thejediknighthusezni

NeverarGreat said:

thejediknighthusezni said:

      ^Those are good points.

       An advantage of rethinking education and seeing 16 as a start for vocation training while still home is that there could be more room for "false starts". Any scholarships or grants-in-aid could go towards the final choice. 

       We get the sort of society we subsidize. Non-vital fathers, Over-worked and isolated mothers, kids who blow tens of thousands on sheer time-wasting nonsense...

       I'd rather see kids still at home until 21 instead of back in the basement at 28. They progress to 12 or 13 and then slide down until 21 anyway.

Remember that some people progress at different rates. While vocational training at sixteen or earlier may work for some, others will still prefer more esoteric and technical knowledge.

What exactly do you mean by "slide down until 21"? Do you mean that kids tend to become less focused and driven until then? Again, I wouldn't lump all kids into this category, but I think that people slide down perpetually even after this point.

I'm currently in college in America, and many people are simply there because it is expected of them. It wouldn't matter what subject was taught, or whether it directly applied to their life or not. They simply would not feel that it was important. Some of this I think has to do with the American government. We've been involved in a war in the middle east for over a decade and are engaged in a perpetual and unwinnable war on Terrorism, as well as failed wars on drugs and crime. We don't look to the stars anymore, and our political system is a sad farce. Our financial problems are worse than ever, and our health as a nation is declining. Is this the kind of future that you would want?

If we had a bright future to look forward to, then our students may become more motivated even with our flawed educational system.

      Slide down? I mean all the typical teen stuff. Feeling their oats without having the first clue how to deal with it in a non-destructive way, not even understanding how completely clueless they are (though they are supposed to be clueless), emotional and self-conscious...The whole disaster. Yes there are a few exceptions here and there, but it's 21 before they even begin making up lost ground. They REQUIRE the assistance of been-there-done-that adults who care about them if they are to steer clear of very dangerous obstacles.

    We had the problem of unfocused college students back in my time of the late 70s-early 80's and ever since. If it is worse now it is because of political leaders who destroy the economy by giving home loans to those who could never pay back and then foster an atmosphere of hopeless dependency on the same nit-wit sort of policies.

     "...flawed educational system"? It is certainly FLAWED. I would call it HORRIFYINGLY, CATASTROPHICALLY DESTRUCTIVE. The elementary students who are utterly burnt-out on the idea of "education" before they reach age 11, The parents who are rendered unable to properly care for their offspring up to and including divorce because of the mad effort to pay for the hyper-expensive public system, the kids between 13 and 21 thrown together in big unsupervised masses becoming involved in vice, the public "teachers" who are more interested in dumbing them down to believe in everything that tears the society apart instead of all the things that make this country a great and decent and good place...

       Another problem is the relic of the "Degree". It is from the dark ages when nobles and clergy and noble-clergy were called upon to be judges AND theologians and an entirely seperate enlightened elite. The Enlightenment encouraged these educated elites to believe they should be expert in everything. In a perfect world I would be all-for this conception of the "well rounded" college grad. In this world, people have the greatest difficulty maintaining a basic level of competency in just one subject. Also, I despise this impulse to regard oneself as a member of an enlightened and superior elite in morality and general intellect. It is EXTREMELY dangerous.

        The very concept of "Degree" should be completely eliminated. It should be replaced with the understanding that Graduation and Licensure/Certification are one and the same thing. Everyone should clearly understand that the ablility to jump through the hoops in a particular subject in no way suggests superiority in any other sense and that these characters could just as easily be stupid rats. The "Doctor" honorific should be reserved for those who attain the highest degree of competency in an advanced field such that they could serve as advanced intructors AND they must have the moral charactaristics of humility and a strong sense of pathetic limitation.

        Kids should be taught the basic Facts and Truths of what works and what, one way or another, is proven to be destructive wherever attempted. This could be done in interesting Reading Comprehension/Civics courses. They should also be strongly encouraged to pursue further reading whenever possible on their own 

      ^Those are good points.

       An advantage of rethinking education and seeing 16 as a start for vocation training while still home is that there could be more room for "false starts". Any scholarships or grants-in-aid could go towards the final choice. 

       We get the sort of society we subsidize. Non-vital fathers, Over-worked and isolated mothers, kids who blow tens of thousands on sheer time-wasting nonsense...

       I'd rather see kids still at home until 21 instead of back in the basement at 28. They progress to 12 or 13 and then slide down until 21 anyway.

     I wonder whether GTA is producing drivers with greater situational awareness and ability to act.

     I don't buy the idea that the games are the problem. There is a miniscule handful of the most extreme nuts who are obsessed with the idea of commiting these acts and wish to participate in them.

     They should be given an opportunity to back away and stop obsessing or, if under 21 or on parole, be placed in a secure environment until they demonstrate it's no longer important to them.

AntcuFaalb said:

CP3S said:

I generally consider all undergraduate degrees useless. They are easy to obtain and the market is over saturated with them. Undergraduate education is the new high school diploma, and who hangs their high school diploma on the wall?

I know it's only anecdotal, but I make a six-figure salary + benefits with my useless CS undergraduate degree and I'm only 2.5 years out of university. This is not uncommon amongst computer programmers, IIRC.

Undergraduate degrees are only useless if you choose the wrong major*. I don't think everyone should choose to pursue a STEM degree, of course, but we should be preparing prospective undergrads for the reality of the job market that they'll encounter after graduation rather than filling their heads with the standard "follow your dreams" nonsense.

* None of this applies if one plans to pursue higher degree(s) and/or plans to go into academia.

       People in Germany begin receiving vocational training in "High School".

       I wrote about eliminating all public education before the 11th birthday and replacing it with mandatory testing every six months and tax refunds going to the parent who stays home. 

      These better educated, socialized, and supervised kids would enthusiastically enter the next stage from 11 to 16. Six bad weather months would be spent exclusively on general and practical subjects such as Practical Math, English Comprehension and Composition and Essential Management of Sexuality. The good weather six months would be spent in carefully supervised member-managed clubs for personal interest such as Athletics, Popular Musical Instruments (keyboards, guitars, drums), Science, Advanced Mathematics, IT and Literature.

      The fiction of adulthood at 18 would end. Kids from 16+ to 21 could take-on limited adult responsibilities such as driving and Vocation Education Loans with approval and some contribution from a parent or guardian. Parents would remain responsible for the housing and feeding of these kids to 21. A 20 year old could not be housed away any more than a 17 year old. All vocational and advanced education would be paid for out-of-pocket or with loans until the student graduates AND finds paid work in a field related to his/her degree and only then could the graduate receive any scholarships or grants (this would encourage kids and parents to be very careful and not waste time and money.) Loans would only go to kids of proven aptitude in the chosen field after careful testing and would continue only if the kids are advancing in those subjects. Elementary schools could be converted to community college/votech centers and other facilities could be built within an easy commute. Instructors could travel to different centers. Only kids from very rural areas or in unusual advanced courses would be boarded away. Kids with serious legal/moral troubles would have to go into sex-segregated classes under even greater supervision. The student/instructor relationship would be as middle-school is supposed to be now.

       Before 1950, kids under 21 were sent off to boarding type educational institutions primarily because of transportation limitations and not because it is the best way to prepare these little snips for real life.  

     I wouldn't be a bit surprised if fps games were saving more lives than they take. They provide aggressive and irresponsible teenage boys with an outlet and catharsis while keeping them occupied for hours instead of out bored drinking and looking for trouble.

      That said, there might be 5 or 6 of the most extreme sort of lunatics out there who could be effected, together with some other radical influences, to commit horrible acts.

      People deemed "Mentally Ill" are, as a group, more peacable than the population in general. If you remove the small minority who are deemed MI AND are obviously violent toward other innocent people or obviously OBSESSED with gorey or mass mayhem imagery, the remaining MI population is FAR more non-violent than the pop as a whole. It would make FAR more sense to pull non-MI people off the streets at random and shoot them full of poison while imprisoned rather than bother the MI people who are not obviously obsessed with violent imagery or commiting violent acts against innocents. 

CP3S said:

I don't know. I've always felt Casablanca is terribly overrated, there is no way that many people genuinely love this one movie that much.

But that being said, I love that movie! I can watch it over and over and enjoy it just as much every time. I can't really say that about too many movies. There really aren't that many movies that I have seen repeatedly that I'll gladly plop down $7 - $12 dollars to see in theaters (and make the time to do so on top of that) when it occasionally comes back around for a one evening showing.

Kind of contradicting right? I guess I want to think Casablanca is genuinely one of my favorites, while so many others are posing and just saying it is one of their favorites because it is the popular thing to do. Which might be a ridiculous line of thinking. People know what they like. All I know is, personally, I think it is fantastic and get great joy out of watching it. I have seen in more times than I can remember, and I will see it again more times than I'll be able to keep track of. 

     I suppose it is the common theme running through 'Casablanca' and 'Breakfast at Tiffany's' and other films of the unhappy, lost man sacrificing his chance at happiness with the lost, wayward woman in order to send her where she "should be.".

     Anyway, 'Little Miss Sunshine':

     I passed on this film's theatrical release thinking it was a silly little family film. I was mistaken. Now I watched it thinking that, if I was going to be lurking around OT.com, I should be a little better informed.

     It was outstanding. Spot-on writing, directing and acting from the excellent ensemble cast.

     Now I'm curious to see 'Toy Story 3'.

     ^Looks like it could be fun.

        I also liked the idea of building of the Vader line "You should not have returned." He could start on Tat helping Luke and visiting the cantina and then go off, as in ANH.

       Why the pit in the Throne Room?

       Maybe a glow could rise from the shaft every time the laser is fired and the Emp could be shown relishing the power?

        Just saw it. I thought it was great. Seems to have stuck close to the stage musical. Outstanding job translating something like that to cinema.

        I liked everything but the final visual that seems to come from the stage version. It seemed discordant with the themes developed before.

    ^ Yeah, I was thinking basically about pace for those very familiar with the rythm.

      Fantastic work on the edits around here. It's alot of fun.

      I wonder if each ep could start out with minimal changes for the first few minutes to preserve mood and then increase gradually over the next 10-15 minutes. This might preseve the original experience and mood and pace and then surprise gradually with more and more changes. ;/

zombie84 said:

CP3S said:

With the mass number of guns in this country, I don't think they will ever be very hard to find. At least not for a very, very, very long time.

I agree, I don't want to drag this out, so I'm going to focus on this very specific point, specifically the last part.

You are probably right, because guns are such an ingrained part of US culture, even if they were illegal most people would know where to get them if they were intent on it. Marijuana is illegal in Canada but so many people use it--hell, my 60 year old dad uses it--that if you ask your friends, you will be able to buy it in not a very long time, even if your friends are near-seniors like my dear ol' dad. So, banning guns or being tough on guns wouldn't have a serious effect overnight. But, over time, it would diminish. If it was illegal, there would increasingly be a stigma, because it would be less common. The crime rate would probably go down, because there would be less non-gang-related deaths, but for criminals intent on using guns, and ordinary citizens who just really, really want to have one, it wouldn't affect them much at first. But if gun ownership was harder to get around, I feel that 50% of the current gun-owning population wouldn't be bothered to go through with it. Lots of people would buy illegal, but most wouldn't. And, over time, that would diminish the obsession with guns. People just wouldn't see a need for it. It's not like prohibition or other substance laws, because people often "use" (drink) on a daily or regular basis, but most people use their guns fairly rarely (most, remember), and some almost never. So, they would discover that their lives aren't impacted. It's a baby step towards slowly dissolving the national obsession with guns, and even though crime may spike at first due to proliferation of arms dealers, actual violent, gun-related fatalities would slowly diminish over time. It would gradually normalize the United States to the same usage stats as the rest of the world and the same fatality stats that follow. But slowly, over years and years, because there is a lot of work to do.

I think that is the point I am trying to make. Not only would it save immediate lives from non-criminal fatalities, from everything from accidental discharges which cause hundreds of deaths a year to the jealous husband with a revolver in the bedroom closet, it would slowly create a mentality that doesn't value or see the need for guns, the way most the rest of the western world is, which also drives the crime rate down like it does in most other countries. There will always be guns and crime in every society in our lifetime, but since the United States isn't a nation overrun with criminals it is the widespread ownership and fetishization of weaponry that plays a major, if not central, role in the massive, massive disproportiate gun crime there. Other countries have similar population, but no one has anything close to the same numbers of gun owners and gun victims per capita. When you remove the ease of access to guns from the equation, you will still have both, but over time they will diminish. It's easy to say "you don't know that would happen," but it's not like the US is just a little more of a widespread gun ownership society per capita than everyone else--it's more like a marathon sprinter racing against a guy in crutches, they are that far apart from everyone else in the western world (and many in the non-west). It's no surprise that in almost every single country in the west, almost no one owns guns and almost no one ends up on the receiving end of one. I guess that's my point. Maybe I am wrong, it just seems like too big of a fact to ignore.

       Okay, I'll bite...

       The single most TERRIFYING thought to me is, BY FAR, the ROCK STUPID and CATASTROPHICALLY DANGEROUS IGNORANCE of most all people around the world and a majority in the USA of their TOTAL DEPENDENCE upon the US Constitution and the minority of US citizens left who are willing to uphold it's principals. Without that, everyone in Canada would be (will be) down on their knees before their Russian or Chinese overlords in an AGONIZING Orwellian dystopia. Every instance of pleasantness and decency in the lives of EVERY person on planet Earth is due ENTIRELY to that document and that rapidly dwindling group of people.

       It's preposterously easy to sit back and sneer at the difficult necessities of maintaining that space of decency when it is all provided by others, gratis.

       There is a great difference of mentality between a population that is well armed and one that is entirely disarmed. This difference is CRITICAL. Well armed men are less willing to be kicked around by the ruling elites ever eager to expand their powers, the ruling elites are less eager to push the general populace too far, and the population retains some last desperate hope if the elites finally bring things to the verge.

       Of course, Canadians need not concern themselves with any of this.

      A while back, I read a study showing that the incidence of white on white violence in the US and Britain were about the same. Guns were never the problem.

      Anne Coulter wrote a very interesting online editorial about the only sort of gun policy shown to stop mass killings.

Father Skywalker said:

 

 

 

 

...For instance, let's take a good look at what happened in during/WW2. The Allied Powers defeated Adolf Hitler, the Third Reich, Nazism, Nazi Germany, the evil xenophobic racist Japanese Empire (a very little known fact about imperial japan during the second  world war, they were evil bastards who killed innocent people and civilians in China and other countries-for instance, unit 731, it's is a Slayer song, but it's is also a horrible torture chamber human experimentation done by imperial Japan).....

So, we defeated 2 of the most evil groups of people in all of history, and saved possibly, almost most certainly and definitley true, tens of millions of innocent lives from evil mass murderers. Regardless of the fact that the allied powers contained an evil mass murderer, Joesph Stalin, and some may have estimated that the soviet union atrocity body count may have even surpassed that of nazi germany, in the long run, without the soviet union, tens of millions of more innocent people would have died in genocide and ethnic cleansing. The Stalinist soviet union did most of it's atrocities and purges before the 3rd reich ever came to power, and most of joseph stalin's atrocities were done and over with, as opposed to the nazis, who were a real threat that had to be stopped and defeated.....

         Anyone who thinks that the Soviet Union, IF UNOPPOSED by the U.S. nation ruled by the U.S. Constitution, would have been any better and not worse than Stalin in the thirties needs to carefully read Orwell's 1984 AT LEAST A DOZEN TIMES.

        Most of those killed in Europe in WWII were killed by Soviet brutality and disregard for life. The Soviets were utterly exhausted from all their genocides and purges in the '20s and '30s and stupid and evil sacrifices of lives in the war. They had NO CHOICE but to moderate in order to meet the VAST moral and technical superiority of the U.S..

        Orwell's entire point was that TOTALITARIANS, regardless of the particulars of their respective doctrines, are exactly the same in basic mentality and goals. They will continue to amass greater and greater power, over every single aspect of human existence, ad infinitum. It's what they are all about. Any suggestion otherwise is only to fool people. They don't HONESTLY recognize ANY upper limits to what they take from others. For every inch they gain they will be right back for another mile........... 

        If VADER was a totalitarian, he would have kept going and going and going.......... 

         CASINO ROYALE didn't knock my socks off, though seeing DC in the role was fun. 

         QOS (serious and prosaic) and MOONRAKER (silly and far-out) were at the opposite ends of the spectrum. Some great sequences. 

         SKYFALL went off the spectrum on it's own tangent. From Bond to Bourne to IPCRESS FILES. I liked it alot. Everyone did a great job.

       ....awsome FX for countless films, finding an amazing home for LFL, developing better learning and instructional techniques.....

       My only problem with the FX from AOTC is inconsistency with the OT. They are fantastic otherwise.

       Perhaps just replacing much of the backgrounds with RMesque matte paintings and adding some real elements back there would bring it in line. Real footage of exotic earthy places could help.

       Edit: How did this thread escape from SW Fan-Edits? ;)

       Could change the light and textures to make the Sarlaac sequence seem like evening.

       Open up side of barge with window or sliding panels for wider view and balcony feel?

      ANH   ANH-ESB   ESB-25ROTJ-15TPM    25TPM-50AOTC-15ROTS    ROTS-fforward to DSII    ROTJ

       They could do both a remake-reboot and a seperate ST with the original cast.

       If they go with ST originals, everything should be consistent with the OT, IMO.

       The other day, I was very surprised to see another little brunette from the mid-'70s. She didn't look like Marie Osmond, and heavy make-up may have helped, but, deeyaamm, that was one smokin' HAWT looking 30 year-old chick. I'd bet dollars to dimes they could get CF looking like a hawt 42.

       If I had to choose, I'd want a R-R.

          ^I think that less time for hindsight and revisions made ESB superior to ROTJ (though I like ROTJ very much.) ESB remained linked to ANH in spirit, though darker. I wish that ROTJ was produced the year after ESB, in '80. We would have had a younger cast and no time for second thoughts. I think it could have been financed, even though sequels were considered risky.

         Hemsworth is a surprisingly good actor. Fillion has done a great job in a similar role.

         MH and CF were effectively total unknowns. If nothing else, that could work again.

         For a ST, I could see setting it 25-30 years later. It would be fun to see the old gang. With the new techniques, CF could quickly become a Hawt mature gal. She has the basics.

         For recasting, I'd go with a saga remake-reboot. Whats the point in putting them in an ST when you already have great storylines in the OT and a PT that could use a reboot?

        For a franchise like SW, why go with every 2-3 years? It made sense with HP because we follow him through his school years. I understand that a theatrical release makes about 90% of it's money in the first three weeks. There's enough time starting around May 22 to do 3 limited engagement releases in the summer blockbuster season. They could all work from the same marketing campaign. They could be re-released in the last half of the summer. You already know that there is almost zero chance of losing money.

      I'm one of those who believes that successful entrepreneurs accomplish the most for "Humanity" by establishing and maintaining more small and medium sized private enterprises.

      If it was me, I'd  take that 4 bil and create businesses for my kids with smart people in place to help run them. I'd also be SORELY tempted to flip the bird to all the whiney-graspy progressively-totalitarian lefties who shriek about my "responsibility" to their vanguard servants of the proletariate.

      If I had to donate to "Educational Charity", I'd take a hard look at the disgusting mess created by all the others claiming to be concerned about "The Children" and establish an organisation devoted to promoting "Benign Neglect".

        The droids and then Leia and Chewie (or just disguised Leia) quickly enter the palace and then Leia is made a slave and taken out on Jabba's ship to find the others arriving? ;/ ;\  Could save a little time.

        90 minutes to the escape from the DS and the turret battle with the fighters and then 23 to medals. If the DS is shown looming behind the MF before the fighters engage and maybe shooting at it with turrets of DS there could be a cliffhanger ending with the fighters attacking and then pick up again with the escape and DS just before the fighters. ;/ ;\

       90ANH cliffhanger----  23ANH 67ESB 8-o cliffhanger---- 20ESBROTJ 45TPM 25AOTC cliffhanger----  65AOTC 25ROTS cliffhanger?---- 90ROTS---  90 ROTJ opening with discovery of DS2  ;/ ;\

           If they fixed up the current EU and then put it to bed, they could establish a whole new canon.

           They could start with the OT storylines and expand from there. They could recycle the best of the OEU and the stories and elements that had promise but weren't put into full effect.

           I don't know about this site. Such extensive altering of the properties is sure to draw attention. Honestly, if I were a Disney legal beagel, I'd be dropping C&Ds on this site like a blizzard.

           I hope the real talent around here could conitnue. On an approved secure site if nothing else.

      It'd be nice if they could return it to some of GL's original conceptions.

      -Luke and Leia as true twins looking much alike.

      -Ben with a more prominent role and maybe a clone.

      -Palps as responsible for both generations.

      -Artoo with more mobility and the droids are more prominent in 5 and 6.

      Maybe "Faster and more intense." would be possible. Disney specializes in 90 minute features.

strangeland said:

SG1JOE said:

were is the new link you said you would put up looking forword to this

 

KEEP YOUR PANTS ON DAMNIT.

Heres a rough edit of the ending, im going to figure out an amount of engineer I want to show in the final bits though.

THE ENDING

and heres a super rough cut of the c section/fifield scene.... Of which i hate, and planning on mixing up.

GETITOUTOFMEGETITOUTOFME

       MMMuuuchhh better! Why didn't this stuff make it into the movie?

       The solution to the "Shaw's cut to pieces and nobody cares." problem.

       Great to have more backstory on the Captiain.

       Shaw v Engineer works well this way. Great tension. The "Oxygen is good" was a little quick, imo, and could use a hiss. Maybe some sounds to attract Shaw back towards the squid ;/

       Terrific work!