His story arc is basically "mean girl" > "Not mean girl". No pilot would volunteer for mission commander; if anything they'd fight about who DOESN'T want to be mission commander.
The mission itself doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It's extremely unlikely that something high risk like this would be flown by a four ship strike package of Rhinos (Super Hornets). A real strike package would have included AWACS, air superiority fighters, SEAD taking out the SAMs, most likely some EA-18G Growlers...and if they absolutely had to be subtle, they'd use F-35Cs....assuming the mission wasn't carried out by Air Force B-2's. GPS jamming is a thing, but it's much harder to jam laser, and they'd probably drop some SEALs in to lase the target for them. The whole valley thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense, either. No way is any adversary going to leave such an obvious back door open. That entire valley would be littered with SAMs, MANPADs, and AAA....and if for whatever reason they didn't see them on radar (which they would have while they were out to sea) they would definitely have heard them. The TLAM strike does make sense, but they'd probably program them with an off-axis waypoint so they didn't come in from the same direction as the fighters. The pilots wouldn't be too happy about missiles flying a couple hundred feet over their heads; if one goes haywire, that could be it for you or your wingman. It's worth noting that TLAMs are subsonic cruise missiles, too, so they wouldn't be outrunning fighters cruising at 400+ knots.
The diving delivery doesn't make a whole lot of sense. F/A-18s are 4th generation fighters; laser guided bombs don't have to be dropped in a dive, they just have to be dropped into a virtual "basket" where the seeker head can acquire the laser signal. They could do this while staying under the rim of the mountain crater.
The F-14 scene is pretty cool, although if he'd taken off using flaps...he might have saved the nose gear. But, if he saved the nose gear, he wouldn't be able to barricade, and movies have to have tension, right? That being said, the chances of surviving against not just one, but two Su-57s in a F-14 are...Not great. The Felon's capabilities are doubted, sure...the cockpit looks like it has very poor rear visibility...but, it is a 5th gen fighter with 3D thrust vectoring. It would make quick work out of the heavy, ungainly F-35, let alone a Tomcat, and modern heat seeking missiles like the AIM-9X and R-73 (R-74 in the Su-57's case) are hard to decoy with flares. There's no way flying through a canyon would confuse the Felon's systems...they'd just hang back and keep firing missiles until they brought the Tomcat down. They wouldn't bother following it through the canyon, either...they could just fly a couple thousand feet above and behind and maintain visual contact.
Finally...nobody would be crowding the flight deck celebrating. Everyone topside has a job; if your job doesn't involve you being on the flight deck, you won't be there. Their first priority would be ensuring nothing caught fire, and they did that. Second priority would be clearing the deck, because an aircraft carrier is busy 24/7 with launches, recoveries, and training.
Anyway, that's just my take. Feel free to share yours.
We Were Soldiers and Hamburger Hill are good... never liked Tom bs Cruise at all.
blackhawk said:
We Were Soldiers and Hamburger Hill are good... never liked Tom bs Cruise at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hacksaw Ridge was pretty excellent too. I'm not a huge fan of Cruise either but the intent here is to talk about what we like or didn't like about Maverick
V0latyle said:
Hacksaw Ridge was pretty excellent too. I'm not a huge fan of Cruise either but the intent here is to talk about what we like or didn't like about Maverick
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Numerous technical errors as usual... try to pretend you're stupid, don't think, pretend it's not Tom Cruise and the movie might be ok.
Probably not.
I once shot out a 30" crt with a 9mm Glaser safety slug because Tom Cruise was on it at that time. Got him center mass
Deeply satisfying and the micro shrapnel from it was incredible. Replaced the crt for $169... it was so worth it.
After thinking over, watch Spy Hard instead. Far more believable, better script and acting too
Dang! Glad I saw the movie before reading all of this. I loved it! Could care less about all the technical authenticity or whatever, I go to the movies to forget about the real world, and if I wanted to see all this technical stuff, I could have saved the $60 bucks, had a few sips of Scotch and looked it all up on the interwebz, and forgotten all about it anyways!
Good thing Badgers are simple creatures!
Badger50 said:
Dang! Glad I saw the movie before reading all of this. I loved it! Could care less about all the technical authenticity or whatever, I go to the movies to forget about the real world, and if I wanted to see all this technical stuff, I could have saved the $60 bucks, had a few sips of Scotch and looked it all up on the interwebz, and forgotten all about it anyways!
Good thing Badgers are simple creatures!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any critter that decorates its den entrance with bones from its plunders isn't a simple creature
blackhawk said:
simple creature
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you meant, Simply effective!
Badger50 said:
I think you meant, Simply effective!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Simply hungry too
Meh... saw it.
Great cinematography... at times,
sound track- meh,
script- another death star miracle... it was pretentious and rehashed.
wokeness- a token women top gun, lame.
It had a click to it but it felt like a 80yo cougar making a pass at you.
It's ok... hella better then any of the new woke Disney crap
Guess I'll watch it again. Older Tom Cruise isn't nearly as anoying as young TC.
What do two F18 pilots, Wombat and Mover think?
They bring up some interesting aspects of the movie.
I want to believe... *explodes into pink mist*
The sequel to a classic created another classic...Tom Cruise back as Maverick is fantastic...a film to watch and re-watch..
V0latyle said:
If you've seen the movie, go ahead and share your thoughts here. I'll go first. Obviously, I understand this is just a movie, it's made for the entertainment value, but I can't help picking it apart.
Overall, I think the movie did what it was supposed to do - a "feel good" flick about America. The nostalgia was nice. But, my experience as a Marine veteran as well as knowledge of military aviation raised a lot of issues for me.
First...The SR-72/Aurora/Darkwing project. It's plausible that someone like Maverick could indeed become a test pilot, but most such projects are run under the Air Force, at the end of a pilot's career. It would have made more sense to put this at the end of the movie, although he would have a literal snowflake's chance in hell of surviving a Mach 10+ disintegration. The human body cannot withstand supersonic ejection; the force of the air stream can literally rip your body apart. Maverick would have been pink mist. Also...You crash a multi-billion (if not trillion) dollar prototype, chances are you'll never fly again.
This brings me to the bar scene, where apparently no one knows who he is, and he eventually gets thrown out by Hangman and the other pilots. The problem with this is, someone like Maverick would have quite the reputation; everyone there would have been buying him drinks, not throwing him out on his ass.
I do like the line where he tells Penny "Being a fighter pilot is what I am". This is true for pretty much every career pilot I've known - their whole life revolves around it, and when it's over, they have a lot of trouble finding a sense of purpose. It's tough to know you're staring at the end of something you've done (and loved) your entire adult life, wondering what the hell do you do now?
The element of TOPGUN itself, the Navy's Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor program, was rather lacking. The pilots were all graduates of TOPGUN, sure...but the idea that only they could perform the mission doesn't make sense. In reality, the military would simply use whatever assets that were the closest and most capable. But, assuming all this...Why are all these pilots struggling against G's like 2nd week flight school boots in the G trainer? They're fighter pilots, not truck drivers. They should be well used to handling high Gs with composure. Then Phoenix crashes her jet...Bird strikes are a thing, engine flameouts are a thing, but she apparently forgot all the boldface procedures. Chances are she'd still have at least limited power even with a fragged motor, and there's no reason she'd lose control of the jet. Still, she crashed it, and they still somehow sent her on this high risk mission. In reality, that wouldn't happen...She wouldn't necessarily be grounded, but she'd be off the team after that. And why are they flying out of NAS North Island? TOPGUN has been at NAS Fallon since 1996, and it's just a waste of gas to fly back and forth that far. That being said, they could have been training at MCAGCC Twentynine Palms, also out in the middle of the Mojave desert. Also, why are two admirals running TOPGUN? And what's the point of Hangman? His story arc is basically "mean girl" > "Not mean girl". No pilot would volunteer for mission commander; if anything they'd fight about who DOESN'T want to be mission commander.
The mission itself doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It's extremely unlikely that something high risk like this would be flown by a four ship strike package of Rhinos (Super Hornets). A real strike package would have included AWACS, air superiority fighters, SEAD taking out the SAMs, most likely some EA-18G Growlers...and if they absolutely had to be subtle, they'd use F-35Cs....assuming the mission wasn't carried out by Air Force B-2's. GPS jamming is a thing, but it's much harder to jam laser, and they'd probably drop some SEALs in to lase the target for them. The whole valley thing doesn't make a whole lot of sense, either. No way is any adversary going to leave such an obvious back door open. That entire valley would be littered with SAMs, MANPADs, and AAA....and if for whatever reason they didn't see them on radar (which they would have while they were out to sea) they would definitely have heard them. The TLAM strike does make sense, but they'd probably program them with an off-axis waypoint so they didn't come in from the same direction as the fighters. The pilots wouldn't be too happy about missiles flying a couple hundred feet over their heads; if one goes haywire, that could be it for you or your wingman. It's worth noting that TLAMs are subsonic cruise missiles, too, so they wouldn't be outrunning fighters cruising at 400+ knots.
The diving delivery doesn't make a whole lot of sense. F/A-18s are 4th generation fighters; laser guided bombs don't have to be dropped in a dive, they just have to be dropped into a virtual "basket" where the seeker head can acquire the laser signal. They could do this while staying under the rim of the mountain crater.
The F-14 scene is pretty cool, although if he'd taken off using flaps...he might have saved the nose gear. But, if he saved the nose gear, he wouldn't be able to barricade, and movies have to have tension, right? That being said, the chances of surviving against not just one, but two Su-57s in a F-14 are...Not great. The Felon's capabilities are doubted, sure...the cockpit looks like it has very poor rear visibility...but, it is a 5th gen fighter with 3D thrust vectoring. It would make quick work out of the heavy, ungainly F-35, let alone a Tomcat, and modern heat seeking missiles like the AIM-9X and R-73 (R-74 in the Su-57's case) are hard to decoy with flares. There's no way flying through a canyon would confuse the Felon's systems...they'd just hang back and keep firing missiles until they brought the Tomcat down. They wouldn't bother following it through the canyon, either...they could just fly a couple thousand feet above and behind and maintain visual contact.
Finally...nobody would be crowding the flight deck celebrating. Everyone topside has a job; if your job doesn't involve you being on the flight deck, you won't be there. Their first priority would be ensuring nothing caught fire, and they did that. Second priority would be clearing the deck, because an aircraft carrier is busy 24/7 with launches, recoveries, and training.
Anyway, that's just my take. Feel free to share yours.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The best Way to explain what I think is summed up in the video of this guy..
*not my video* hope it’s ok to post
I think maverick died in the beginning and lived his dream afterlife. However, we will never know.
I’ve read many posts about it, so I don’t think I’m the only one (besides the guy making the video).
It makes sense. But if he died that also means.. no part 3. 🫤
Cv7676 said:
The best Way to explain what I think is summed up in the video of this guy..
*not my video* hope it’s ok to post
I think maverick died in the beginning and lived his dream afterlife. However, we will never know.
I’ve read many posts about it, so I don’t think I’m the only one (besides the guy making the video).
It makes sense. But if he died that also means.. no part 3. 🫤
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's one way to put it.
On another topic, I saw several comments on YouTube insisting that they used minimal CGI in the movie because Tom Cruise apparently doesn't like doing CGI. So, explain these:
- The SR-72 Darkstar is still in development; if there are any flying prototypes, they are undoubtedly UAVs, much less capable of Mach 10.
- The US military has very specific rules on "safety bubbles" in training - a buffer zone around your aircraft that MUST be clear of other aircraft, the only exceptions being formation flight. Even professional stunt pilots like the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds maintain "bubbles" of at least several hundred feet and use perspective angles to create the illusion of much closer proximity for maneuvers such as the head on break. Why would the military break hard and fast rules written in blood for a film?
- There are only 5 total flying Su-57/PAK-FA fighters, all in the Russian Air Force. How exactly did the Navy gain cooperation from a historically belligerent foreign military to use their 5th generation fighters for a film?
- The only flying F-14 Tomcats are all owned by Iran, again historically belligerent towards the United States, so same problem as above. While a real F-14 was used in the movie, it's a non-flying airframe with no engines or avionics that was shipped in pieces to the film set.
- The missiles...think those were real?
- The one thing that MIGHT be real would be the Mi-24 helicopter, just because there are so many all around the world.
V0latyle said:
That's one way to put it.
On another topic, I saw several comments on YouTube insisting that they used minimal CGI in the movie because Tom Cruise apparently doesn't like doing CGI. So, explain these:
- The SR-72 Darkstar is still in development; if there are any flying prototypes, they are undoubtedly UAVs, much less capable of Mach 10.
- The US military has very specific rules on "safety bubbles" in training - a buffer zone around your aircraft that MUST be clear of other aircraft, the only exceptions being formation flight. Even professional stunt pilots like the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds maintain "bubbles" of at least several hundred feet and use perspective angles to create the illusion of much closer proximity for maneuvers such as the head on break. Why would the military break hard and fast rules written in blood for a film?
- There are only 5 total flying Su-57/PAK-FA fighters, all in the Russian Air Force. How exactly did the Navy gain cooperation from a historically belligerent foreign military to use their 5th generation fighters for a film?
- The only flying F-14 Tomcats are all owned by Iran, again historically belligerent towards the United States, so same problem as above. While a real F-14 was used in the movie, it's a non-flying airframe with no engines or avionics that was shipped in pieces to the film set.
- The missiles...think those were real?
- The one thing that MIGHT be real would be the Mi-24 helicopter, just because there are so many all around the world.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you watch Hamburger Hill or We Were Soldiers you don't have turn off your your intellect while watching, but it may get bruised. Hamburger Hill is one of the most realistic war movies ever made. My Nam buddy Al said "It was like that!". It seems plotless and random, horrible $hit happens just like war. Hard to say who "won".
I've watched Hamburger Hill over a dozen times.
Das Boot (director's cut) is another excellent war movie. Uboat ace Captain Eric Topp was a consultant for that film.
blackhawk said:
If you watch Hamburger Hill or We Were Soldiers you don't have turn off your your intellect while watching, but it may get bruised. Hamburger Hill is one of the most realistic war movies ever made. My Nam buddy Al said "It was like that!". It seems plotless and random, horrible $hit happens just like war. Hard to say who "won".
I've watched Hamburger Hill over a dozen times.
Das Boot (director's cut) is another excellent war movie. Uboat ace Captain Eric Topp was a consultant for that film.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. And the whole point of Top Gun is a feel good all American movie. If we want to talk about ridiculously unrealistic, how about Mission: Impossible...
V0latyle said:
Yeah. And the whole point of Top Gun is a feel good all American movie. If we want to talk about ridiculously unrealistic, how about Mission: Impossible...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I blew MI off after a few minutes
The Bruce Lee movies still impress, he was pulling punches and nunchuk hits so fast it was a blur even at 40fps? Wow. Like Jimi on the guitar, where they mere mortals?
Two oldies but goodies are the original Freaks (all the freaks are real) and Spider Baby with a young Sid Haig, a stellar performance from Lon Chaney jr plus more top shelf character actors.
blackhawk said:
Yeah I blew MI off after a few minutes
The Bruce Lee movies still impress, he was pulling punches and nunchuk hits so fast it was a blur even at 40fps? Wow. Like Jimi on the guitar, where they mere mortals?
Two oldies but goodies are the original Freaks (all the freaks are real) and Spider Baby with a young Sid Haig, a stellar performance from Lon Chaney jr plus more top shelf character actors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Typical movie framerate is 24fps. I've honestly never watched the Bruce Lee movies so I don't know.
V0latyle said:
Typical movie framerate is 24fps. I've honestly never watched the Bruce Lee movies so I don't know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe 36fps, they deliberately used a higher frame rate to shoot the action scenes. Don't ask me how they integrated that?
blackhawk said:
Maybe 36fps, they deliberately used a higher frame rate to shoot the action scenes. Don't ask me how they integrated that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now there's a technical brain teaser. Before digital film, both cameras and film projectors were mechanical, so the movie had to be played at the same rate at which it was filmed. Variable speeds would be a problem since the soundtrack was synchronized to the film as well. It's not so difficult with digital technology, but most video encoders use a static frame rate - the BIT rate can be variable, wherein the "depth" of the information recorded can vary, but the frame rate generally doesn't.
Now if they shot the entire movie in 36fps, that would make sense.
V0latyle said:
Now there's a technical brain teaser. Before digital film, both cameras and film projectors were mechanical, so the movie had to be played at the same rate at which it was filmed. Variable speeds would be a problem since the soundtrack was synchronized to the film as well. It's not so difficult with digital technology, but most video encoders use a static frame rate - the BIT rate can be variable, wherein the "depth" of the information recorded can vary, but the frame rate generally doesn't.
Now if they shot the entire movie in 36fps, that would make sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
36fps it appears to be. Lee was incredibly fast and formidable.
blackhawk said:
36fps it appears to be. Lee was incredibly fast and formidable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh okay, so they shot at 34fps, which resulted in a bit of a "slow motion" effect when played at the standard 24fps.