• Categories

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

 
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2009 edited
    Christodoulides wrote
    Well, you would if you were me and i had you on the opposite side wink I Just needed to realize you weren't on the opposite side actually wink Your point is true. Those oooh maii gaawwd Jebus Christttt save us from the Us-heeiting terrrrrstsssssss are indeed a very problematic part of population, and these are just a small percentage of the international radical / fundamental / extreme (Whatever one might call them) Christians. Having faith is one thing but being over-the-top religious is very dangerous.


    Very dangerous, and very arrogant.

    The great Sam Harris puts it more eloquently than I could dare hope to in his Letter to a Christian Nation, directly aimed at those very same fundamental Christians:

    One of the monumental ironies of religious discourse can be appreciated in the frequency with which people of faith praise themselves for their humility, while condemning scientists and other non-believers for their intellectual arrogance. There is, in fact, no worldview more reprehensible in its arrogance than that of a religious believer: the creator of the universe takes an interest in me, approves of me, loves me, and will reward me after death; my current beliefs, drawn from scripture, will remain the best statement of the truth until the end of the world; everyone who disagree with will spend eternity in hell.... An average Christian, in an average church, listening to an average Sunday sermon has achieved a level of arrogance simply unimaginable in a scientific discourse - and there have been some extraordinarily arrogant scientists.


    Every word in that little book is dripping in refreshingly clear minded, decisive and sharp blows to the intellectual high treason of religious dogmatism! wink
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2009
    Marselus wrote
    Nautilus wrote
    G.I Joe

    G.I Joe is a popcorn movie without complications. Sommers put a lot of energy , moving the camera all the time without being confusing, with some quick flashbacks in the middle of the action sequences (a great narrative move). G.I joe was some of the faster 2 hours of my life.

    I agree. Sommers does not have the style nor the personality of Michael Bay, but he knows how to spend a few millions to make a good entertainment.

    Nautilus wrote
    About the music? Silvestri Shines. Silvestri rocks. I liked the score when I head it , and now with the images I love it even more. It reminds me the times of Ricochet o Predator 2 but with electronics and electric guitars.

    I agree again, but the music is forgotten once the end credits have finished.

    Nautilus wrote
    PS: The Paris chase is hilarious, terrific.

    You defined it perfectly. I´d add spectacular.


    That score is soooooooo cheap.
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMarselus
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2009
    Totally, but it works in the movie. That said, I don´t remember a thing about it.
    Anything with an orchestra or with a choir....at some point will reach you
    •  
      CommentAuthorBregt
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2009 edited
    I finally saw the last episode of Six Feet Under.

    Fantastic.

    Hard to not get sad, but also satisfied.
    Kazoo
    •  
      CommentAuthorSouthall
    • CommentTimeOct 24th 2009
    I have never seen the final season of Six Feet Under. I've been waiting for it to be repeated.. and it never has been. What a great show!
  1. Steven wrote

    The great Sam Harris puts it more eloquently than I could dare hope to in his Letter to a Christian Nation, directly aimed at those very same fundamental Christians:

    One of the monumental ironies of religious discourse can be appreciated in the frequency with which people of faith praise themselves for their humility, while condemning scientists and other non-believers for their intellectual arrogance. There is, in fact, no worldview more reprehensible in its arrogance than that of a religious believer: the creator of the universe takes an interest in me, approves of me, loves me, and will reward me after death; my current beliefs, drawn from scripture, will remain the best statement of the truth until the end of the world; everyone who disagree with will spend eternity in hell.... An average Christian, in an average church, listening to an average Sunday sermon has achieved a level of arrogance simply unimaginable in a scientific discourse - and there have been some extraordinarily arrogant scientists.


    Every word in that little book is dripping in refreshingly clear minded, decisive and sharp blows to the intellectual high treason of religious dogmatism! wink


    It may be eloquent, but the rhetoric there is more than a bit haughty itself. One thing you can at least give a religious soul credit for is that if they're really into the spirit of the thing, they lay the credit to this understanding of the universe not to their own wits, but to something outside of themselves. It's closer to trust than arrogance, to me at least. (Of course there are a great many who regard themselves as supporters their gods could not do without, but they could hardly be described as 'meek' or 'poor in spirit'.)
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
    •  
      CommentAuthorBregt
    • CommentTimeOct 25th 2009
    Southall wrote
    I have never seen the final season of Six Feet Under. I've been waiting for it to be repeated.. and it never has been. What a great show!

    It's a better season than season 4. You have to see it. The last 4 or 5 episodes, and the finale are hard and very emotional. Indeed a fantastic series.
    Kazoo
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeOct 25th 2009 edited
    franz_conrad wrote

    It may be eloquent, but the rhetoric there is more than a bit haughty itself. One thing you can at least give a religious soul credit for is that if they're really into the spirit of the thing, they lay the credit to this understanding of the universe not to their own wits, but to something outside of themselves. It's closer to trust than arrogance, to me at least. (Of course there are a great many who regard themselves as supporters their gods could not do without, but they could hardly be described as 'meek' or 'poor in spirit'.)


    To them, to you, I'm sure it is a matter of trust. But to believe that which they trust so fervently without question is very arrogant from where I'm sitting. It would be very easy to assume a trust in theological beliefs is the same as the trust I place in scientific beliefs. But it would be a very misguided attempt to legitimize faith-based beliefs. My trust in science is based on logical thinking, not least because I see it work day in and day out. I believe, for example, that the theory of evolution is a very accurate description of how different species and complexities appear in nature. I place my belief in it since the evidence is doggedly staring us in the face and the fact that it's highly unlikely that it's a conspiracy devised by generations of scientists to fool the layman. I base all my beliefs in life (since, from a human perspective, I guess everything comes down to a belief) on the best evidence and reasoning available to me, and of course if new evidence points otherwise, I will quickly change my beliefs hopefully without fuss. If I saw Jesus coming down from the heavens like a superhero, you can be sure my beliefs about this world would differ in some significant way.

    But to speak of having knowledge of something which cannot be possibly be known with any certainty, to me, seems highly arrogant - even though it may be unintentionally so and born of something so beautiful as human emotions. The mentality of faith is what worries me; "There's nothing you can say to change my mind"; "my religion is the only true religion"; "faith is immune to reason." It's a conversation stopper and simply proves the person in question is unwilling to take into account the state of the world. And that genuinely worries me!

    Of course not all religious people are so stubborn as I probably make them out to be, but undoubtedly a great deal are. I realise religious moderation is very popular these days, and has been for a long while, but I shan't go into that for now for the sake of brevity.
  2. But Steven, there's nothing you can say to change my mind. biggrin
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
    •  
      CommentAuthorNautilus
    • CommentTimeOct 25th 2009 edited
    State of play

    I didn't know about this movie until I saw it in the Blockbuster store.

    A great cast, and a very entertaining and good movie.

    I love this kind of movies (journalist, politicians,truth..) and Rachel Mcadams is hot!

    Oh, about the music a great mix of M.I2, Spy game and American beauty cool

    PS: Don't lie to me Russel, You don't eat because the character needed, you eat because you like EAT!
    •  
      CommentAuthorSouthall
    • CommentTimeOct 25th 2009
    Nautilus wrote
    PS: Don't lie to me Russel, You don't eat because the character needed, you eat because you like EAT!


    lol
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeOct 25th 2009
    Nautilus wrote
    State of play

    I didn't know about this movie until I saw it in the Blockbuster store.

    A great cast, and a very entertaining and good movie.

    I love this kind of movies (journalist, politicians,truth..) and Rachel Mcadams is hot!

    Oh, about the music a great mix of M.I2, Spy game and American beauty cool

    PS: Don't lie to me Russel, You don't eat because the character needed, you eat because you like EAT!


    I saw it and liked it too, quite entertaining. Your last comment made me laugh!
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeOct 25th 2009
    MOON

    Brilliant. 2001: a space odyssey-influenced, a completely gripping, claustrophobic, continuously intense and intelligent modern sci-fi at its best. Dramatic, humorous, engaging and the Clint Mansell score works so good i can't think of anything else in the movie. Absolutely Recommended.
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMarselus
    • CommentTimeOct 25th 2009
    Christodoulides wrote
    MOON

    Brilliant. 2001: a space odyssey-influenced, a completely gripping, claustrophobic, continuously intense and intelligent modern sci-fi at its best. Dramatic, humorous, engaging and the Clint Mansell score works so good i can't think of anything else in the movie. Absolutely Recommended.

    Totally agree. Winner of the best film, best screenplay, best production designer and best actor in this year´s Sitges Film Festival.

    As for the score, it is simply great, all of it, but there´s a piano cue by the end of the film that is specially beautiful and captures the tone of the sequence in a perfect way. Not only absolutely recommended but a must see.
    Anything with an orchestra or with a choir....at some point will reach you
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeOct 25th 2009
    Marselus wrote
    Christodoulides wrote
    MOON

    Brilliant. 2001: a space odyssey-influenced, a completely gripping, claustrophobic, continuously intense and intelligent modern sci-fi at its best. Dramatic, humorous, engaging and the Clint Mansell score works so good i can't think of anything else in the movie. Absolutely Recommended.

    Totally agree. Winner of the best film, best screenplay, best production designer and best actor in this year´s Sitges Film Festival.

    As for the score, it is simply great, all of it, but there´s a piano cue by the end of the film that is specially beautiful and captures the tone of the sequence in a perfect way. Not only absolutely recommended but a must see.


    It's really rare in our days, such phenomenal films in all aspects. beer
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
  3. Nautilus wrote
    State of play

    I didn't know about this movie until I saw it in the Blockbuster store.

    A great cast, and a very entertaining and good movie.

    I love this kind of movies (journalist, politicians,truth..) and Rachel Mcadams is hot!

    Oh, about the music a great mix of M.I2, Spy game and American beauty cool

    PS: Don't lie to me Russel, You don't eat because the character needed, you eat because you like EAT!


    I've heard the film is good. However I do recommend checking out the full miniseries some time. It's excellent.
    A butterfly thinks therefore I am
    •  
      CommentAuthorNautilus
    • CommentTimeOct 25th 2009 edited
    Ice age dawn of the dinosaurs

    While I watch Pixar movies, because of the movies. I watch this kind of films because the music.

    Anyway, Ice Age 3 is a great surprise. I find the first two movies rather mediocre. Boring, with a lot of clichés and no even funny. (Im surprised that this movie had worst reviews than his predecessors)

    Ice Age 3 has a little more clever jokes and has a great sense of adventure. I didn't watch the movie in 3d, but the "jurassic" jungle with so many colors ad giant animls, seems a good way explote this system.

    Buck's character is hilarious, and of course, the music fits very well.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDreamTheater
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009 edited
    UP

    in magnificent eye-popping super whopping three dimensions !!!!

    First time I saw a full motion picture like this, and it was a blast. Of course in the end 3D is nothing but a gimmick, because it doesn't enhance or worsen this glorious animated feature from the only studio that produces consistent quality films. Wicked 3D gimmickry aside, I liked the sense of storytelling coupled with the humour, which never becomes annoying (unlike Transformers 2, which could be defined as an animated feature as well tongue ). The voice acting is SUPERB throughout and the characters totally adorable !!! This movie provides plenty of excitement and fun for young and old, and it has its fair share of touching moments too, as we've come to expect with this studio. Up is an absolutely great PIXAR and one to own for sure (I'm sure I will). It was totally worth the expensive price I paid for two tickets (more than 20 €). cool
    "considering I've seen an enormous debate here about The Amazing Spider-Man and the ones who love it, and the ones who hate it, I feel myself obliged to say: TASTE DIFFERS, DEAL WITH IT" - Thomas G.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009 edited
    Star Trek

    You know what?
    I really enjoyed this!
    Fast, furious space operatic action, with only a bare minimum of technobabble and "majestic" space shots.
    And what a clever way of completely rebooting the whole franchise without negating anything that's gone before.

    Chris Pine is sufficiently rebellious and good-looking for Kirk, but overall just so-so, but Zachary Quinto as Spock and Karl Urban as dr. McCoy absolutely nail their parts, and stay completely in tune with the characterisations Leonard Nimoy and the late Deforest Kelley initiated (without resorting to simple carbon-copying their performances).
    Eric Bana's part as the villainous (yet tragic) captain Nero is sadly one-dimensional and could have made for far more interesting development, but in the end it's a minor quibble.

    Leonard Nimoy was utterly wasted (I can see where his presence may have been considered to be needed to give the film some cross-over validity, but honestly, it was pointless and did not aid or further the story per se).

    To my surprise the much-reviled lens flares actually do help giving the generally quite clinical feel of the Star Trek universe (or at least the Enterprise bridge) a bit of an edge), but Giacchino's "heroic motif" wears very, very, VERY thin after about its sixthousandth repetition.

    All in all, a very pleasurable, if not very thought provoking or intellect taxing, experience, and I am most curious to see where the franchise goes next.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
  4. I'm buying Star Trek on blu-ray soon, should be quite the looker and sounder. And I've not yet seen the film, that's how much I know I will like it... Too bad about Nimoy's part but I assume the movie works with or without him. And 45 minutes (album) vs. 127 minutes (film). I can imagine the theme getting a bit repetitive. shocked
    "considering I've seen an enormous debate here about The Amazing Spider-Man and the ones who love it, and the ones who hate it, I feel myself obliged to say: TASTE DIFFERS, DEAL WITH IT" - Thomas G.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
    DreamTheater wrote
    I'm buying Star Trek on blu-ray soon, should be quite the looker and sounder.


    shocked
    It should be! It's a really lush spectacle which I can only imagine the effect of on the big screen or through Blu-ray!
    I watched it on the plane so I couldn't give any valid insight on the sound design (I couldn't even hear half the dialogue slant ), but if it's half as good as the visual design, you're in for one hell of a ride, Gilles!!!
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
  5. Goddamn, I could never watch a movie like that. On a plane vomit

    I have to have the full audiovisual experience, or not at all.
    "considering I've seen an enormous debate here about The Amazing Spider-Man and the ones who love it, and the ones who hate it, I feel myself obliged to say: TASTE DIFFERS, DEAL WITH IT" - Thomas G.
    • CommentAuthorTimmer
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
    Is Star Trek available to rent now?
    On Friday I ate a lot of dust and appeared orange near the end of the day ~ Bregt
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
    It is in The Netherlands since last week.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    • CommentAuthorTimmer
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
    I'll check my local store, I really want to see it.
    On Friday I ate a lot of dust and appeared orange near the end of the day ~ Bregt
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
    Wolverine: Origins

    The Hitherto Untold And Secret Saga Of The Mutant Named Wolverine, As Revealed By Marvel Inc. Productions.

    What you think it is, is exactly what you get.

    The special effects are up to par, dialogue and story predictably Marvel-esque.
    It's a moving comic. No more. No less.
    Fluff.
    At times entertaining. Mostly rather mindnumbing, to be honest.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
    Martijn, i am glad you enjoyed J.J.Abrams' work on STAR TREK. I love the man's work, no matter how cliched it has become lately to bash him smile
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBregt
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
    I liked the new Star Trek film too!

    It was my very first Star Trek film too!

    It was also the first time I saw Kirk in a Star Trek film too!

    Should I watch the other Star Trek films too, or should I wait for Star Trek 2?
    Kazoo
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
    Martijn wrote
    Wolverine: Origins

    The Hitherto Untold And Secret Saga Of The Mutant Named Wolverine, As Revealed By Marvel Inc. Productions.

    What you think it is, is exactly what you get.

    The special effects are up to par, dialogue and story predictably Marvel-esque.
    It's a moving comic. No more. No less.
    Fluff.
    At times entertaining. Mostly rather mindnumbing, to be honest.


    Rather careless and impersonal i should add. Especially aided by the nonexistent quality of the score.
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
  6. Bregt wrote
    I liked the new Star Trek film too!

    It was my very first Star Trek film too!

    It was also the first time I saw Kirk in a Star Trek film too!

    Should I watch the other Star Trek films too, or should I wait for Star Trek 2?


    you're very first Trek movie?

    OMG face-palm-mt

    I say watch all the Trek films with the original cast for the amazing chemistry between the actors, even though some stories in 1 and 5 could have been better. But the cast and the scores will get you through them, especially 2, 3 and 6 are amazing, while 4 is the delightful anti Trek movie (but works well enough on itself

    As of the newer generation, only rent First Contact, because it is goddamn amazing and above all well acted.

    Now go rent Trek's my son
    waaaaaahhhhhhhh!!! Where's my nut? arrrghhhhhhh