What's on your mind?

[Nasty_Cabbage]

11 hours ago, Thatguy said:

I think it warrants a second view and I want to do it as a double bill. I bet if you do that you won't think it is too short! They couldn't continue with all the characters - too confusing. My wife - who has not read the book and has no interest in science fiction - had no real idea who anyone was and her overall take was it looked good but too much fighting. 

What? I mean, the first one really only had three or four major action set-piece segments. Too much fighting? Keeping the political intrigue in balance with these set pieces is absolutely pivotal to any action film. The screenplay needs to be tightened down to as little chaff as possible for it to work at all. I mean would you level a complaint about The Fugitive having too much running? I like a good patient adaptation as much as anybody, but there's no way anybody went into Dune expecting Remains of the Day. This is probably why I just watch movies by myself anymore. Somebody saying that to me would get under my skin.

1 hour ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Their motivation is certainly to protect themselves. But I can absolutely empathize with your frustration over the injustice. I don't know how big their staff is that handles the copyright claims but it's probably a few people or half a dozen maybe, and they must get hundreds if not thousands of claims per week. Investigating them all thoroughly would definitely be too much effort (because everyone's lazy) and since they see every claim as a potential lawsuit they err on the side of shutting shit down. I'm surprised more shit doesn't get taken down.

Almost all of it is triggered by algorithm at this point. Technologically Youtube has almost no reason to keep anything but a skeleton staff working on actual personal reviews of their copyright policy, and yes this is done entirely in the name of avoiding litigation. They are at the end of the day a company, not a court. Due process is simply something to avoid in consideration.

This kind of behavior predates the internet as well. The rise of the corporate HR department has gone from merely being a sort of joke in large companies with the information and statistics to meticulously analyze their risk in any given action, to being the belligerent bullies of the policy world, beholden to the lowest grade of selfish individuals who would rather burn entire economic behemoths to the ground at the expense of potential employees than accept anything short of their specific utopian version of a work environment. Copyright claims are not an avenue for cultivating fairness and refinement in intellectual property law, but simply another tool for use in a battle of personal leverage and attrition. Remember when ASCAP sued the girl scouts of America for using Bruce Springstein songs at some of their presentations, naming him as the plaintiff while not even informing Springstein himself.

[FatherAlabaster]

9 hours ago, Thatguy said:

I think it warrants a second view and I want to do it as a double bill. I bet if you do that you won't think it is too short! They couldn't continue with all the characters - too confusing. My wife - who has not read the book and has no interest in science fiction - had no real idea who anyone was and her overall take was it looked good but too much fighting. 

The daughter who hasn't read the book either but who likes fantasy and science fiction enjoyed it and understood it well enough. The son and his wife thought it was a 5 out of 5.

I first read the book when I was 14 and it blew my little mind. I haven't re-read it for many years. I don't think the storyline was significantly altered - true, the timespan was compressed and I would have like to have seen Alia as a creepy grandfather killing toddler (but 2024 is probably not up for that). There was not enough weird mysticism and I think Paul's visions of the future and how he was forced to mould his fate could have been explored more deeply and clearly. And riding sandworms is intrinsically weird and a bit silly but was done as well as could be. Still looks silly though.

I'll definitely watch it again. I liked the first part better after I watched it a second time. I thought Jessica and Stilgar were too one-note, almost cartoonishly so, and I'm not sure I buy Chani as either the avatar of a non-religious anti-BG coalition or the jilted lover riding off in frustration.

I see that they wanted to focus on the "mostly reluctant participants in a cynical manipulative plot that offers the only alternative to complete annihilation" angle, and they made all of their storytelling choices in service of that. In a big-picture way it makes sense. But I think there's a lot of nuance and depth between the characters that they left out by doing that, not to mention interesting world-building stuff and the feeling of immersion in a sometimes jarringly different culture with different values and mores, and it made the story feel less consequential to me.

For instance, when Chani got hurt by Paul's demand for Irulan's hand in marriage, I felt a little like I was watching that dumb Beowulf movie from a few years back. In the book, Paul had to take the wife of Jamis as his own after he won that first fight - culture shock! - and he and Chani were together for a few years, and they'd had and lost a child together, and she understood exactly what was going on when Paul married Irulan out of pure political convenience. And I think Jessica's character would have been deeper and more sympathetic if Alia had been born and we'd seen them interacting. There are other things that I think would have helped too. And it would have been cool to see some of the other characters who got sidelined. I can understand how all of that is of less consequence to the part of the story they wanted to tell through this movie, but for me, the characters are the focus, and when they're not served well - like in those fucking awful sequel books by Frank Herbert's son - I have a hard time swallowing it.

But look, I read the first book when I was 7 and loved it immensely as a "coming of age" story. It took me a few years to get into the rest of the series - Paul was maybe a childhood hero and I didn't want to see him as a tragic ruined figure - but all the original books became favorites and I've read them a bunch. I might be too much of a purist about them to be happy with anything that isn't completely exhaustive.

2 hours ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

The whole giant sandworm angle has been what's always kept me away from the Dune universe. Haven't ever read or seen anything Dune related. I like my sci-fi to be reality based.

You might get more out of it than you think. Frank Herbert's world-building was meticulous. The mechanics of the sandworm/spice/desert ecosystem and the tools and methods the Fremen developed to interact with the worms are pretty thoroughly detailed, they're not just a stand-in for the "mighty steed". I like hard sci-fi too, but from my point of view anything relying on technology that doesn't exist yet is a kind of fantasy. 

[AlSymerz]

2 hours ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Their motivation is certainly to protect themselves. But I can absolutely empathize with your frustration over the injustice. I don't know how big their staff is that handles the copyright claims but it's probably a few people or half a dozen maybe, and they must get hundreds if not thousands of claims per week. Investigating them all thoroughly would definitely be too much effort (because everyone's lazy) and since they see every claim as a potential lawsuit they err on the side of shutting shit down. I'm surprised more shit doesn't get taken down.

 

Yeah it must be a nightmare dealing with all the complaints. There would be everything from the serious to the most inane and some people would have to go through them all in case YT become liable for something. It would be a shitty job.

There probably is a lot of shit that gets taken down we just don't know about it until it's a channel we use.

Not sure if it's stupid, strange or weird but there is chatter about the channel having a secret back up channel of all the stuff which one can only get the address of by "liking" a forum post on another forum. They are kind of weird people on that forum, then seem to despise conversation in preference for praise of the work they do, which at times isn't even their work.

[RelentlessOblivion]

Death Metal Promotions is down now too. A shame I found a few killer records through that channel over the last year also.

[AlSymerz]

Deathmetalmania's facebook site, sister site to thrasmetalmania, got hacked several days ago. According to the owners of the site nothing was changed and FB appear to have helped get it back, but there also hasn't been any new posts since it happened.

[RelentlessOblivion]

Oh boy what a doozy of a news story. Think I might need to convert to NRL after the recent revelations about the AFL. Non-Australians, feel free to skip over this post by the way, so apparently the AFL, in an effort to circumvent what is now sports integrity Australia, had a policy of club doctors, hiding a players illicit drug use by inventing injuries prior to game day, so a player who would otherwise fail their drug test Could get off scot-free. Also, they wouldn’t even get a strike against them for the AFL illicit drugs policy. now first and foremost by the sounds of it that had been going on for at least 10 years, and because of the AFL’s illicit drugs policy club. Doctors weren’t allowed to tell any other officials at the clubs that a player was using drugs, I can only imagine how many players have ongoing issues rather than being referred to programs which could help them kick the habit, they were given the green light to use as much as they wanted consequence, free and the doctor would get them out of any potential trouble. I know lead has had plenty of problems with player behaviour before,  but I don’t think they’ve ever had a competition wide conspiracy to protect players from the consequences of illicit drug use before.  

[FatherAlabaster]

1 minute ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

Non-Australians, feel free to skip over this post by the way,

whew, I thought I was going to have to read that

[AlSymerz]

I think that the fact that the first statement from the AFL on the matter was not a statement of denial says a lot. It wasn't an admission of guilt either but usually the AFL's first response is to deny everything.

However it's not overly surprising, most Victorian's have known for years that the AFL are a law unto themselves. They dictate to the Victorian Government. They dictate to VicPol and they have been able to keep police from investigating criminal activities (for eg players doing business with OMG's). And their drug policy has been a joke since the day it was invented to save their sorry arse employees from criminal convictions.

The NRL might not be exactly the same, their drug rules are slightly better, but don't expect things to be too much different for them just because it's not been found out yet.

 

[RelentlessOblivion]

well, with any luck, this will be the straw that breaks the camels back, surely federal and state governments now have a valid reason to terminate any, and all funding for the AFL as a starting point, and if it turns out that rugby, soccer, and cricket have similar problems at the top level which is probably the case that we can stop funding those two. 

[Thatguy]

4 hours ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

Think I might need to convert to NRL

Come on over. You know you want to.

[AlSymerz]

The problem with stopping funding is how much the governments loose. Look at the BS around Crown Casino in Melbourne. After all the corruption that has been found they are still deemed worthy to hold a gambling licence. Why? Because they are the only company big enough to operate such a licence in this state and because it's in the governments best interest to keep the casino operation. The AFL is a cash cow for the government, both state and federal, so the funds we see, and the ones we don't, that the Government put into the AFL come back into the coffers and into the communities tenfold. No government would allow such a operation to be unfunded.

If NSW and QLD governments are happy to prop up NRL over the really bad years where teams like the Bulldogs etc were in the news every day for the wrong thing and it over shadowed the games being played there is little these clubs will do that governments wont fund. They tell the media they are unhappy but they wont stop funding it.

[RelentlessOblivion]

it will depend on the sports integrity Australia investigation I think, you can’t get away with blatantly avoiding anti-doping measures for 20 years without some serious consequences.

[AlSymerz]

Yes they can, they've been doing it. There is no other sport in the world that created it's own drug policy the way the AFL did. The three strike system was always made to protect the players and avoid serious sanctions against teams and players. FFS the AFLW system doesn't even have a full drugs policy in place and that sees two female players who were caught over Christmas not even sanctioned by the system.

Even if the cheating and lying can be proved Sport Integrity Australia will find fault, demand a weak penalty, probably monetary which wont even be paid in full, then tell the AFL to improve things. Just like the gambling commission did with Crown Casino. And just like the casino the under hand ways will go deeper, out of sight of people, until they get caught again.

 

[GoatmasterGeneral]

2 hours ago, AlSymerz said:

Yes they can, they've been doing it. There is no other sport in the world that created it's own drug policy the way the AFL did. The three strike system was always made to protect the players and avoid serious sanctions against teams and players. FFS the AFLW system doesn't even have a full drugs policy in place and that sees two female players who were caught over Christmas not even sanctioned by the system.

Even if the cheating and lying can be proved Sport Integrity Australia will find fault, demand a weak penalty, probably monetary which wont even be paid in full, then tell the AFL to improve things. Just like the gambling commission did with Crown Casino. And just like the casino the under hand ways will go deeper, out of sight of people, until they get caught again.

Why does anyone really care if some of the players are doing drugs? As long as they're not high during the games while they're actually on the field, but even that might be fairly entertaining. Seems like a lot of pearl clutching and virtue signaling over nothing more than than some trivial nonsense.

Rock stars have been ingesting copious amounts of illegal drugs for decades and no one has ever given a shit. Even when they've OD'd and dropped dead no one cares. Imagine if they drug tested rock stars before a concert and wouldn't let bands perform if they pissed dirty?

[Thatguy]

8 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Why does anyone really care if some of the players are doing drugs?

Not me. As long as they are not enhancing performance then the silly buggers should be able to take what they like - just like the rest of us silly buggers.

[AlSymerz]

Well for one the policy in place rarely rules in or out whether the player was drug effected during games or not. But being drug free is a rule the players agree to as a part of their contracts. Whether any one person cares about it doesn't really come into it. Neither does the players own health or the effects it has on their personal lives.

It can become a litigious issue if players start saying the drug culture was forced upon them by the teams because then it becomes an employer/employee situation. But that's probably never going to happen even if teams have been encouraging their players to take drugs of any kind. It certainly didn't happen last time one team was found to be pushing performance enhancing drugs on their players. The news did rabbit on about it for months and the team coped pointless sanctions and fines that were probably never paid, some players even threatened legal action but then it just fell away from the news.

Today we have an AFL football player standing up against racism. Sure no sensible person condones racism, especially against his kids when they are in their own back yard. But this story of first nations player standing up against unknown racists feeds the good news for the code. It wont delete the current drug stories and today is a slow day for news given how everything religious takes over on Good Friday in this country. But it will give the AFL breathing room it needs to congratulate the player and keep the drugs scandal at the back of the news for 24 hours or so. A few more good stories and the AFL gets less and less talk about the bad which is exactly what they need to start sweeping the drug scandal back under the rug where it's lived for years.

 

[navybsn]

Sportsball would be much more fun if all of the athletes were allowed to take all the drugs all the time. PED or illicit. Matter of fact, each team should be sponsored by a specific drug. Who wouldn't want to watch the San Diego Stoners vs. the Minnesota Methheads in a gladiator style brawl. Players contracts could be incentive based to encourage max usage on the sidelines. Games would be shorter since everyone would be totally fucked in short order leading to fewer injuries and less CTE. Health benefits people!

 

[GoatmasterGeneral]

15 minutes ago, navybsn said:

Sportsball would be much more fun if all of the athletes were allowed to take all the drugs all the time. PED or illicit. Matter of fact, each team should be sponsored by a specific drug. Who wouldn't want to watch the San Diego Stoners vs. the Minnesota Methheads in a gladiator style brawl. Players contracts could be incentive based to encourage max usage on the sidelines. Games would be shorter since everyone would be totally fucked in short order leading to fewer injuries and less CTE. Health benefits people!

 

Now that's using the old noggin'. We need to put the fun, danger and unpredictability back into sportsball. As long as they have the Narcan crew standing by on the sidelines in case of accidental opioid overdoses 'n such, what could possibly go wrong? 

[RelentlessOblivion]

2 hours ago, Thatguy said:

Not me. As long as they are not enhancing performance then the silly buggers should be able to take what they like - just like the rest of us silly buggers.

Often, if it is in your system on the game day, or you are still affected by the drug, to some extent, it actually is performance enhancing. The previously mentioned Essendon incident really should have had far more extreme consequences, considering it was the club forcing players to use or lose their place on the list. The consequences of having a system designed to protect players and ensure those who speak out/seek help to deal with their addiction. Issues are condemned, and let’s be under now illusions that is exactly what would have been happening, is appalling. It honestly makes me yearn full the early 2000s when I was a naive, kid blissfully, unaware of just how problematic the AFL’s policies were, and are even when compared with other sporting codes approaches to off field issues.

 

I can’t believe I’m about to say this, but, only fellow Australians will get this once again by the way, Eddie Maguire is right. It isn’t mandatory to play football, but it should be mandatory to play football drug free. 

[Thatguy]

37 minutes ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

Eddie Maguire is right

You can't believe you said that.

[GoatmasterGeneral]

54 minutes ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

Jerry Maguire is right.

[AlSymerz]

4 hours ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

I can’t believe I’m about to say this, but, only fellow Australians will get this once again by the way, Eddie Maguire is right. It isn’t mandatory to play football, but it should be mandatory to play football drug free. 

Eddie probably got it from someone else and is just repeating it because someone told him it was right.

[RelentlessOblivion]

well, it would seem my prayers to the metal gods have been answered, Hellhammer and Eyehategod both visiting my neck of the woods in just a few short months

[AlSymerz]

Well now it's up to you and your fellow Radleians to pony up and buy tickets to prove to promoters that it's worth sending bands to the city of churches.

[markm]

 

This is pretty much me, except I do download stuff I can't get on CD or is too expensive, and I do stream for convenience in certain situations. But, yeah, like NY Pete, I'm an an old school stuff guy.