algroth

Oh, I do agree there, even if some models allow more freedom to the director than others (many countries offer funds and credits for film and in such cases directors tend to find a lot more freedom and final say on their work). But even disregarding the usual conflicts of vision and so on, it is also true that cost places a pretty hard limit on what you can do and how, just because certain things will either cost more money or be outright "impossible" whilst a few words could do. That's an advantage literature has, I suppose, where the only limits are down to the author's imagination and skill, and the reader's own imagination and comprehension. But likewise there are specific situational advantages to cinema and music over literature, be it the "a picture can tell a thousand words" effect (it is far more impressive to see Fitzcarraldo move a steamboat over a mountain than it is to read about it), and the directness with which the emotional can be captured in that medium (see Tarkovsky and Dreyer's renditions of the spiritual experience for example, which are more often that not rendered in pure audiovisual terms). Which is not to say one medium is better than the other, but they are pretty different experiences that, to me at least, often work best in pretty different areas. I'm digressing anyways. The above examples I gave are of course albums or films I found to be great, and granted, they may be pretty particular to my tastes. But all the same, I hope you enjoy them, and let me know your thoughts if you do check them out.

There's a lot of good stuff coming from both the fields of music and film too. For the former, just out of last year I can recommend: Aviary by Julia Holter, Dhorimvishka by Koenjihyakkei, Your Queen Is a Reptile by Sons of Kemet, A Laughing Death in Meatspace by Tropical F--- Storm, Antología del cante flamenco heterodoxo by Niño de Elche, Isolation by Kali Uchis, The Light Is Leaving Us All by Current 93, Dian Long: Soundscape China / Destruction of Chinese Pop by Kink Gong, Collapse by Aphex Twin, Dead Magic by Anna von Hausswolff, and more. For the latter, you can find some absolutely brillant stuff in Roma, The Favourite, Shoplifters, Cold War, Burning, Widows, An Elephant Sitting Still, If Beale Street Could Talk, or even as far as Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse which is both a high-budget Hollywood film *and* an adaptation of one of the most popular superheroes out there. I see this sort of "reverse recency bias" often, have seen it for decades now, and I feel that as time moves on we gradually accept that it wasn't the case as the good stuff endures and the trash is largely consigned to oblivion. For filmmakers doing films at a sub-5k budget, Mariano Llinás is another curious example of the same, having done Historias Extraordinarias and last year's La Flor at a minimal budget - it is especially impressive considering these films last 4 hours and 12 hours respectively, and the former at least had been estimated at a budget north of U$S 12 million initially. But whilst I don't know the case of Joel Potrykus specifically, in Llinás' case it was all possible largely because of a lot of good will from other people and institutions as well, who offered their talents and equipment for free, so to speak. In fact the whole film was so beyond normal regulations that it couldn't get approved by the INCAA in Argentina and thus was only shown in festival circles and specific non-commercial screens like at the MALBA museum and the likes. Pretty good films though, worth checking out.

(warning, ear rape included)

(wrong thread, nvm)

https://imgur.com/AMTLXdv

Parts of his collaboration with Sunn O)))

I'll probably be posting a bunch of Scott Walker over the week. So... Some early Walker Brothers goodness here:

Scott Walker passed today. I will echo something similar to what injurai said about Keith Flint, Walker's been an integral part of my life as both a consumer of music and artist. He was never one to stay too comfortable with what he did for long, and that took him to some wild places, a true 30 century man. Absolutely devastated by this. https://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2014/mar/05/10-of-the-best-scott-walker

I can't remember much of 3 so yeah, why not. As for the reboot, I can still remember it and it was total garbage. I would watch through the reboot again if it was some sort of entertaining action movie, but it isn't which is a shame because the director made this really nice Brazillian movie about the special forces known as B.O.P.E. Can't remember the name but that was awesome. I guess I expected a similar experience when I heard he was directing the RoboCop reboot Edit: 2 is already hilariously bad but at least it has violence and early 90's vibe. Tropa de Elite, yeah. Wasn't big on it myself but I hear the sequel's much better, and Narcos is pretty good too, which is his creation. I know Padilha had a really hard time making Robocop, he talked about how every idea he tried to bring forth had to be approved several times over for it to actually make it into the film and even then only a tenth of them ever made it through, so I've no doubt the end result is a pretty watered down and generic affair. Regardless I'd reckon a tenth of his ideas would be enough to make it more interesting than Robocop 3. But yeah, I was being tongue-in-cheek with the above comment. Sorry if I came off snarky with it.

You'll skip the reboot because it sucked but not Robocop 3? Just joshing of course, but personally I figure that of the films the only one in the saga that was ever worthwhile was the first. The second had some promise and maybe some decent moments but tonally it's all over the shop, filled with really confusing decisions throughout. I'd be curious about revisiting the animated series as it was part of my childhood but really haven't seen it since and don't exactly expect it to live up to memory. I could see there being a possibility that the remake (which I haven't seen, mind) is actually the best bit of Robocop media since the original, but only because the bar is otherwise so low.

https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/6253-the-criterion-channel-announces-launch-lineup Please make this available in Argentina.

And of course there's Ford Explorer

This doesn't look like minimum to me. Obviously bugs exist anywhere. The question is whether or not crowdfunding lends itself to laziness/sloppiness or exacerbates it. The game is estimated to have cost around $25 million. In all honesty I haven't noticed any more or less bugs in this game than in several other non-crowdfunded games. But I guess it's expected that people will hyperbolize about such things on the net. You could see it that way, except for all of the bugs I've been reporting. Or perhaps I'm just that good at finding bugs? I'm not looking for them particularly hard. It just baffles me how I'm finding all of these almost a year after the game released when they seem so obvious and stand out. It's not like I've even played this game multiple times. This is the first time. From reading your several threads on these 'problems' you seem like a pretty anal individual, which I guess makes you perfect for the job. All those "bugs" (they aren't always, as has been pointed out a few times) are frankly quite negligible to the overall experience, and again, not necessarily more than most other games of this complexity tend to have - yes, it'd be better if they weren't there, but they do not warrant a thread like this.

This doesn't look like minimum to me. Obviously bugs exist anywhere. The question is whether or not crowdfunding lends itself to laziness/sloppiness or exacerbates it. The game is estimated to have cost around $25 million. In all honesty I haven't noticed any more or less bugs in this game than in several other non-crowdfunded games, and it definitely runs better for me than many previous Obsidian games, either now or in its release state. But I guess it's expected that people will hyperbolize about such things on the net.

ThePirateBay, here we go!

Worth pointing out, the trailer specifically lists Steam as a platform. Things could change, of course, but given the tweet offers nothing to back up the claim and links to the wrong article, I'm inclined to believe this hasn't changed.

That's a very odd tweet. The link leads to a completely unrelated article, whilst there's a link to another tweet that's also been deleted apparently. Not sure what's up there.

dammit, wrong thread. Uh, fair enough, we'll replace it with a bit of Spinetta. Can't go wrong with a bit of Spinetta.

What the ****, Carly? Catchy tune all the same.

Di ck Dale

Disney's a company and one that is deeply associated with family-oriented entertainment, their image and brand is a primary concern of theirs and when someone working under them is getting the spotlight over comments on paedophilia, rape and so on, be they in jest or otherwise, that may be enough for them to want to disassociate themselves with that person for the sake of the brand. I believe (actually I kinda *know*, since I've seen the same things occur before on a smaller scale, with people who could never have the widespread support a public figure like Gunn garnered) similar things could occur if any other company started getting flack due to a floor manager making similar crass and potentially misguided tweets, or even falling victim of malicious pranks that could harm the company's image (to go back to the previous example, my friend in question got doxxed by a troll in another forum, and he and a couple of others began sending hookers to his workplace - curiously these same trolls were alt-right and persecuted this person for being the "resident communist"). The thing is that there were very specific intentions behind the smear campaign against Gunn and therefore to essentially follow "standard protocol" was, as you put it, to "acquiesce to alt-right trolls", and what eventually resulted in a backlash against Disney and Gunn's eventual reinstating and so on. Ultimately a lot of people forget that Disney is first and foremost a company. As former Disney CEO Michael Eisner put it: "We have no obligation to make history. We have no obligation to make art. We have no obligation to make a statement. To make money is our only objective." Sometimes 'making money' goes hand in hand with a statement or what others may interpret as a political leaning, with making art, or "making history", but ultimately all these things are entirely secondary. Disney is a company and behaved like one - in face of this 'scandal' they protected their own interests as they thought best, and that meant getting rid of the object of said scandal. But it does not take away from the fact that the provokers *were* politically motivated, and I don't believe acknowledging that is a problem - in fact it's pretty important to do so.

Floyd and Led Zep don't deserve to be lumped in with that pap.