Warbler

yes college football uses a combination of polls computers to rank the teams each week.   The top two teams in the final rankings of the regular season, go to the national championship game.   In a year when you have 5 undefeated teams(such as this year),  3 are left out in the cold.

You can click here http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/eligibility and scroll down to BCS standings for an in depth explanation as to how it works.

Its time to beat that old dead horse again.   It maybe dead, but I'm going to beat it until College football gets playoff system.   Most every other sport has a playoff system.  All the other divisions of College football have playoff systems.  Even highschool football has playoffs.    Why not College football.  How many Undefeated teams not making the Championship game does it take?   How many situations like what happened with Oklahoma and Texas(Oklahoma going to the Championship even though Texas beat them) does it take?  The BCS is just BS.   It is clearly unfair.   Teams outside of the big 6 conferences don't have a chance to compete for a National Championship.   I have a question for all those that don't think College football should have a playoff system,  Should the NFL get rid of theirs and just let polls and computers decide who plays in the Superbowl?   In 2007, when the Pats went undefeated in the regular season, should it have just been the Pats verses the Colts in the Superbowl and forget about the Giants(who beat them in the Superbowl) and the rest of the playoffs?  I'd be very upset if Baseball did this.   The Phillies  probably wouldn't have made the World Series either this year or last.   Anyone who is in favor of the BCS, please tell why/how you think it is fair to have over 100 teams play 12 games and elimination all but 2 teams afterwords?   How can you possibly think that such a system can be anywhere near accurate at deciding who the 2 best teams are?   Does anyone know if there is a petition like ours for the OOT,  for a College football playoff system?

oh boy,  I could come up with a large list here.   I don't watch them all every year as there is just too many.   I alternate.

Movies:

A Christmas Carol(Alastair Sim, George C. Scott, and Patrick Steward versions, I may have to day the new animated Disney version.  I don't like the added action scenes, but even with them, it is one of more accurate versions I've seen)

Scrooge(the Musical starring Albert Finney)
(yes, I am a big fan of the story A Christmas Carol.  I highly recommend that everyone should really the Book.  I try to read it every year as this time.)

Miracle On 34th Street(the original)

Its A Wonderful Life

The Lemon Drop Kid(its where the song Silver Bells comes from)

White Christmas(I have a tradition of watch this one at midnight on Thanksgiving to officially start the Christmas season. )

The Bishop's Wife

It Happened on Fifth Avenue

Die Hard's 1 and 2

(at some point, I intend to get "The Nativity Story" and add that to the list)

TV specials:

Rudolf The Red Nosed Reindeer

Frosty The Snowman

The Grinch Who Stole Christmas

Santa Claus is Coming to Town.

Twas The Night Before Christmas.

A Chipmunk Christmas

If I could, I'd like to get a hold of the original Looney Tunes and Disney Christmas specials that aired when I was a kid. 

I could probably add more to the list, but that is enough for now.

I just don't understand how they able to do this effectively.   In order to have 3D, I though you needed two images, one for each eye.  Two images are slightly different from each other, so that your mind processes it like an image from the real world.  How do they create the 2nd image if it wasn't originally filmed?

I was talking about this in another thread, but it more properly belongs here.  Just how effect would 3D transfer of a 2D movie look?   I can't believe it would look as good as movie shot in 3D, would it?  It also alters the original version. Its kind of like showing a widescreen movie in pan and scan.  Isn't it?

ImperialFighter said:

even if he adds a couple more extra bells and whistles to them for their eventual '3D conversion' release

how can he make them into 3D.   Don't movies have to be filmed that way?   If I'm not mistaken,  you film the movie with 2 cameras,  one for each eye.   That's how you get the 3D effect right?

I've signed the petition.  Its good to see this site go back to its roots.

I really have no desire to see Gaffer in a bikini.  

Ric Olie said:

Warbler said:

xhonzi said:

Umm... So you and Warbler would have some great conversations, eh?

Sure why not?   He can't me...

It's true - I can't you.  Only you can you.

 

I meant to say He can't hate me.

Ric Olie said:

Warbler said:

...my pic is real.

And my pic isn't real?  How dare you?  How do we know you're real?  I've never seen you in a movie.

I think I  shall boycott the boycott discussion too.  Boost can continue defining the word how he likes and I will define it my way.

I wasn't first person in this thread to use the term boycott in this thread.  

According to Wikipedia a boycott is

a form of consumer activism involving the act of voluntarily abstaining from using, buying, or dealing with a person, organization, or country as an expression of protest, usually for political reasons.

This seems to fit what the Trek people are doing.  It does not say that lack of quality can't be used as the reason for the boycott.  It doesn't limit the reasons behind a boycott at all.

I think they are refusing to see it for more than just because they don't like the movie.   I think its because of how it messes with the original Trek Universe or maybe they can't stand the Spock/Uhura romance.  But you'd really have to ask them for their reasons for the "boycott". 

As for my boycott of Lucas,  it is definitely more just perceived lack of quality.   The PT wasn't that great, but I'd still buy the DVD's if it wasn't for how Lucas was treating the OOT and its fans.   I'd also get myself the soundtracks of all the movies.  I like the soundtracks.  correction: I love the soundtracks.  Yet, I refuse to buy them because of Lucas.   If it weren't for how Lucas was treating OOT, I might even buy the SE, just to have both versions.   So, even under your definition, what I'm doing fits.

it is illogical . . . illogical . . . please explain . . . only humans can explain their behavior . . . illogical . . . Norman coordinate . . . illogical . . . illogical *light on necklace blinks . . . steam comes out of ears . . . deactivates*

if only I still had the WarbSP.  Oh well,  I guess my Swiss Army Knife will have to do.

Ric Olie said:

Don't forget people with avatars that aren't their real picture.

Ric Olie hates that.

xhonzi said:

Umm... So you and Warbler would have some great conversations, eh?

Sure why not?   He can't me,  my pic is real.  

Anchorhead said:

I've been a more-than-casual Trek fan for decades. I enjoyed the latest film. For me, it was better than most of the previous films and it fit in just fine with the history of the series. In fact, it got back to the more cerebral aspects of Science Fiction - altered realities, internal struggles, spacetime, etc.

Those types of "we're taking a stand against the franchise" boycotts are funny. They just come across as selfish tantrums. The movie-going public is a hell of a lot bigger than the voice a period-specific segment of a 44-year-old franchise consisting of six TV series, 11 films, and hundreds of novels.

It's no different than us here (even though we're trying to get something as opposed to stopping something). I signed the petition years ago in good faith, but I never expected it to amount to anything - and as it turns out, it didn't. Not really anyway. We finally got a DVD version of the theatrical release, but it was substandard quality, given away as an extra, on a disc with a childrens game. It was a bitch slap to our segment of the fan base.

We changed nothing. While we were being placated, the franchise is continuing on in the direction Lucas wants it to go. The revisionist lies are still being published as though they were fact, history still being erased, the cheese still being produced, and by all indications we're no closer to getting what we want.

The TOS fans taking a stand against the 11th film has about as much impact as me starting a website called - theresonlyonestarwarsfilmanditcameoutin1977.com

For me, what has always worked and always kept my angst & heartburn down to manageable levels, has been my method for most of my life......If you don't dig the idea of a certain film - don't go see it. Hating it doesn't change anything and seeing it only puts the images in your head.

[/off-topic rant]

while I'm not boycotting the new film, I can sympathize with those that do.   I'm sure many who do, understand that they will have no real impact and just doing it for the principle of it.  I'm still refusing to give Lucas any of my money.  I know it won't have an impact, but I'm doing it anyway. 

As for the new Trek,  the only real problem I have with it is the romance between Spock and Uhura.  That is just wrong unvulcan-like.   Whatever happened to being totally logical and unemotional?

*is very confused*

that's probably the best way to go.

that's strange I wonder why?  It didn't look like you guys were fighting.   Perhaps you can PM him and talk about it.

Amerika? 

ditto.  Happy Thanksgiving!

 At some point aren't they going to find out about the Associates degree?  I can't lie about on a job application.  If I get caught in a lie, they'll throw my application in the trash can. or if they find I lied after they hire me, they'll fire me.   Won't they?  

Welcome to the forum, Stampede.   Its good to have members here from outside the USA.  Its give us another perspective on things.

I think both sides are to blame for that.

TheDoctor1987 said:

 i have always liked the special edition trilogy over the original version when i saw them again back in 97

to quote Scotty "The Excelsior!?!  Why in God's name would you want that bucket of bolds?"

I hate it when that happens.  what set was this a part of?