Sixsmith

The Spirits Within

Ugh, I have to post soon. I've been swamped lately, but I'll try and get to it either tonight or tomorrow!

The Spirits Within

She'd seem nicer dead, I'm assuming?

BECAUSE SHE ALREADY IS!

*Cue Sixth Sense Plot Twist*

The Spirits Within

Ugh, I'm so sorry I haven't posted yet.

I just found the Sims 4 CAS Demo on Origin today and I've been slaving away at that because Sims!!!

I would show you guys my creations, but I'm shy. Lemegablush.

The Spirits Within

Ex said
I agree about the casting, with one exception: Bradley Cooper is good as Rocket but H. Jon Benjamin would have been perfect.

I disagree only because I love Bradley Cooper.

That's the only reason. D:<

The Spirits Within

Ex said
Guardians of the Galaxy is so good. Highly recommend! There's a movie that really takes the "science" out of "science fiction," but see - I don't care! It's just the damn brain thing.They could have done genetics, or super-amoebas, or whatever, I don't care, except for that brain thing.

Super-Amoebas! What the hell is a super-amoeba?

It's also a Marvel movie and Marvel is more known for its fantastical heroes and story arcs than science!

If they made Star Trek more like Star Wars and took out all the things that made logical sense, science wise, then that would be a travesty. I'd still watch it, though... le cough.

I honestly think my problem is more directed toward people finding agendas in movies than anything else. I really dislike when people go see a movie and that's all they can get out of it. It's like they paid no attention to the acting, the writing, the plot, or the cinematography and I just hate that so much. :( I love paying attention to how well a the set is lit up or how amazing the chemistry is between actors. Guardians of the Galaxy does that last part amazingly.

I'm still amazed at how well Marvel/Disney is casting all of these movies. I feel like they've yet to make a mistake in those regards. And if they did, they hid it well enough to make it work.

The Spirits Within

Ex said
There's quite a bit we don't know, but what we DO know is that we're using pretty much all of our brain pretty much all the time. There are variations in the degree to which we're utilizing each part at a given time, but every part has a (known or hypothesized) function and is active. The way the brain works on a fundamental level means that the idea of only using some amount of it, as if there were a slider you adjust up and down somewhere, is complete crap. There are so many other ways they could have MacGuffined in the pretense to making Lucy a superhero that would have worked better. Usually, I can get past that sort of stuff, but the brain thing really pisses me off. ANYWAY, did you read my damn story yet?

I did not... uh... I'll read it after I take my sister to go see a movie.

I said I was gonna go see TMNT with her, but I'm gonna try and convince her to want to see Guardians of the Galaxy so that I can watch it a second time. Q_Q

As for the brain thing, I think it'd be more logical if they went with genetics, instead. I think X-Men does a good job with explaining superpowers that way and it makes sense evolutionary wise that our genetics would eventually code itself to give us unbelievable powers. That's what I wish for and I feel like it's not necessarily going to happy any time soon because it doesn't necessarily make sense to evolve something like fire manipulation or anything like that. I think the most logical power we'd develop, if we ever did, would be telepathy or telekinesis because there are very practical applications of that rather than, say, heat vision or emitting radiation. Maybe radiation resistance should something happen to our atmosphere that was slow enough to allow such evolution.

The Spirits Within

Ex said
I couldn't see Lucy. Every time someone says "we only use 10% of our brain!" I die a little inside.

I kind of wish the movie was true, but it's a nice concept. Unless it's a horror flick or it's just a terrible movie, I usually watch it to enjoy it and the concept, rather than delve too deeply into why it was made or what it's trying to get across. My dad can't watch movies because he sees an agenda in everything. I preoccupy myself with how well the actors are doing, how well the plot is, how good the writing is, and the overall concept without going too deep into, "Well this was made to spread awareness of global warming," or some crap. I could care less about the subliminal messages; movies are there for me to escape and enjoy my life.

I still think there's quite a bit we don't know about our brains, doe, so who knows. I think Transcendence clearly defines that. Which was also a good movie.

I can watch a movie that completely destroys anything remotely scientific and still enjoy it. Star Wars kind of does that pretty well. Or at least, it's more a futurist's view of what we could achieve rather than Star Treks hyper-logic and actual scientific fact.

I think it's the main reason I can go into a movie and come out like, "I thought that was really good," while everyone else is like, "Ugh, that sucked dick." Unless the actor was below par.

I enjoyed the new TMNT for what it was, but it wasn't a blockbuster hit. Megan Fox didn't do quite well acting wise, in the movie, and that disappointed me. I mean, that's my only issue with the movie. The acting was subpar, whilst everyone else is on about how it's a travesty to remake TMNT like that and twist lore and concept and shit that doesn't matter because comics often twist the lore regardless, depending on who is writing it.

I mean, I really want to see them make the new Ghostbusters with their all female cast and people are complaining about that shit. If anyone wants to complain about something, complain about how they destroyed the happy ending of Aliens with the third installment of the movie. Q_Q Why they break my heart like this? It was an okay movie, though. I liked that they went back to their roots in Alien and made it more of a thriller/horror flick than Aliens horror/action movie. Hell, I loved Prometheus and I watched Aleins: Requiem for that Sigourney Weaver miracle basketball shot.

Mass Effect: Wanted

I'll be able to post sometime this weekend, as well.

As for your girlfriend, Hank, I'm very sorry for her loss. Things like that suck and I guess there's nothing much else you can say other than that.

The Spirits Within

JJ Doe said
Adora! N-n..no… *Sniffs* This is unfortunate... @Ozerath: Oz! Welcome back!@Blackwell: A…are you an undead? Glad to see you are still alive, undead or not :) Jack would have been quite lonely without Kat.JJ’s Random Comment of the Day:When I read about laws such as "It's illegal to take a lion to the movies”, I can only assume someone did it. How do people intend enforce laws like “It's against the law for animals to have sex in the city limits”? Arrest the animal? Have them pay a fine? I doubt animals (excluding humans) care about human laws. Or are they inadvertently talking about humans? Well I guess city dwellers aren’t allowed to have sex, then.

I think it's the fact that animals aren't sentient, and so they have no means to act out of cruelty. They do such things to survive, so there is no concept of murder or rape. It's a matter of surviving and passing ones genes on! A human wouldn't think of murdering a baby to inseminate a female like chimps and bears and most other animals to. A women wouldn't be like, "omg you killed my baby, so I guess I have to breed again," and it induces estrus. A human killing a baby is an act of cruelty, whereas a chimp killing a baby in front of the mother is an act of survival.

If you watch Lucy, which I did and it was amazing, Morgan Freeman's character brings up a good point about immortality and how, unless a habitat is inhospitable, then a being will look to pass on genes and survive, rather than achieve immortality.

"If its habitat is not sufficiently favorable, or nurturing, the cell will choose immortality, in other words, self-sufficiency and self management. On the other hand, if the habitat is favorable, they will choose to reproduce — that way, when they die, they hand essential information and knowledge to the next cell, which hands it down to the next cell, and so on. Thus knowledge and learning are handed down, through time."

Dunno how reliable that quote is, but I think it makes quite a bit of sense. *Nod* And I liked that movie and it was said by Morgan Freeman, so it must be true.

Regardless, it's all about survival and, with animals limited lifespan, survival means reproducing by any means necessary. That means killin' babehs and inseminating females against their will. It's terrible... very, very terrible, but it's also very common in the animal kingdom. Humans are sentient, though, so concepts like that don't stand well to reason, especially when, with our intelligence, we have better means of going about reproduction other than rape and murder. So, testing that theory and going by logic, it would be an act of cruelty to commit such crimes when we are able to take advantage of more efficient options. Our population is growing at an exponential rate, so there's the evidence to that.

At its base, we have laws for order, but we all know laws are in place for many, many more reasons other than order and sometimes those reasons subtly cross the threshold of necessity and can be considered borderline cruel.

But yeah, I think the movie also quotes that humans are the only animals capable of willing cruelty. Though, that can be challenged by certain, more intelligent animals.

Like the dolphin, which are dick bags of the ocean.

Anyway, I went on a tangent very unrelated to your post. Regardless, when laws like that are made, they're directed toward humans. If a lion comes into a movie theatre, people aren't going to be like, "Lion, that's against the law!" they're probably going to be like, "Who the hell let out the lion?" Because it's not the lions fault, as it has no concept of human laws and other things governing us as beings because Lions aren't sentient creatures. Or at least, they don't have the capacity to reason quite as much as humans. You point the finger at the human and not the creature as laws aren't made to govern animals. Though, I'm pretty sure they put down animals if they get out of the zoo or harm humans, which is more law of protection rather than laws to govern animals.

I dunno.

This is just me stating that I am here and that I will post sometime this weekend. @_@

The Spirits Within

I can't get this song out of my head.

Roy fact of the day: He very good at subterfuge and acting, especially using accents and dialects and just different voices in general. It's more comedic relief to him than a useful tool as a spy or any such matter. Though, I'm hoping he can utilize it sometime in duh RP. :D