Questions For The World

Things that don't belong anywhere else. (Check first).

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: Questions For The World

Postby eSOANEM » Thu Jul 03, 2014 6:55 pm UTC

Adacore wrote:In the UK, you'd be best off saying "without gherkin(s)", but they'd probably understand what you meant if you said "without pickles" instead. They might understand "without cucumber", but even if they did they'd think it was a strange way to refer to the ingredient in question; I'd guess that most Brits aren't even aware that gherkins/pickles and cucumbers are from the same/similar fruits.


I always say "without gherkin". I wouldn't have understood "without cucumber" before it came up here (or rather, I'd have taken it for granted that the burger was without cucumber.

Adacore wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:Adacore, do Brits generally use the botanical sense of fruit like that [or something closer to it than Americans at least], or is that just you?)

No, that was just me, I think. I debated which to use, and fruit just seemed more natural in that sentence. If I hadn't been reading the Wikipedia articles on cucumbers/gherkins to research for these questions I probably wouldn't even have thought to say 'fruit'.


Most people use something in between "it's fruit if it goes in a fruit salad" and the botanical definition. A tomato for instance is something I'd say was "technically a fruit" rather than "a fruit". It's on the edge of the space described by the word fruit.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: Questions For The World

Postby yurell » Thu Jul 03, 2014 10:59 pm UTC

eSOANEM wrote:Most people use something in between "it's fruit if it goes in a fruit salad" and the botanical definition. A tomato for instance is something I'd say was "technically a fruit" rather than "a fruit". It's on the edge of the space described by the word fruit.


It's what happens when colloquial and technical definitions differ. Another botanical one is 'thorns', which roses do not have ('thorns' are modified branches, 'spines' are modified leaves and 'prickles' is the word you're looking for), but colloquially it's a different matter.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Adacore » Thu Jul 03, 2014 11:03 pm UTC

Yeah, I think the reason I used the word 'fruit' in the context I did was because I was talking about the origin of the edible products, and the origin of a variety of ingredients derived from the same plant seemed more botanical than culinary.

User avatar
freezeblade
Posts: 1405
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:11 pm UTC
Location: Oakland

Re: Questions For The World

Postby freezeblade » Thu Jul 03, 2014 11:07 pm UTC

What we need is a word that means "starchy/savory fruit" so we can eliminate this form of confusion.

I always count tomatoes as a fruit, and in my opinion to call it a vegetable is silly. Perhaps said person calling it a vegetable has never had a tomato sweet enough to eat one out-of-hand.
Belial wrote:I am not even in the same country code as "the mood for this shit."

User avatar
fizzgig
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 10:35 am UTC
Location: Canberra, Australia

Re: Questions For The World

Postby fizzgig » Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:51 am UTC

I think deciding whether to call something a fruit or not based on how sweet it is is a bit silly. Do you call grapefruit a vegetable?

User avatar
poxic
Eloquently Prismatic
Posts: 4756
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:28 am UTC
Location: Left coast of Canada

Re: Questions For The World

Postby poxic » Sat Jul 05, 2014 3:22 pm UTC

A weapon of mouth-skin destruction, perhaps.
The Supreme Ethical Rule: Act so as to elicit the best in others and thereby in thyself.
- Felix Adler, professor, lecturer, and reformer (13 Aug 1851-1933)

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Questions For The World

Postby addams » Sat Jul 05, 2014 9:01 pm UTC

Giant Speck wrote:
Diadem wrote:Wait, you make sauce out of pickles? Truly, the world is a weird place.

Thousand Island dressing is often made with finely diced pickles. The "special sauce" that goes on a Big Mac is nothing more than mayo, sweet pickle relish, yellow mustard, vinegar, garlic powder, onion powder, and paprika.

Great.
Now the special sauce is not secret, anymore.

What other secrets do you have Speck.
Do tell.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
emceng
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: State of Hockey
Contact:

Re: Questions For The World

Postby emceng » Mon Jul 07, 2014 1:03 pm UTC

Wondering about music evolution in other countries and cultures. The USA is I think the birthplace of rock and roll and jazz, hip hop too I guess*. What has been going on in other countries in the past 50-100 years? Probably stuff I've never even heard of.

*caveats and addendums apply.
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. - CS Lewis

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Adacore » Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:50 pm UTC

I don't know that much about Korean music, so this isn't exactly a reply to your question, but I do know that Korean music was basically all ballads and crooners until 1996, when the first 'idol groups' were launched, and heavily produced K-Pop quickly became ubiquitous. Pop music for teenagers was already big in other countries at the time, of course, but this was the first time it became a big deal in Korea.

A tangent from the original question, but it seems like every country I know about had two duelling boy bands in the 1990s, and almost all teenage girls were expected to be fans of one (and not the other). In the UK/Ireland that was Take That and Boyzone; in the USA it was N Sync and Backstreet Boys; Korea had H.O.T and Sechs Kies. Did other countries have a similar dynamic at that time?

User avatar
Grop
Posts: 1998
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:36 am UTC
Location: France

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Grop » Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:24 pm UTC

I think France did pretty much the same thing as the US.

And we had some boy bands too (we may still have some), but I am not aware of a rivalty between them, like teenage girls were supposed to like only one.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Diadem » Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:50 pm UTC

emceng wrote:Wondering about music evolution in other countries and cultures. The USA is I think the birthplace of rock and roll and jazz, hip hop too I guess*. What has been going on in other countries in the past 50-100 years? Probably stuff I've never even heard of.

*caveats and addendums apply.

In the Netherlands the mainstream pop music comes broadly in two flavours. The first is very much like mainstream American/western pop/rock music, some of it even sung in English. A number of bands are internationally known, such as Golden Earring or Ilse de Lange. A more traditional popular genre is the 'lifesong', related to the German schlager, which are very sentimental songs with very simple melodies, about how terrible life is. Only people with absolutely no taste whatsoever like this, so it's very popular.

Neither of those styles are unique to The Netherlands. So if you want to know differences in music evolution compares to other western nations, you should probably look at eletronic music. In the Dutch party scene electronic music is hugely popular, and Dutch electronic music had a huge influence on the rest of the world. Styles like techno and trance are heavily influenced by the Dutch scene. And we pretty much invented the DJ. Over the last few decades all of the top selling and top rated DJs in the world have consistently been Dutch.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
emceng
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: State of Hockey
Contact:

Re: Questions For The World

Postby emceng » Tue Jul 08, 2014 2:48 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
emceng wrote:Wondering about music evolution in other countries and cultures. The USA is I think the birthplace of rock and roll and jazz, hip hop too I guess*. What has been going on in other countries in the past 50-100 years? Probably stuff I've never even heard of.

*caveats and addendums apply.


Neither of those styles are unique to The Netherlands. So if you want to know differences in music evolution compares to other western nations, you should probably look at eletronic music. In the Dutch party scene electronic music is hugely popular, and Dutch electronic music had a huge influence on the rest of the world. Styles like techno and trance are heavily influenced by the Dutch scene. And we pretty much invented the DJ. Over the last few decades all of the top selling and top rated DJs in the world have consistently been Dutch.


Very interesting, thanks!
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. - CS Lewis

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5474
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue Jul 08, 2014 4:20 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Only people with absolutely no taste whatsoever like this, so it's very popular.

I think I'm in love with that sentence and all its implications.

(As a young child it took me a while to realize that popularity didn't entail terribleness, and that there were on occasion genuinely good things which were nevertheless popular anyway).
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Questions For The World

Postby addams » Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:35 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:
Diadem wrote:Only people with absolutely no taste whatsoever like this, so it's very popular.

I think I'm in love with that sentence and all its implications.

(As a young child it took me a while to realize that popularity didn't entail terribleness, and that there were on occasion genuinely good things which were nevertheless popular anyway).

You figured that out as a child?
You Are an advanced intelligence.

I did not begin to figure that out until I was an adult.
I, still, don't 'get it' some days.

Stupid Story:
Spoiler:
It was during an interaction with a very good friend from Japan that started me thinking about it.

Well...? ...She yelled at me.
Our friendship was long enough and strong enough to withstand The Blow.
It left me looking at her with the same stupid look a Golden Retreiver gets.

She would say, "It is convenient."
I'd do the Opposite.

She would say, "It's popular."
I'd do something else.

She lost her shit with me, one day.
I was an Adult that went out of my way to stay away from the Hustling Crowds.

It was some kind of Miscommunication.

She liked most of the same things I did.
She wanted to do what we did.

She, just, wanted 'things' to be convenient.

If other people were trying something,
She thought it was worth a 'shot'.

I thought if everyone else is doing it,
That is a sure sign I won't like it.

I was an Adult and I was dull as a post.
Without her to guide me, I still do that.

When she explained, it made perfect sense.
What she said that finely got through to me?

"Toilet paper is both Convenient and Popular!"

I thought Convenient was 7-11 Stores.
I thought Popular was FootBall Games.

Toilet Paper?
I like it. It Is Popular stuff.

I know very few people that Bitch about the invention of Toilet Paper.
Not even Luddites like me. For a price it can be gotten at 7-11 Stores.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: [SAFESPACE] Woman Thread - All Things Women. Period.

Postby Quercus » Sun Jul 27, 2014 5:03 pm UTC

I think this is a more appropriate thread for this question

-Angua


I had a question which I would like a female perspective on (I'm male). I'm dating at the moment, and am anticipating being intermittently sexually active (I've only had sex with one person since I started dating so it doesn't really count as "intermittently" yet*).

I have just discovered that the emergency contraceptive pill (aka the morning after pill) is available for anyone to buy in advance, without prescription, in the UK. I was thinking of buying one, just in case I have a condom breakage incident with a partner and she decides she wants to take the pill. I obviously wouldn't pressure her into taking it, and would only mention I had it if she indicated that that was the option she wanted.

Is this plan:

a) a sensible piece of contingency planning, helping to ensure, if my partner wants to take the pill, that it is taken in the optimal time window for effectiveness and also saving her a potentially embarrassing trip to a pharmacy/clinic.

b) creepy and paternalistic, indicating that I don't trust my partner to deal with this stuff effectively herself.

c) none of the above

Thanks in advance!


* I was sexually incompatible with that person - maybe my next partner will "work out" so "intermittently" won't happen, but then again maybe not. If you want the details (spoilered for TMI):

Spoiler:
She was only interested in being submissive, I'm not interested in, or indeed capable of, being totally dominant in a relationship.

Wonderbolt
Posts: 212
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:11 pm UTC

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Wonderbolt » Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:43 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:A more traditional popular genre is the 'lifesong', related to the German schlager, which are very sentimental songs with very simple melodies, about how terrible life is. Only people with absolutely no taste whatsoever like this, so it's very popular.

Can you give some examples? I don't think I've ever heard about that genre before.

User avatar
Apparently Anonymous
Posts: 438
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:17 pm UTC
Location: The blogosphere

Re: [SAFESPACE] Woman Thread - All Things Women. Period.

Postby Apparently Anonymous » Sun Jul 27, 2014 9:03 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:I have just discovered that the emergency contraceptive pill (aka the morning after pill) is available for anyone to buy in advance, without prescription, in the UK. I was thinking of buying one, just in case I have a condom breakage incident with a partner and she decides she wants to take the pill. I obviously wouldn't pressure her into taking it, and would only mention I had it if she indicated that that was the option she wanted.


Sure, it sounds good to me.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26528
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: [SAFESPACE] Woman Thread - All Things Women. Period.

Postby SecondTalon » Sun Jul 27, 2014 9:20 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:I had a question which I would like a female perspective on (I'm male). I'm dating at the moment, and am anticipating being intermittently sexually active (I've only had sex with one person since I started dating so it doesn't really count as "intermittently" yet*)....



Let's go with C.

So, if the closest place to get said pill is more than a hundred miles or so away, or has some other completely arbitrary or unreasonable problem with it (Only open on Tuesdays from 4:45am to 5:10am) that I can't think of... then having one handy is... maybe a little creepy, but somewhat understandable.

If, however, you're surrounded by 24 hour Wal-Greens or somesuch where no one inside gives a single fuck and is more than happy to sell you a Valu-Pak of 90 tablets, any time ( or maybe just the more traditional 9-5 pharmacies pretty much with a few miles of anywhere)....

Then having one available gives the impression that you're the sort of person who has condom "accidents". The "Gosh, I don't know what happened, must have slipped off when we switched positions and I just didn't notice I barebacked you for 15 minutes" accidents.

It makes you look like a complete asshole who is more concerned with violating someone's trust than someone who is simply being prepared.

So, no, if you can get one just about any time, then don't worry about it - get one on an as-needed basis.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: [SAFESPACE] Woman Thread - All Things Women. Period.

Postby Quercus » Sun Jul 27, 2014 9:32 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote: So, no, if you can get one just about any time, then don't worry about it - get one on an as-needed basis.


Fair enough, lets go with that. I have a tendency to over-think things, this may have been was one of those occasions. I am now seriously freaked out that I inadvertently ended up sounding like someone who would fake a condom accident. Urgh.

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Adacore » Mon Jul 28, 2014 1:10 am UTC

I would say that unless getting to a pharmacy is difficult for some reason, pre-buying a morning after pill as the male partner could potentially come across as strange/creepy. If you're in a long(er) term sexual relationship, and your partner doesn't want to use a secondary method of contraception (like birth control pills or an IUD) for whatever reason, then it might be worth discussing it, or just mentioning it so your partner is aware that she can pick one up just in case.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: [SAFESPACE] Woman Thread - All Things Women. Period.

Postby addams » Mon Jul 28, 2014 4:46 am UTC

Quercus wrote:
SecondTalon wrote: So, no, if you can get one just about any time, then don't worry about it - get one on an as-needed basis.


Fair enough, lets go with that. I have a tendency to over-think things, this may have been was one of those occasions. I am now seriously freaked out that I inadvertently ended up sounding like someone who would fake a condom accident. Urgh.

Better to have Over thought this shit than Under thought it.
The voices of the Internet people sound reasonable to me.

That may be a problem.
Internet people have a bad reputation for being Wrong.

They Can be Right!
It is, just, not what we have been told to expect.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Quercus » Mon Jul 28, 2014 7:48 am UTC

Adacore wrote:If you're in a long(er) term sexual relationship, and your partner doesn't want to use a secondary method of contraception (like birth control pills or an IUD) for whatever reason, then it might be worth discussing it, or just mentioning it so your partner is aware that she can pick one up just in case.


I like the "just mentioning it" option a lot, thanks.

Addams wrote:Internet people have a bad reputation for being Wrong.


In my experience, that reputation is undeserved on these forums, which is a testament to both the quality of the moderation and to the quality of the regulars.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Questions For The World

Postby addams » Tue Jul 29, 2014 5:37 am UTC

That is nice.
xkcd does tend to have good links and a little good sense.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Zarq
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:29 pm UTC
Location: Third Rock from Earth's Yellow Sun

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Zarq » Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:05 am UTC

Wonderbolt wrote:
Diadem wrote:A more traditional popular genre is the 'lifesong', related to the German schlager, which are very sentimental songs with very simple melodies, about how terrible life is. Only people with absolutely no taste whatsoever like this, so it's very popular.

Can you give some examples? I don't think I've ever heard about that genre before.


Google Frans Bauer.

edit: here's the wiki page about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levenslied
You rang?

"It is better to shit yourself, than to die of constipation." - Some picture on reddit

Wonderbolt
Posts: 212
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:11 pm UTC

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Wonderbolt » Tue Jul 29, 2014 12:01 pm UTC

Zarq wrote:
Wonderbolt wrote:
Diadem wrote:A more traditional popular genre is the 'lifesong', related to the German schlager, which are very sentimental songs with very simple melodies, about how terrible life is. Only people with absolutely no taste whatsoever like this, so it's very popular.

Can you give some examples? I don't think I've ever heard about that genre before.


Google Frans Bauer.

edit: here's the wiki page about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levenslied

Oh gods, *that* kind of music. Yeah, never mind, I know what you mean, and don't what to hear any of that ever.

User avatar
Dipstick
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 12:15 am UTC

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Dipstick » Sat Aug 02, 2014 7:36 pm UTC

There are other countries?

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Questions For The World

Postby addams » Tue Aug 05, 2014 3:34 am UTC

Wonderbolt wrote:
Zarq wrote:
Wonderbolt wrote:
Diadem wrote:A more traditional popular genre is the 'lifesong', related to the German schlager, which are very sentimental songs with very simple melodies, about how terrible life is. Only people with absolutely no taste whatsoever like this, so it's very popular.

Can you give some examples? I don't think I've ever heard about that genre before.


Google Frans Bauer.

edit: here's the wiki page about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levenslied

Oh gods, *that* kind of music. Yeah, never mind, I know what you mean, and don't what to hear any of that ever.

I, kind of, like it.
The US went though a period of Crooners.
As late as the 1970's, I think.

I have no idea what the words are to the Dutch Music.
That is its charm.

Englbert Humperdink was and his friend Tom Jones were so Weird.
I could understand the words.

This guy was wildly popular in the US, at one time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EG-A_qTAKEI

(shrug) I like to understand the words sometimes.
This guy was wildly popular at one time, also.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8Gbk4i41_M

We don't like that kind of music anymore.
To Boring? Not enough Violence? (shrug)

I thank The Gods for earbuds.

In the 1980's there was an American Fad of grown men walking on city streets with Boom Boxes on their shoulders.
Now, in cities those guys have their Boom Boxes inside a Car. Today they have More Power.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
PAstrychef
for all intimate metaphysical encounters
Posts: 3068
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 6:24 pm UTC

Re: Questions For The World

Postby PAstrychef » Wed Aug 06, 2014 3:33 am UTC

Why do books have to be made into movies? Even allowing for the differences inherent between the two, it is usually horrible. Can't people just FRACKING read the book if they want to experience a given story?
Bad casting, bad scripts, either faithfully filming every scene and missing every nuance or filming a sequence that vaguely resembles the emotional content of the text but lacks any meaningful connection to the actual plot-it all just sucks.
Leave the literature alone, and come up with your own god damned stories, cinemaland!
Don’t become a well-rounded person. Well rounded people are smooth and dull. Become a thoroughly spiky person. Grow spikes from every angle. Stick in their throats like a puffer fish.

User avatar
poxic
Eloquently Prismatic
Posts: 4756
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:28 am UTC
Location: Left coast of Canada

Re: Questions For The World

Postby poxic » Wed Aug 06, 2014 3:40 am UTC

Silly PAstrychef, not enough people make money from a book.
The Supreme Ethical Rule: Act so as to elicit the best in others and thereby in thyself.
- Felix Adler, professor, lecturer, and reformer (13 Aug 1851-1933)

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Questions For The World

Postby addams » Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:58 am UTC

PAstrychef wrote:Why do books have to be made into movies? Even allowing for the differences inherent between the two, it is usually horrible. Can't people just FRACKING read the book if they want to experience a given story?
Bad casting, bad scripts, either faithfully filming every scene and missing every nuance or filming a sequence that vaguely resembles the emotional content of the text but lacks any meaningful connection to the actual plot-it all just sucks.
Leave the literature alone, and come up with your own god damned stories, cinemaland!

PAstrychef;
That's a Rant not a question.
A question would be, "Has any Movie ever been as good as the Book."
An answer would be, "Cannery Row was as good, maybe better, than the Book."

PAstrychef;
People don't read, much, anymore.
Loads of people never did.

Movies and TV and Documentaries allow Common Folk an opportunity to Think new and interesting Thoughts.
Hunt for Red October was a suspenseful Book. The Movie was easier on the eyes. It may have been that Man.

Sean Connery?
So Romantic.

A Scotsman dressed like a Russian looking so handsome and serious.
What was that book about, again?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Quercus » Wed Aug 06, 2014 6:26 am UTC

PAstrychef wrote:Why do books have to be made into movies? Even allowing for the differences inherent between the two, it is usually horrible. Can't people just FRACKING read the book if they want to experience a given story?
Bad casting, bad scripts, either faithfully filming every scene and missing every nuance or filming a sequence that vaguely resembles the emotional content of the text but lacks any meaningful connection to the actual plot-it all just sucks.
Leave the literature alone, and come up with your own god damned stories, cinemaland!


As someone who enjoys both books and the movies/TV shows those books are made into, I think the answer for me is that a book gives me my experience of a story, but a film gives me someone else's experience of a story, which I find interesting in it's own right. I always try to read the book first though (as my experience of the story is the most interesting to me).

To give some examples, I enjoyed both the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings, because although they (especially LOTR) missed out quite a lot of important background and lore that gives the books greater depth, that didn't bother me because I knew it anyway from the books. What the films did do is realise the battle scenes in far more detail that I had imagined them (I'm not that good at cinematic imagination of large battle scenes, unless they are amazingly well described), which was quite entertaining. I'm also enjoying Game of Thrones, although there it's more because some of the characters are quite different from how I imagined them, and I find the contrast interesting. Bladerunner/Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep was another film/book combo I enjoyed.

There are certainly films that do it very badly - the Ender's Game film was an utter travesty, where they turned what is essentially an emotionally driven coming of age book, mixed with an exploration of ethics, into essentially only the military sci-fi the original story clothes itself in. I didn't mind too much - I'd already read the book three times by the time I saw the film, so the only cost was 2 hours of my life doing something which actually, taken on it's own merits, was still mildly entertaining. Harry Potter too lacked the strangely compelling nature of the books (I will never claim Harry Potter was good literature, but by God were they readable). The only bits of the films really worth watching were the quidditch scenes, because of the impressive special effects.

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Adacore » Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:18 am UTC

There's also the argument that some people don't want to read a book, but do want to watch a movie with the same theme/plot. That's completely up to them, just as it's completely up to you whether you go to see the movie. If you don't want to watch book adaptations, just don't go to movies that are based on books?

Also, I think in general, most people who like writing stories start off by writing books, not screenplays. Maybe they'd prefer their story to be on film, but films are expensive, high risk, and difficult to persuade anyone to actually produce, compared to books. If the story is good, or popular as a book, that's a reasonable indicator that (a) it's a story people find interesting, so might also give a popular film, and (b) there's a pre-existing audience and publicity engine in people who enjoyed the book.

I don't think movies based on books are fundamentally bad, though. In fact, my experience is more along the lines of 'whichever version you encounter first - movie or book - will likely be the one you prefer'. The first one you experience becomes the 'correct' version of the story, characters, &c., whereas in reality there's no reason both versions can't be good, but different.

Brief review of movies I've seen recently, mainly serving to highlight how many are book adaptions and how little I read:
Spoiler:
Atonement - watched this over the weekend, haven't read the book. The movie was good, and I imagine the book is also good, but I would almost certainly never read it.
How to Train Your Dragon 2 - haven't read the book. Good movie. I doubt I'll ever read the source material, and I probably wouldn't enjoy it that much if I did.
X-Men Days of Future Past - haven't read the book. Good movie. Again, I'll probably never read the source material. Graphic novels generally don't hold that much interest for me.
Edge of Tomorrow - haven't read the book. Good movie. I suspect the book would be okay, but less enjoyable than the movie, based on my experience with Japanese action novels.
Amazing Spider Man 2 - haven't read the book. Good movie. See X-Men (although that movie was better).
Captain America 2 - haven't read the book. Good movie. Again with the comics.
The Grand Budapest Hotel - not based on a book! Although inspired by an author's work (that I've not read). Good movie.
300: Rise of an Empire - based on an unreleased book, absolutely terrible movie.
The Lego Movie - not based on a book. Good movie.
Frozen - not based on a book. Good movie.

User avatar
Grop
Posts: 1998
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:36 am UTC
Location: France

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Grop » Wed Aug 06, 2014 8:08 am UTC

I laughed a lot during the Hobbit 2. Too bad they are only making three movies.

But then I was really worried that the dwarves might actually kill the dragon. That would have made the third movie quite complicated.

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Adacore » Wed Aug 06, 2014 9:14 am UTC

I had the opposite problem. I knew for sure they wouldn't, and thus found the end sequence entirely pointless, overlong and somewhat boring.

User avatar
UniqueScreenname
Something something Purple. Stop asking.
Posts: 1430
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:11 pm UTC
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Questions For The World

Postby UniqueScreenname » Wed Aug 06, 2014 11:03 am UTC

Holes was an excellent movie that had every detail from the book except for Stanley's weight loss, which isn't exactly a big deal.
PolakoVoador wrote:Pizza is never a question, pizza is always the answer.
poxic wrote:When we're stuck, flailing, and afraid, that's usually when we're running into the limitations of our old ways of doing things. Something new is being born. Stick around and find out what it is.

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: Questions For The World

Postby yurell » Wed Aug 06, 2014 11:58 am UTC

Adacore wrote:I had the opposite problem. I knew for sure they wouldn't, and thus found the end sequence entirely pointless, overlong and somewhat boring.


This basically describes the entirety of the Hobbit series for me. There's no way that novel has enough length to be dragged out for three movies like this, even with all the padding they've put in. It could quite easily have been wrapped up in two movies but hey, cash-cow must be worshipped.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1810
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Questions For The World

Postby Quercus » Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:31 pm UTC

yurell wrote:
Adacore wrote:I had the opposite problem. I knew for sure they wouldn't, and thus found the end sequence entirely pointless, overlong and somewhat boring.


This basically describes the entirety of the Hobbit series for me. There's no way that novel has enough length to be dragged out for three movies like this, even with all the padding they've put in. It could quite easily have been wrapped up in two movies but hey, cash-cow must be worshipped.


The Hobbit is the only sets of films I've watched recently that feels long enough for my tastes, most films I find to be quite annoyingly compressed. The pacing just feels right to me, although I appreciate that that's probably a minority opinion.

User avatar
PolakoVoador
Posts: 1028
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:11 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: Questions For The World

Postby PolakoVoador » Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:46 pm UTC

As a huge huge fan of Tolkien lore (I even have it tatooed), I absolutely loved the Lord of the Rings movies. Of course they missed something here or there, but it's an adaptation, and I'm ok with that. I think they're among the best movies of recent history (2000's onwards), so, there's that.

Let's not forget one of the great advantages of a movie about a book: it expands the fandom, which is always a good thing. Personal example: since I've never had the habit of reading comics, when Watchmen movie was announced, my initial reaction was "What is this? And why is everyone so hyped about it?", which led me to actually read the series (which is amazing, you should go read it right now). Even if the movie didn't quite lived up to the expectations, how many people read the comics because of it? I'm sure it's a net positive. :mrgreen:

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26528
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: Questions For The World

Postby SecondTalon » Wed Aug 06, 2014 2:47 pm UTC

how many people read the comics because of it?


For any comic-turned-movie? Not enough.

In the specific case of Watchmen? Too many. But that's a very Watchmen specific complaint. Or DC specific. Or Moore specific. Hard to say.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
freezeblade
Posts: 1405
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:11 pm UTC
Location: Oakland

Re: Questions For The World

Postby freezeblade » Wed Aug 06, 2014 3:53 pm UTC

There are two movies that stick out in my head as accuratly representing the book, and which I find just about as good:

Fight Club - I know they changed the ending somewhat, but I still feel the movie was very faithful
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas - Due to the monologue nature of the movie, narrator and all, This translated very well.
Belial wrote:I am not even in the same country code as "the mood for this shit."


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests