 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> stbenge <stb### [at] hotmail com> wrote:
>> Some brilliant techno/indie pieces would have worked wonders for that
>> series.
>
> Didn't you see the party scene in the second movie?-)
I said *brilliant* techno/indie pieces. Something you remember easily
for its emotive qualities and technical genius.
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stbenge <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > stbenge <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> >> Some brilliant techno/indie pieces would have worked wonders for that
> >> series.
> >
> > Didn't you see the party scene in the second movie?-)
> I said *brilliant* techno/indie pieces. Something you remember easily
> for its emotive qualities and technical genius.
IMO the party scene was emotive enough. I think it was cool.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> stbenge <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>> stbenge <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>>>> Some brilliant techno/indie pieces would have worked wonders for that
>>>> series.
>>> Didn't you see the party scene in the second movie?-)
>
>> I said *brilliant* techno/indie pieces. Something you remember easily
>> for its emotive qualities and technical genius.
>
> IMO the party scene was emotive enough. I think it was cool.
The music was better in that scene than the rest of the movie, I'll
admit. Unfortunately such moments were rare, and the emotive harmonies
present during most of the film were... generic and uninspired :(
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <486706e3$1@news.povray.org>, dne### [at] sanrrcom says...
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
> > but the central premise was, in fact, "Don't
> > follow dogma from people who desperately want to control things they
> > can't comprehend at all, imagine are dangerous when they are the exact
> > opposite and who know absolutely nothing about what they claim to be
> > telling you about."
>
> Except the scientists who understood exactly what they were doing were
> all evil as well. At least those from Laura's world.
>
Hmm. Yes and no. There are always scientists that opt to side with the
lunatic fringe and only use the science when/if it helps that agenda. We
only really get to see that side in the books, since its connected to
the theme. However, you do get the hint that some, those working with
the college and in scholarly circles, where skirting the edge as much as
possible, trying to avoid helping people who would undermine the very
purpose of their existence. Someone had to make, for example, the
alethiometer, back before the Magesterium tried to destroy them all and
everyone the dared to challenge them directly. What sort of scientist do
you "expect" to find in such a world?
> > It wasn't evil leaking into the world, it was "life" leaking out.
>
> I was referring the the monsters that only ate the adults that came in
> from between the worlds. The invisible shades monsters. Not the dust.
>
Ah. Yes, those. But it does involve dust anyway, since there its "that"
which they feed on, in the end. And yeah, that was a bit of the sort of,
"Try at least to be cautious what you bring into the world.", sort of
message with that. The scientists that did that where no evil, they just
didn't recognize what they where doing. They made their pursuit of
knowledge "into" a sort of religion as well, denying consequence, and in
the end, they gave up one "everything" other than that pursuit.
> > I wouldn't even call it anti-religious, save in the sense that its main
> > message was, "Don't limit yourself to the silly BS some church come up
> > with. They don't have a clue, just dogma, and they might be completely
> > wrong about *everything*."
>
> Yeah. Except the *author* said it's anti-religious, and indeed that was
> his purpose in writing it. Just as the author of the Narnia stuff said
> he explicitly wrote it to make children more credulous so they'd more
> easily believe in the fantastic claims of religion without any proof.
Oh, and it definitely is. But in a way that, despite the necessity of
introducing one fanciful other explanations for everything, to counter
all the "presumptions" the rest had about what was true, clearly says,
"The person that figures this out is going to be the one that keeps her
eyes open, thinks, and looks for answers, not the clown who thinks they
already have them." Its unclear how you show this, without "inventing" a
lot of silly fantasy elements to "replace" the existing silly ones.
Well, at least without making reaching anyone with it impossible. Its
one thing to say, "Angels could be real, but what if they are not what
you imagine them to be", and another entirely to say, flat out, to some
believer, "They just don't exist at all, and its all made up nonsense."
I think the intent was to make a story that was anti-religious, but in a
way that might be subtle enough, at least initially, to get people to
think, before making it absolutely clear what the message is. And, he
almost manages it. Unfortunately, the message is hinted at, for the far
gone, enough in the first book to keep them from reading it at all, it
gets "too" explicit about it in the second, and before you even open the
cover of the third you know that religion and blind faith in made up
ideas, where truth gets ignored or discounted, is the absolute enemy
running through the whole series. The knife simply wasn't subtle enough.
;)
--
void main () {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Sat, 28 Jun 2008 20:04:07 +0100, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did
spake, saying:
> I'm not really sure what I expected when I rented this movie, but I
> really didn't expect it to be boring. However, it resulted to be, at
> least in my
> view, just a parade of famous actors, one after another, none of which
> really had a good role which would have shown their acting prowess and
> charisma,
Thought about seeing it when it came out, but I was put off by the promos
all making out that everyone was after the eponymous 'compass'. I thought
that if that was a true representation of the movie then they'd really
screwed with the plot compared to the books.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Hmm. Yes and no. There are always scientists that opt to side with the
> lunatic fringe and only use the science when/if it helps that agenda.
Well, I was speaking of Laura's father. I suppose there were a number of
other "scientists" in the book that weren't so clear-cut.
> Someone had to make, for example, the alethiometer,
It just seemed very contrived to me, is all. Breaking willing suspension
of disbelief, that none of the scientists opposed to the Magesterium
actually knew how the magic worked either.
I'd like to see fictional books that pit science against religion
realistically, you know, where like science works reliably and people
know why, kind of thing.
> Ah. Yes, those. But it does involve dust anyway, since there its "that"
> which they feed on, in the end.
I couldn't figure out wtf they were feeding on, but now that you mention
it, yeah, makes perfect sense. Duh on me.
> Its unclear how you show this, without "inventing" a
> lot of silly fantasy elements to "replace" the existing silly ones.
Not while making it amusing for children, I suppose, yes.
> The knife simply wasn't subtle enough. ;)
Heh.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stbenge wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> I'm not really sure what I expected when I rented this movie, but I
>> really
>> didn't expect it to be boring.
>
> I saw it too, and yeah, it wasn't the best. I did not find the plot
> confusing, but the ending left me wondering if they were going to
> release a second or third installment.
>
> Sam
If they had ended the movie where the book ended, there would have been
no doubt that there would be a second or third movie. That would have
committed them to the next movies and, you know those commercial
businesses, they don't like to make a second or third if the first fails
to sell.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <486918c2$1@news.povray.org>, dne### [at] sanrrcom says...
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
> > Hmm. Yes and no. There are always scientists that opt to side with the
> > lunatic fringe and only use the science when/if it helps that agenda.
>
> Well, I was speaking of Laura's father. I suppose there were a number of
> other "scientists" in the book that weren't so clear-cut.
>
> > Someone had to make, for example, the alethiometer,
>
> It just seemed very contrived to me, is all. Breaking willing suspension
> of disbelief, that none of the scientists opposed to the Magesterium
> actually knew how the magic worked either.
>
Tell that to people building gravity meters. I am sure they could
"test" for what ever made it work, even if they didn't get how. And, it
was suppressed technology, so its not impossible that they tried, and
given the power the Magesterium had in the book, actually succeeded, in
destroying knowledge of how it worked, even if they missed all the
devices.
> I'd like to see fictional books that pit science against religion
> realistically, you know, where like science works reliably and people
> know why, kind of thing.
>
True enough. Though, I don't mind some that try to give semi-plausible
reasons why some fantasy things do work, as long as those reasons in the
end are "effected" by science in some fashion, and thus really part of a
larger natural world. Its the ones that try to treat it as "separate",
then even dumber, try to use a lot of gibberish and BS that is debunked
to "show" how its untouchable/explanable/defies the laws of physics,
that I have a problem with it. GC takes the, "its part of the greater
natural world, just a lot of it is parts we normally don't, and can't,
see directly.", approach. Its not doing an astounding job of it, but its
dealing with trying to provide plausible reasons why some stupid stuff
people insist, due to lack of any clue how often they have been tested,
failed the test, and don't in fact work, *might* be there some place.
Its like the steps some parents take when trying to teach their kids
that the monsters on TV are not real, while sidestepping if Santa is or
not. lol
--
void main () {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Tell that to people building gravity meters.
I'm not saying it's impossible for a world to have that happen. I'm
saying it felt counter-productive to the point I thought he was making.
Why have a book about "don't believe religious authorities" and then
have a widely-known (and true) prophesy about how you shouldn't believe
prophets?
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <486b1475@news.povray.org>, dne### [at] sanrrcom says...
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
> > Tell that to people building gravity meters.
>
> I'm not saying it's impossible for a world to have that happen. I'm
> saying it felt counter-productive to the point I thought he was making.
> Why have a book about "don't believe religious authorities" and then
> have a widely-known (and true) prophesy about how you shouldn't believe
> prophets?
>
lol True enough.
--
void main () {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
