Bartimaeus

I prefer Eagles but this was definitely my least preferred match-up of the 4 teams remaining

If the story similarly ends with Jordan Love winning a Super Bowl the year Rodgers retires after having the worst season of his career...yeah, I'll take the Super Bowl.

i am sorry that i hate your face so much but i hate your face so much

Did you check the Windows system event log after any of these things happening? There can sometimes be useful information in there, even for spontaneous reboots. With my current setup for example, I would rarely get spontaneous reboots both while sitting on desktop and while actually doing something as a result of limiting the power curve of my CPU a little too much, and event log would capture which core had failed, and I'd go give it slightly more power, problem solved. After looking through there and seeing if there's anything useful, the thing I'd do next is check the SMART status (basic/essential health information) of my storage drives via the program GSmartControl. If everything there looks okay (no red highlighted sections on any of the drives that suggests a drive failing), probably memtest86 the RAM next since that's pretty easy and straightforward...but it is very rare that RAM spontaneously goes bad after years of good service so that's really more of a "I'd like to eliminate the simplest to deal with possibilities first" measure. If everything to this point checked out, my next suspicion would be GPU...and then the PSU. PSU is usually the last thing I want to test on a system that "mostly" functions because, well...it's never fun to troubleshoot a PSU, even if it's totally dead and it's just a matter of plugging it into a PSU tester and going "yep, it's dead", and that's not the case here. This reminds me of how there are certain tools in Photoshop that when I use them, the moment I hold down left-click a whine instantly starts to emit, but the moment I stop holding it down it stops just as quickly.

Yeah, so I thought the film was pretty funny throughout, which probably helped alleviate it from feeling dull throughout much of the middle,.

Films have gotten extraordinarily indulgent in editing and run time in recent times. I don't really know why. I mean, I kinda do...setting a tone, setting the mood, allowing everything to take its time and breathe instead of feeling so basic and rushed all the time like was often the case in past decades of film...but it does feel excessive at this point. Before watching Banshees, I actually got ten minutes into some other recent historical drama film called The Favourite, and...I saw the run-time was 2 hours and thought to myself, 2 hours is a long time for a movie I'm not really feeling at all sold on - if this were an hour and fifteen minutes or thereabouts, I could probably convince myself to keep watching it, but this is just too freaking long. Welp, let's try the next one...aaand Banshees is 2 hours long as well, great. Difference was, it caught my interest much faster - which was a little funny to me, because the main characters in The Favourite are women, while the main characters in Banshees are men, and that's obviously unusual for me as a total cinematic man-hater. It's not my my fault! Or at least it's not completely my fault: films/shows centered around men just tend to be written completely contrary to when they're centered around women. I'll let you watch the rest of it before any comments on anything you said about it. @Space KP, Baby

uBlock Origin forums.obsidian.net##[href^="https://forums.obsidian.net/index.php"] > .ipsContained.ipsImage It's bloody huge and also bloody hugely distracting because it's animated...and it's fast animation, which makes it even worse.

The joke with the Cowboys is that they can't get out of the divisional round. They have a record straight 12 post-season appearances without appearing in the the conference championship, and it's...just kind of weird, especially given how many great teams they've had over that time. In terms of recent overall futility, many other teams have them soundly beat - the Lions, for example, haven't won even one playoff game since 1991. Corrupt text: Interestingly, I specifically chose a version that did not display the up-and-down text like you saw - it was just supposed to be all bunched up to being nearly unreadable like other posters mentioned seeing. But I guess your font/display settings changed how it looked. Yeah, it's the age-old conundrum: you have a guy who's good enough to get you regular season success, and that's good, because who wants to have a miserable regular season year-in and year-out? Plus, if you make the playoffs, you never know might happen, especially if you make them a lot. But then you do make the playoffs and your team just can't ever beat the other good playoff teams. At least the Packers have beat some pretty good teams on their way to NFCCG losses, but the Cowboys have five playoff wins, and all of them in the wild card, since their last Super Bowl run back in 1995. That's pretty shocking to me, and seems like it should be impossible with the quality of some of those teams. How do you get better? I guess you have to really knock a draft or two out of the park so you can have cheap young talent combined with a number of great veterans and hope it pushes you over the top, but there's usually only one or maybe two outstanding draft classes each year that really change the trajectory of a franchise, so that's pretty tough to do.

It's a good thing Rodgers won a Super Bowl early on into his career, I can't imagine the endless and merciless mocking the Packers would have been suffering the last decade if they hadn't done at least that. It's not as much as it should be, but it is something. Isn't your situation literally worse? You're 'held hostage' by a younger yet just about equally expensive QB who's not going to retire anytime soon that doesn't appear like he's ever going to become a great QB...just good. You know, like Kirk Cousins good. Which is good...but never good enough. As for me...just like last off-season, I'm pretty cool with whatever happens. Blow up the team, don't blow up the team, doesn't really make too much difference to me.

Jin-Roh: The Wolf Brigade (1999), written by Mamoru Oshii of Ghost in the Shell fame. So don't get me wrong, it's pretty solid on the whole or thereabouts, which is so much better than I expected given the title of the film (boy that is a really bad title and conjures up all sorts of wrong ideas that don't really apply to this film, at least not past the first few minutes since it does start with a bit of an action sequence), but for it to all come down to the characters acting like they'd each had frontal lobotomies performed upon them at some point during the film is just a bit too much for me to tolerate. This is why I don't do male protagonists - sooner or later, all the characters start behaving like they're literally incapable of any emotional intelligence or even just plain old thinking with which they could use to reasonably navigate their way through situations, and I ain'ts got the patience for it. Write better male characters (and movies/shows around them), all you industry hack frauds. Well, luckily, at least I have Mr. Bean up there as one of the most forefront pioneers of emotionally intelligent male protagonists. I shudder to think of how much worse we would be as a species without him lighting our way to better times.

I do believe Junji Ito is quite famous among manga viewers - even I'm passingly familiar with his art, and I've read like...maybe two books' worth of manga in total. This incredibly lovely image, which was near the top of the search results after merely searching his name so I figure it must be of some import in his work, is usually the first thing that comes to mind when I hear his name: (spoilered because perhaps somewhat objectionable?) Now if I could ever look at manga and not immediately think "good lord, why is the dialogue written/translated so unnaturally all the time regardless of whom/what I'm reading", I might be able to enjoy some of it, because the art does look neat, but...it's a hurdle I've yet to clear.

Rest of your spoilery post:

One thing I have noticed is that when a post is going to "break" before I post it, I cannot embed an image or video that should embed, nor react to other people's posts - both of which will work if I refresh the page and try again. I think Sarex previously mentioned something about experiencing a similar phenomenon with regards to at least reacting to other people's posts. Next time I contemplate writing up a longer post, I'll try to remember to keep my browser debugging open to see if there's anything useful.

It has been 26 years since the Cowboys made it to the NFCCG...oops, make it 27.

There was an amusing comment I saw talking about the trailers of each film - they watched the trailer for In Bruges and thought it seemed hilarious, so they watched the movie and felt like they were tricked because apparently In Bruges (which I have not seen) was not funny at all. So then later, they saw the trailer for The Banshees of Inisherin and had the same exact thing happen again where they thought the trailer was funny so they watched the film and didn't find it funny at all, and then they saw that it was the same director/writer. Hopefully, they have now realized their mistake and will stay away, . I didn't watch the trailer for either films because trailers always make me think movies look bad, so I can't comment upon the veracity of whether they "seemed" funny or not. On a side-note, I don't think most anybody should take my tastes at face value too seriously. A single character inexplicably annoying me a little too much for some really minor reason early on into something can be enough to irreversibly poison the well and set me on the warpath against whatever it is I'm watching. Similarly, I will stop watching something within a minute flat if I get off on the wrong foot with either the style or framing - if I'm watching Singin' in the Rain and I feel the film is unintentionally minimizing of or derogatory towards the lead women characters in a way that I feel is gross, I'm going to be mad as hell regardless of whatever else the film has to offer. So that's just not really any basis from which normal people can determine the value of one's tastes, not unless you just happen to share in the exact sensitivities and eccentricities that I have. Now if I give a full explanation of why something did or didn't work for me instead of the quick face value judgement and it sounds like something that applies or matters to you, that could be a little more meaningful.

Your link goes to your/the Gmail inbox. Comments I read seemed to suggest that if you didn't like In Bruges, you won't like Banshees, and vice versa.

If I had to guess, I would say you specifically won't love it. But that's just a guess based on my poor understanding of your tastes - it's a difficult movie for me to project how other people will take it, so I certainly wouldn't stake my name on it. It is sad, but I didn't really come away with that message at all. Big spoilers:

The Banshees of Inisherin (2022). Have ye' been rowing? Both hilarious and quite touching.

Because a really terrible plush still looks better than trying to use CGI. It was an admirable and powerful choice in the face of difficult budgetary circumstances. I did like the main character, Arete, a bit during the first third of the film. Some general film spoilers:

Honestly, I think you would just find it kind of boring. I could be wrong, but it really wouldn't seem to be the type of thing you'd care for. It's not an "insane", wacky, or even especially weird film. It's more just very slow and a bit odd. I guess you know what it feels like? A classic fairy-tale kind of story. Not really a Disney-fied version of it, where all the writing and story beats have been smoothed out and the more questionable ideas stripped down while the main character cleanly and predictably wins the prince or princess in the end...no, it's more like one of the older ones, where you get some interesting and novel ideas served up with purpose, which are then followed up with some pretty baffling ones that maybe made sense to the author and/or the people who read it when it was originally written, but which just don't feel like they quite fully work right now and make it all feel a bit disjointed and weird. I think it's worth watching to someone with an interest in this kind of thing, but at the same time, it's very difficult to just recommend. I've seen the first episode of Monster, it seemed like it would be pretty good...buuut it seemed a bit on the long side at 74 episodes for the type of show it is. I generally prefer to blame direction and/or the people responsible for making casting choices for acting woes...unless you see a specific actor in multiple roles and can rightly conclude you genuinely dislike their acting chops. Of course, I'm not usually thinking or talking about productions quite as sorry as Pretty Guardian Sailor Moon...

It's difficult to put into words exactly, but it's more something that perhaps majestic and I should love because of it being 95% slow character-driven dialogue with some big themes behind it...in theory, but because of how bizarrely it handles some of its ideas and elements, and because of its penchant for taking weird and difficult to understand turns, it doesn't quite land entirely as it should yet still feels like a worthwhile watch anyways. One third of the way through it, I thought I loved the film and what it was going for, and then I watched the rest and it and...I'm still just not sure what to make of it. I guess I'm kind of reminded of my experience with Studio Ghibli's The Tale of the Princess Kaguya, which is also a pretty oddball film with the slowest pacing out of any of their films. Though I'd say it was reversed in how I felt about them, as it was the last third (and not the first) of The Tale of the Princess Kaguya that I thought was awesome while I wasn't sure how I felt about the rest. It doesn't help that they have pretty similar themes and ideas. Did Naru and Ami ever speak to each other even once in the original show?

Apparently, all the images here are AI-generated for a film that doesn't exist - though some influences are pretty obvious.

tl/g;dw (too long/german; didn't watch): 3rd party sellers with lots of used cards (likely former miners) store or even wash cards improperly, short out when put to use by buyer due to moisture build-up inside cards, quick permanently dead/damaged card

Yeah, I'm still frequently suffering from posts not going through (i.e. the forum just gobbling them up). It seems a bit more frequent than it used to be, as posts I spend a handful of minutes writing seem to usually be affected. Have to always CTRL+A+C before you post, as majestic said...

No, I don't think you'd like it at all.