The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Music, books, movies, TV, games, hobbies, food, and potent potables. And forum games! Pour a drink, put on your smoking jacket, light a pipe (of whatever), and settle in.
User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 4654
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Painboy »

Highway wrote: 27 Apr 2020, 21:37 I don't know if anyone is interested in bladesmithing or reality shows, but my wife and I like watching Forged in Fire on History Channel. It's a pretty static format where 4 bladesmiths have 3 hours to make a blade, usually meeting one odd condition (like they all have to do a certain type of Damascus steel or have to use parts off of a tractor or something). After the first section, one is eliminated, leaving the remaining three to finish their blades with handles and then have some testing, to eliminate a second person. Then they send the remaining two smiths home to make a specific weapon and then bring it back to test them. Each 1 hour episode is an entire competition to a winner.

There's no bloodsport (although they make a big scene of carving up dummies with red gel inside them sometimes), but there's a lot of respect all around in the show, and it's got a good feel for a competition show. The judges don't ever denigrate the competitors. And it's interesting seeing people overcome challenges, both intentional and mistake-sourced.
Yeah my roommates are kind of obsessed with that show. It's quite good for a reality show. I agree that the judges are definite plus. A lot shows like that try to artificially amp up the drama but the show wisely avoids that. It's a nice mix of the technical and the creative.
User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 13481
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Ellie »

Oooooh, I'm sold.
"Yours is the much better comeback." -JD
User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 19073
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by lunchstealer »

Y'alls kids must be so proud that you've gotten accepted to grdad school.
"Dude she's the Purdue Pharma of the black pill." - JasonL

"This thread is like a dog park where everyone lets their preconceptions and biases run around and sniff each others butts." - Hugh Akston

"That's just tokenism with extra steps." - Jake
User avatar
Jasper
Posts: 3464
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 07:56
Location: Newyorkachusetts

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Jasper »

Painboy wrote: 27 Apr 2020, 22:53
Highway wrote: 27 Apr 2020, 21:37 I don't know if anyone is interested in bladesmithing or reality shows, but my wife and I like watching Forged in Fire on History Channel. It's a pretty static format where 4 bladesmiths have 3 hours to make a blade, usually meeting one odd condition (like they all have to do a certain type of Damascus steel or have to use parts off of a tractor or something). After the first section, one is eliminated, leaving the remaining three to finish their blades with handles and then have some testing, to eliminate a second person. Then they send the remaining two smiths home to make a specific weapon and then bring it back to test them. Each 1 hour episode is an entire competition to a winner.

There's no bloodsport (although they make a big scene of carving up dummies with red gel inside them sometimes), but there's a lot of respect all around in the show, and it's got a good feel for a competition show. The judges don't ever denigrate the competitors. And it's interesting seeing people overcome challenges, both intentional and mistake-sourced.
Yeah my roommates are kind of obsessed with that show. It's quite good for a reality show. I agree that the judges are definite plus. A lot shows like that try to artificially amp up the drama but the show wisely avoids that. It's a nice mix of the technical and the creative.
My wife really digs this show. I find it interesting enough, but that one guy who does all the stabby & slashy on the gel-filled dummies creeps me out. "This blade... will kill." Often said with his weird grin. Fuckin' psycho, that one.
"i'd like to move toward not combusting except on special occasions like arbor day." - dhex
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30214
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Warren »

I got bored with it after half a dozen episodes.
I'm just not a knife guy. I can watch cooking shows season after season (though I will eventually burn out on them too). But the difference between an omelette and duck confit is much greater than a dagger and a saber to my mind.
Nobody, men included, wants a world where men treat women with the same respect they show to other men. - thoreau
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20448
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

Warren wrote: 28 Apr 2020, 12:31 I got bored with it after half a dozen episodes.
I'm just not a knife guy. I can watch cooking shows season after season (though I will eventually burn out on them too). But the difference between an omelette and duck confit is much greater than a dagger and a saber to my mind.
Just like a frog to bring a duck to a sword fight!
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30214
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Warren »

D.A. Ridgely wrote: 28 Apr 2020, 21:24
Warren wrote: 28 Apr 2020, 12:31 I got bored with it after half a dozen episodes.
I'm just not a knife guy. I can watch cooking shows season after season (though I will eventually burn out on them too). But the difference between an omelette and duck confit is much greater than a dagger and a saber to my mind.
Just like a frog to bring a duck to a sword fight!
Touche
Nobody, men included, wants a world where men treat women with the same respect they show to other men. - thoreau
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30214
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Warren »

Fighting With My Family is good fun. There's even a pretty good emotional payoff. But I really wish they let someone that could write have a pass at the script.
Nobody, men included, wants a world where men treat women with the same respect they show to other men. - thoreau
User avatar
dbcooper
Posts: 18726
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:40

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by dbcooper »

Quentin Tarantino is posting movie reviews on the web:

https://thenewbev.com/tarantinos-reviews/
Slip inside a sleeping bag.
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30214
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Warren »

dbcooper wrote: 10 May 2020, 05:42 Quentin Tarantino is posting movie reviews on the web:

https://thenewbev.com/tarantinos-reviews/
*click*
It's exactly what I expected. Saves a lot of time not having to read it all.
Nobody, men included, wants a world where men treat women with the same respect they show to other men. - thoreau
User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 25477
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by JasonL »

The Deliverance take was solid. They fucked up the second half of the movie after a legendary ramp up and turn.
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30214
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Warren »

JasonL wrote: 10 May 2020, 10:03 The Deliverance take was solid. They fucked up the second half of the movie after a legendary ramp up and turn.
Ugh. You think so? I mean maybe if you're a wannabe film maker. A wannabe film maker that wants to make films exactly like Quentin. Or more like, if you want to know what Quentin's scrotum tastes like. He's just so up his own ass. I quit reading at.
Not dissimilar to the courtship dance between Randolph Scott and Richard Boone in Budd Boetticher’s “The Tall T.” Lewis doesn’t need or want Drew or Bobby’s company.
Nobody, men included, wants a world where men treat women with the same respect they show to other men. - thoreau
User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 25477
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by JasonL »

Warren wrote: 10 May 2020, 10:45
JasonL wrote: 10 May 2020, 10:03 The Deliverance take was solid. They fucked up the second half of the movie after a legendary ramp up and turn.
Ugh. You think so? I mean maybe if you're a wannabe film maker. A wannabe film maker that wants to make films exactly like Quentin. Or more like, if you want to know what Quentin's scrotum tastes like. He's just so up his own ass. I quit reading at.
Not dissimilar to the courtship dance between Randolph Scott and Richard Boone in Budd Boetticher’s “The Tall T.” Lewis doesn’t need or want Drew or Bobby’s company.
Ahh right your tastes are garbage.
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20448
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

It's Tarantino's theater, it's Tarantino's movie selections, it's Tarintino's typical patter (though only if you read it really, really fast) and, as with so much else that's Tarantino, the reviews are far more about Tarantino than about the movies he's picked to review. As with so many other things in life, people who like Tarantino will find that this Tarantino is to their liking. Otherwise, not so much.

The signal-to-noise ratio in his review of "The Shootist" is high but he still has some interesting takes on Wayne's career. Also, I agree "The Cowboys" is probably Wayne's greatest late-career movie.
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30214
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Warren »

JasonL wrote: 10 May 2020, 12:50
Warren wrote: 10 May 2020, 10:45
JasonL wrote: 10 May 2020, 10:03 The Deliverance take was solid. They fucked up the second half of the movie after a legendary ramp up and turn.
Ugh. You think so? I mean maybe if you're a wannabe film maker. A wannabe film maker that wants to make films exactly like Quentin. Or more like, if you want to know what Quentin's scrotum tastes like. He's just so up his own ass. I quit reading at.
Not dissimilar to the courtship dance between Randolph Scott and Richard Boone in Budd Boetticher’s “The Tall T.” Lewis doesn’t need or want Drew or Bobby’s company.
Ahh right your tastes are garbage.
This is a question of taste?
D.A. Ridgely wrote: 10 May 2020, 13:30 It's Tarantino's theater, it's Tarantino's movie selections, it's Tarintino's typical patter (though only if you read it really, really fast) and, as with so much else that's Tarantino, the reviews are far more about Tarantino than about the movies he's picked to review. As with so many other things in life, people who like Tarantino will find that this Tarantino is to their liking. Otherwise, not so much.

The signal-to-noise ratio in his review of "The Shootist" is high but he still has some interesting takes on Wayne's career. Also, I agree "The Cowboys" is probably Wayne's greatest late-career movie.
this
Nobody, men included, wants a world where men treat women with the same respect they show to other men. - thoreau
User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 19073
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by lunchstealer »

D.A. Ridgely wrote: 10 May 2020, 13:30 It's Tarantino's theater, it's Tarantino's movie selections, it's Tarintino's typical patter (though only if you read it really, really fast) and, as with so much else that's Tarantino, the reviews are far more about Tarantino than about the movies he's picked to review. As with so many other things in life, people who like Tarantino will find that this Tarantino is to their liking. Otherwise, not so much.

The signal-to-noise ratio in his review of "The Shootist" is high but he still has some interesting takes on Wayne's career. Also, I agree "The Cowboys" is probably Wayne's greatest late-career movie.
poindexter alert, but a high signal-to-noise ratio indicates that there's a lot of valuable information and little bullshit. An AM station with practically no static has a high signal-to-noise ratio. A low signal-to-noise ratio is a lot of bullshit drowning out a lot of what you're listening for. An AM station full of static in the middle of a thunderstorm has a low signal-to-noise ratio.

It sounds like the review of "The Shootist" is full of Tarantinian blather with a tiny signal of good takes on Wayne's character, so that'd be a low signal-to-noise ratio.
"Dude she's the Purdue Pharma of the black pill." - JasonL

"This thread is like a dog park where everyone lets their preconceptions and biases run around and sniff each others butts." - Hugh Akston

"That's just tokenism with extra steps." - Jake
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30214
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Warren »

lunchstealer wrote: 11 May 2020, 13:52
D.A. Ridgely wrote: 10 May 2020, 13:30 It's Tarantino's theater, it's Tarantino's movie selections, it's Tarintino's typical patter (though only if you read it really, really fast) and, as with so much else that's Tarantino, the reviews are far more about Tarantino than about the movies he's picked to review. As with so many other things in life, people who like Tarantino will find that this Tarantino is to their liking. Otherwise, not so much.

The signal-to-noise ratio in his review of "The Shootist" is high but he still has some interesting takes on Wayne's career. Also, I agree "The Cowboys" is probably Wayne's greatest late-career movie.
poindexter alert, but a high signal-to-noise ratio indicates that there's a lot of valuable information and little bullshit. An AM station with practically no static has a high signal-to-noise ratio. A low signal-to-noise ratio is a lot of bullshit drowning out a lot of what you're listening for. An AM station full of static in the middle of a thunderstorm has a low signal-to-noise ratio.

It sounds like the review of "The Shootist" is full of Tarantinian blather with a tiny signal of good takes on Wayne's character, so that'd be a low signal-to-noise ratio.
Why am I irritated that I didn't say anything about this only after you did?
Nobody, men included, wants a world where men treat women with the same respect they show to other men. - thoreau
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20448
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

lunchstealer wrote: 11 May 2020, 13:52
D.A. Ridgely wrote: 10 May 2020, 13:30 It's Tarantino's theater, it's Tarantino's movie selections, it's Tarintino's typical patter (though only if you read it really, really fast) and, as with so much else that's Tarantino, the reviews are far more about Tarantino than about the movies he's picked to review. As with so many other things in life, people who like Tarantino will find that this Tarantino is to their liking. Otherwise, not so much.

The signal-to-noise ratio in his review of "The Shootist" is high but he still has some interesting takes on Wayne's career. Also, I agree "The Cowboys" is probably Wayne's greatest late-career movie.
poindexter alert, but a high signal-to-noise ratio indicates that there's a lot of valuable information and little bullshit. An AM station with practically no static has a high signal-to-noise ratio. A low signal-to-noise ratio is a lot of bullshit drowning out a lot of what you're listening for. An AM station full of static in the middle of a thunderstorm has a low signal-to-noise ratio.

It sounds like the review of "The Shootist" is full of Tarantinian blather with a tiny signal of good takes on Wayne's character, so that'd be a low signal-to-noise ratio.
Point taken.
User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 19073
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by lunchstealer »

D.A. Ridgely wrote: 11 May 2020, 14:34
lunchstealer wrote: 11 May 2020, 13:52
D.A. Ridgely wrote: 10 May 2020, 13:30 It's Tarantino's theater, it's Tarantino's movie selections, it's Tarintino's typical patter (though only if you read it really, really fast) and, as with so much else that's Tarantino, the reviews are far more about Tarantino than about the movies he's picked to review. As with so many other things in life, people who like Tarantino will find that this Tarantino is to their liking. Otherwise, not so much.

The signal-to-noise ratio in his review of "The Shootist" is high but he still has some interesting takes on Wayne's career. Also, I agree "The Cowboys" is probably Wayne's greatest late-career movie.
poindexter alert, but a high signal-to-noise ratio indicates that there's a lot of valuable information and little bullshit. An AM station with practically no static has a high signal-to-noise ratio. A low signal-to-noise ratio is a lot of bullshit drowning out a lot of what you're listening for. An AM station full of static in the middle of a thunderstorm has a low signal-to-noise ratio.

It sounds like the review of "The Shootist" is full of Tarantinian blather with a tiny signal of good takes on Wayne's character, so that'd be a low signal-to-noise ratio.
Point taken.
Please don't take that as nit-picking. Mostly I just wanted to clarify it because it's one of those things that's a really useful metaphor but is easy to get backwards, so I jumped in and signal-processing-splained it for you, which re-reading sounds like me getting all well akshully condescension when I mostly meant to clarify a slightly esoteric point.

I work with maps all the time and have a devil of a time remembering the related concept of small-scale maps vs large scale maps. People - or at least people who are me - tend to think a large scale map shows a large area of the world and has a large number in it. A USGS 1:24,000 scale map covers a smaller area than a 1:250,000 scale map. But scale is a ratio, so a big number on the bottom is a smaller number than a small number on the bottom. I always have to stop and think before I use that terminology. To the point that I've kind of stopped using it.
"Dude she's the Purdue Pharma of the black pill." - JasonL

"This thread is like a dog park where everyone lets their preconceptions and biases run around and sniff each others butts." - Hugh Akston

"That's just tokenism with extra steps." - Jake
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20448
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

No offense taken. Usually, I try to write something like "a really bad signal-to-noise ratio" both because I do tend to get it wrong and I expect other people will, as well. Used as a metaphor, it's almost always intended to say "too much bad, too little good" and I think people reflexively assume that even when the writer gets it wrong, but it's still a point well taken.
User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 19073
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by lunchstealer »

D.A. Ridgely wrote: 11 May 2020, 16:03 No offense taken. Usually, I try to write something like "a really bad signal-to-noise ratio" both because I do tend to get it wrong and I expect other people will, as well. Used as a metaphor, it's almost always intended to say "too much bad, too little good" and I think people reflexively assume that even when the writer gets it wrong, but it's still a point well taken.
I actually do use it in the positive, but that'd almost always be obvious because I'd be talking about something that was surprising-in-a-good-way, like, a Salon article that had very little progressive posturing relative to the amount of astute observation.
"Dude she's the Purdue Pharma of the black pill." - JasonL

"This thread is like a dog park where everyone lets their preconceptions and biases run around and sniff each others butts." - Hugh Akston

"That's just tokenism with extra steps." - Jake
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20448
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

lunchstealer wrote: 11 May 2020, 16:10
D.A. Ridgely wrote: 11 May 2020, 16:03 No offense taken. Usually, I try to write something like "a really bad signal-to-noise ratio" both because I do tend to get it wrong and I expect other people will, as well. Used as a metaphor, it's almost always intended to say "too much bad, too little good" and I think people reflexively assume that even when the writer gets it wrong, but it's still a point well taken.
I actually do use it in the positive, but that'd almost always be obvious because I'd be talking about something that was surprising-in-a-good-way, like, a Salon article that had very little progressive posturing relative to the amount of astute observation.
Hence, "almost," Poindexter.
User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 19073
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by lunchstealer »

D.A. Ridgely wrote: 11 May 2020, 16:12
lunchstealer wrote: 11 May 2020, 16:10
D.A. Ridgely wrote: 11 May 2020, 16:03 No offense taken. Usually, I try to write something like "a really bad signal-to-noise ratio" both because I do tend to get it wrong and I expect other people will, as well. Used as a metaphor, it's almost always intended to say "too much bad, too little good" and I think people reflexively assume that even when the writer gets it wrong, but it's still a point well taken.
I actually do use it in the positive, but that'd almost always be obvious because I'd be talking about something that was surprising-in-a-good-way, like, a Salon article that had very little progressive posturing relative to the amount of astute observation.
Hence, "almost," Poindexter.
*kicks viking moose's pebble*
"Dude she's the Purdue Pharma of the black pill." - JasonL

"This thread is like a dog park where everyone lets their preconceptions and biases run around and sniff each others butts." - Hugh Akston

"That's just tokenism with extra steps." - Jake
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30214
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by Warren »

Speaking of Tarantino reminded me that I've been meaning to watch Once Upon a Time in Hollywood . I really don't like Quentin's revisionist history, but Hollywood doesn't wallow in it the way Bastards or Django does. And I laughed all through the climatic fight scene. A most enjoyable movie. I liked the Hollywood Hasbeen plot and the use of the child actor to illustrate it. Really great dialog all throughout too.

I had a problem with the music. Some of the songs were instantly recognizable radio hits, and some sounded like they might be stuff that was recorded in the time of the setting, but some stuff sounded like it was meant to sound of that time but was recorded recently. I did not check with the credits and google to find out what's what. Similar issue with product brands and advertisements peppered throughout the movie. I realize this is Quentin really applying himself, but I'm not picking all of it up. Something to pay off on re-watches maybe?

One that did hit me right on the head, was the song Leo sings on Hullabaloo. Holy Crap is he asking? OMG he is! You are a bad bad boy Quentin!
Nobody, men included, wants a world where men treat women with the same respect they show to other men. - thoreau
User avatar
JD
Posts: 12214
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:26

Re: The son of "What the hell are YOU staring at?"

Post by JD »

I actually did not care for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. I get it, it's kind of a fairytale alternate history, but at the end, I was left saying "What was the point of that?" There was some excellent dialog and acting and directorial work, but the enormous buildup led to kind of an "eh" end.
I sort of feel like a sucker about aspiring to be intellectually rigorous when I could just go on twitter and say capitalism causes space herpes and no one will challenge me on it. - Hugh Akston
Post Reply