Displaying 1 - 10 of 90 Forum Posts1 2 3 4 5 Next
  • Sep 04, 2020 04:53 PM
    Last: 24d

    Technology, I swear. It never fails to surprise and scare me at the same time. Now that Daniel Craig is having his swan song in the Bond role this summer, lots of speculation has gone on as to who will be the next Bond. I know I've written a few related threads here myself asking the same question, but this takes the cake. A new AI software firm called Largo has predicted who will be the next Bond by forecasting who could outperform Craig (who is the highest grossing Bond of all time btw).

    Largo created a "DNA footprint" of each actor which is comprised of over 1,000 on-screen character attributes. This is broken down by character type, story elements and cinematographic tones. The AI analyzed these attributes, including what the audience reaction would be by cross-comparing it all against historic films. It created a separate DNA footprint for Bond, and analyzed how it matched with the footprint of each actor. It then found that one actor had a 92.3% chance of surpassing Craig. And that actor was......... Henry Cavill.

    I'm not surprised. Looking at the guy, I could totally see him in the suit with the tiny gun. But I'm like, "dude, you've already been Superman, what more do you want!?"

    Anyhow, there you have it. Thoughts? Do you agree with the AI's choice, or is it mostly a novel idea?

  • Aug 03, 2020 11:29 AM
    Last: 1mo

    It's been a little while since Endgame. The face of the Marvel Universe drastically changed with characters coming in and going out permanently. Which I'm sure has made fans wonder where they will take the story next. Will there be a reboot, much like when a series of comic books has run its course? They just start over, and whoever died in the first series has been brought back to life in a parallel universe, even the main hero. It would be interesting to see if they do reboot the Stark story line, how they would retell it. But I'm sure if and when we see a reboot, it will be many years down the road.

    Since Stark was the headlining act for the vast majority of Marvel films, who is going to pick up the torch? The easiest guess, and the most likely one is Peter Parker. Afterall, they made sure Stark was grooming him for at least 3 Avengers Movies, so it only feels natural that he would succeed Stark. Plus, add on the popularity of the Spiderman reboot. I'd say it's very likely. The second choice would be Doctor Strange. I think this would be more of a versatile story line. I think the Spiderman story line is limited in comparison. Thoughts?

  • Jul 20, 2020 03:24 PM
    Last: 2mo

    I, like many movie nuts out there, use Rotten Tomatoes. I can't help but peak at what a movie got on the site before I go and see it in theaters, or watch it in the comfort of my home. Most of the time, I won't even watch a movie unless I've checked its Rotten Tomatoes score. Which had me curious about what are some of the worst movies out there per Rotten Tomatoes standards.

    1. The Murder Of Nicole Brown Simpson

    2. Gotti

    3. 10 Minutes Gone

    4. London Fields

    5. John Henry

    6. 365 Days

    7. Dark Crimes

    8. Father Of The Year

    9. Grand Isle

    10. The Last Days Of American Crime

    Many of these look like definite doozies. I've only seen Father Of The Year, and it was so bad, that I turned it off after the first 15 minutes or so. Also, who in their right mind would make a movie called "The Murder Of Nicole Brown Simpson"? To me that would be career suicide for a director. There are some movies that I think should be on that list. The most recent rendition of Midway should be there.

  • Jun 24, 2020 01:26 AM
    Last: 2mo
    LAME. I'm not sure what it's connected to. I think perhaps they want to somehow distance themselves from the most iconic image of violence in the world. Which part of me understand, but the other part of me says "its' a cartoon!". Agree on the scythe though. I think it makes Fudd look more like a bumbling psychopath now.
  • Jul 06, 2020 07:28 PM
    Last: 2mo
    Heisenberg Wrote:

    Good list. Thanks. I've used Librivox before. Listened to Flatland that way years ago.

    Chirp sounds cool. Think I'll give that a go.

    I've never used Librivox, but it does sound cool as well. I've seriously thought about just "checking out" a book at my local library.
  • Jun 09, 2020 01:25 PM
    Last: 2mo
    All I can say is WOW. I can see this new story being very complicated, to say the very least. And it will be for any way they go about it, reboot or fourth installment.
  • Jul 06, 2020 07:28 PM
    Last: 2mo

    I'm an Audible subscriber. I've amassed quite the library over the years. But I've found it frustrating sometimes whenever I've used up my credits and I have nothing to listen to until the next month comes around. So I'd like to share some options I've come across to tide you over until those Audible credits come in. Or, if you haven't tried audiobooks, this may be a place to start.

    Audiobooks.com - Has many similarities to Audible.

    Scribd - It too is subscription based, but it allows you to listen to or read unlimited audiobooks, ebooks, and podcasts.

    Downpour - It is a lot like audible in the sense it doles out credits every month for you to spend on books.

    Chirp - It's an email subscription service that will send you daily deals on audiobooks. Every day you receive an email that will show you two deals on audiobooks. Many books are $3.99 or less.

    Apple Books - It's not subscription based, and you pay for the books individually.

    Google Play Books - Very similar to Apple Books.

    Librivox - This is a free library of audiobooks that are out of copyright and read by volunteers.

    Project Gutenberg - This is another volunteer created library of free audiobooks and ebooks.

    Your Public Library System - Many libraries use apps like Overdrive an Hoopla so you can check out audiobooks like you would in person, but on your phone.

  • May 07, 2020 03:40 PM
    Last: 5mo

    I think it's safe to say that Nicolas Cage will take on any role. Also, we still don' know the answer to the much-debated topic on whether or not he's a brilliant actor, or just simply out of his gourd. I think a little bit of both. At any rate, he is set to star in a scripted 8 episode series that is centered on Joe Exotic. CBS TV Studios and Imagine Television Studios are producing it, and it's been optioned. This will be Cage's first regular TV role.

    I just can't see him in this role. Then again, I can at least see him in Joe's ridiculous getup. I just wonder where it will stream. You'd think Netflix would be all over it given the success of the docuseries. Apparently this is the second series that is being done on this crazy story. I guess people can't get enough of the Tiger King. Does anyone else see this being a good fit for Cage? Who would play a better Joe Exotic? I hear Dax Sheppard and Edward Norton have both said they wanted the role in Kat Mckinnon's miniseries.

  • Apr 06, 2020 04:28 PM
    Last: 6mo
    NeoLogic Wrote:

    The cons to listening over reading are you don't ever see the character's names written down, so you often have no idea how they are spelled. That's just a small thing I have noticed. But an even bigger one is, at least for me, you don't get the same value of learning from how to write well by reading. You miss out on seeing and learning from good writers' sentence structure, punctuation and a lot of other stuff that helps readers in turn write better.

    But I do think I remember the books just as well as when I read them. If not better because I am not stumbling or having to worry about staying focused. Especially if the voice narrator/voice actors are good. That makes all the difference too.

    That's a good point. I haven't thought about the spelling of names issue before. One remedy to that would be to listen to a book on a kindle. Many books have both the narration and the print.

    I totally agree that you do miss out on a writer's style and technique. Although, I'm a very auditory learner. I tend to pick up a lot on pacing and overall flow more by listening.

  • Apr 06, 2020 04:28 PM
    Last: 6mo

    We are lucky to live in a time where there are numerous ways to entertain ourselves. Used to be where the whole family sat around a wooden radio set in the living room, and listened to serials. Glad those days are over. Audiobooks have come a long way. I remember audiobooks coming in a sizable cardboard boxes with 4-plus audio cassette tapes inside, and the pain of having to flip the cassette once one side was done. Now all we have to do is tap an app on our phones and we are off. So how do they stack up against other forms of media such as reading and movies? Let's dive in.

    Audiobooks vs Print

    Personally, I enjoy both reading and listening. Like most folks who enjoy audiobooks, I don't have time to sit down and read a book. Purists will say that it's "cheating" or lazy, but I beg to differ. I can accomplish many of my daily tasks while listening to a good book. It's a perfect way to get my mind off of menial tasks such as washing dishes or driving. Another plus side to listening over reading is that I find myself consuming more books over the course of a year. Also, I notice that I retain the information just as well as reading it. Don't believe me? I found something interesting that supports my argument.

    In 2016, researchers at the Gallant Lab published their first interactive map of a person’s brain after they listened to two hours of stories from “The Moth.” It’s a vibrant, rainbow-hued diagram of a brain divided into about 60,000 parts, called voxels.

    Coding and analyzing the data in each voxel helped researchers visualize which regions of the brain process certain kinds of words. One section responded to terms like “father,” “refused,” and “remarried” – social words that describe dramatic events, people or time.

    But the most recent study, which compared brains when they were listening and reading, showed that words tend to activate the same brain regions with the same intensity, regardless of input.

    Audiobooks vs Movies

    I enjoy both immensely. I still think that audiobooks get the win in the productivity/versatility category. You get the benefit of not having to keep your eyes glued to a screen. Audiobooks, aside from music are some of the best forms of mobile entertainment. Another thing that should be addressed is the book vs the movie argument. It's an age old debate that movies have been losing. How many times have you read or listened to a book then watched the movie and were disappointed? I have many times. I would say 7 out of 10 times the movie never does the book or story justice.


    World War Z

    The Shinning

    I heard that the Atlas Shrugged movie was a bummer.

    Who agrees? Do audiobooks stand toe to toe with print and movies? Also, feel free to throw in some other disappointing movie adaptations.