Fizzzzle

Just now, stepee said:

 

I mean, it couldn’t be much worse though!

It could always be worse. The minute you think "this can't get worse" is the minute it does.

My tooth is still there, which I think is the only reason it doesn't hurt like the dickins. Hopefully it will last the weekend.

It could be worse. At least it doesn't hurt as long as I don't chew on anything.

It wasn't even during dinner. What a fucking day to do it,  eh? Right when 75% of dentists aren't working.

They should at least offer to help, but it shouldn't be expected tbh. 

I mean, if you're going to do something to get fired... This tops the list.

I'd smoke a whole pack of cigarettes at the same time.

I mean... If a mRNA vaccine for a virus fucked your shit up, guess what else would have almost certainly fucked your shit up even more? 

... The actual virus. That's how vaccines work.

22 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

I wouldn't put it solely on the shoulders of executives, it just seems to be a normal thing in American animated movies. Tim Allen and Tom Hanks in Toy Story for instance, iconic movie with popular actors acting the part. The bigger issue is if the person can actually ACT the part. In the case of Chris Pratt, it just sounds like Chris Pratt. When I come to a Mario movie or Garfield movie I want to hear those characters not Chris Pratt as an orange cat. People got complacent when people said he was, "fine" in Mario. But I don't want fine, I want to hear Mario being awesome. Even Seth Rogan even went as far as to say that he won't do a voice, he will just do himself (as Donkey Kong) which works for some people but how about we get a Donkey Kong with some personality.

 

Voice actors are trained to act with just their voice and can turn out a variety of awesome performances. When you hire just a screen actor it seems they are just getting by on the sound of their voice and nothing else. Go listen to Megan Fox in MK1, totally out of place. You could have better performances and maybe even save some production costs going with a voice actor. But I guess people won't flock to the theater if Yuri Lowenthal's name is on the poster instead of Ryan Gosling. 🤷‍♀️

 

As for this movie I already touched on it a bit but this sounds just like Chris Pratt. Lorenzo Music set the standard for Garfields, and while the movie sucked Bill Murray at least sounded the part.

See, this is what I mean. Tom Hanks and Tim Allen were iconic in Toy Story, but were they necessary? Was shelling out the budget to get them necessary? Or would people have gone to see the movie regardless, and someone else could have done it? (I recognize that a full 3D movie was a new thing at the time, so they were just hedging their bets)

Pixar and Disney, for the most part, don't get giant celebrities to play their voiced characters. Who was the biggest actor in Frozen? Kristen Bell? Sure, she's famous, but not like Chris Pratt famous. She was still doing fucking network TV, both before and after Frozen. Name a single voice actor from Brave without looking it up. Brave certainly had some accomplished actors in the cast, but no big celebrities.

There are exceptions, like Disney pretty much designing Genie around Robin Williams or Dwayne Johnson in Moana. But no one designed Mario or Garfield around Chris Pratt. They're just shoving his voice in there because they think there's a large enough audience out there that was on the fence about seeing the movie before they went "ooooh, but Chris Pratt is in it!" which I think is absurd.

And before anyone says "well that's different, it's Disney" - NOT when Frozen came out. Disney was coming off the back of Tangled, but that was pretty much their first universally acclaimed animated movie in well over a decade.

33 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Chris Pratt was in the Lego movie which was very successful so perhaps producers equate that success with Chris Pratt and not just the Legos.

 

As for Samuel L Jackson I wouldn't necessarily see an animated movie because of him but in the ones he's in he generally does a good job and more likable than Pratt.

It's just like the tale as old as time of studio execs learning the exact wrong reasons for why movies succeed/fail.

Like how when they renamed "John Carter of Mars" to "John Carter." Why did they do that? Because Disney had just recently released a movie called "Mars Needs Moms" that bombed, and even though those movies had nothing to do with each other at all, the execs at Disney thought "CLEARLY people just don't like movies with Mars in the title."

... THAT's the lesson you learned? Not that the movie sucked, not that it was unclear who the audience was, not that no one seemed to have a clear vision on what the film even was, no... people didn't watch it because it had "Mars" in the title.

You know what I don't get - why do studios keep spending tons of money to get top-bill voice talent for animated films? They don't have to. Think to yourself - who is the intended audience for this movie? Is it kids? Because I don't think kids give half a shit if Chris Pratt or Samuel L Jackson are voicing the characters. Is it their older millennial parents looking for a nostalgia hit? Because I sincerely doubt they do either.

So why does some producer think "you know what would REALLY push this film over the edge? Chris Pratt and Samuel L Jackson." What audience do they think they're going to reach who weren't going to watch this movie anyway?

"Yes, this just increased or voice acting budget by millions of dollars, but think of all the hundreds of people in the world who will now watch this movie BECAUSE Chris Pratt voices Garfield!"

15 hours ago, legend said:

 

This. The hard part of cross-game items has absolutely nothing to do with making the data available and everything to do with

1. The technical challenges of actually supporting other content in your game even when provided the data for those items;

2. (and even worse) the fact that those alternative items might make zero sense in your game and cannot be balanced.

 

Making the data available was always something that's relatively easy with lots of ways to do it, yet NFTs only address that aspect that can already be solved.

 

NFTs are the ultimate solution looking for a problem. It never actually solves real problems and they're almost always a technically *worse* solution than existing alternatives. The whole concept of blockchain in general is aimed to solve a problem that is never a problem in practice That is, it solves "how do you timestamp events when you cannot trust any timestamp sever or set of servers to even timestamp anonymized data?" This is a fascinating intellectual question that has no real world instances, and the various technical costs you pay to solve it are substantial and multifaceted.

100%. It's a neat thing we can do, and I'm sure there could be a useful thing it could be useful for some day, but it is not this day. Almost all of what it gets used for is selling things with forced artificial scarcity, or FARTS for short.

That doesn't mean the technology has no value, it just means that for now it's just blowing wind. Wait until someone applies the concept to something that isn't immediately about making themselves a ton of money for nothing.

1 hour ago, Remarkableriots said:

 From my experience, apartment building living is horrible. Townhomes can be very nice, though. I hope I never get woken up again by the fire alarm going off due to a false alarm.

Sure, some people hate living in apartments. I, for one, long for the day where I could have a wall that isn't somehow shared (I haven't had that in years). The problem is that, in most of America/Canada, you are ONLY allowed to build single family 3/4 bedroom homes. For the most part, that is the only new housing that ever gets built.  The few apartment/condo buildings that get built both come with so much red tape and are in such high demand that they become luxury housing by default.

I still think NFTs could be useful in some capacity in the digital world. But 99.9% of people used NFTs and shit coins as a get rich quick scheme which has fully imploded at this point. The bottom fell out of the pyramid.

4 hours ago, Remarkableriots said:

Texas family rejects millions for their property and does something remarkable with it instead: ‘I’m just very grateful’

WWW.YAHOO.COM

---

Originally, the plan was to build a subdivision in the area, which would have provided 2,400 homes.

 

I mean... 2400 new single-family homes in subdivisions is not the kind of housing we need. We need fucking townhomes and apartment buildings. We need the missing middle. 

Adding 2400 single family homes addresses the housing crisis the same way adding a 10% off coupon to prime grade steaks addresses hunger. Cool, the venn diagram of the people who have money for steak but not enough money for GOOD steak is like having the circles barely touch.

By creating nothing but single family homes, we are catering to a smaller and smaller market. Not to mention the environmental impacts of development further away from cities, which makes the environmental impact worse.

9 hours ago, legend said:

 

I just wanted to say that Polyphia is amazing.

Prog music that my girlfriend doesn't fucking hate, that's an incredible achievement.

1 hour ago, skillzdadirecta said:

That was part of the charm of Spartacus... you're in season one and it gets FAR more cheesier as time goes on. They actually lean into it.

They do this weird thing with the dialogue that no one else has ever done. Like they have everyone speak in a passive third person (perish the thought, etc) in a way that is immediately distracting but kind of grows on you over time. But it doesn't ever sound natural.

Gotta hate sticking your finger through that TP.

I've been watching series 1 of Spartacus and holy balls is it cheesy. Far more than Black Sails ever was (and that had more than its fair share of cheese)

I actually just started rewatching the series (plus I never finished it to begin with), so this is good news! Probably, I don't know.

4 hours ago, SoberChef said:

Just hope it's better than The Pacific.

I've grown to really love the Pacific. Sure, it's not as cohesive as a narrative, but I love it nonetheless.

I'll say it, since everyone is thinking it...

... Vin Diesel as Link.

So I've been kind of getting into heavy music again. Heavy music is a lot of fun to play.

There is a band that I used to love called The Agony Scene. They have two songs in particular that make me hard.

This one, called "The Darkest Red"

And this one called "Scars of Your Disease"

Are the vocals good? Not particularly. Is the song structure good? Not particularly. Is the mix good? Hell no, it sounds terrible. But I listen to it and I want to raise my grandma from the dead just so I can slap her in the face. And I love my grandma, she was a gem.  I'm just having a hard time conveying the amount of stank face I exhibit when I hear these songs. SLAP YOUR GRANMDA.

I hope you and the missus treat yourselves to something splendiferous.

Just now, best3444 said:

 

My brain litteraly shut off midway. 

WHY DID REVOLUTIONARY FRANCE NOT SWITCH TO METRIC MONTHS

... This question keeps me up at night

3 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

I get that a lot