Mr Sneeze

On 11/28/2023 at 3:18 PM, Bookery said:

I'm late to this topic, but I think if you were to poll actual science-fiction authors, the general consensus is that Frankenstein is the first true science-fiction novel.  There were a number of voyage-to-the-moon stories prior to that, but they had no science basis (you flew to the moon in a sailing ship, or dreamed your way there, or were carried by angels, etc.).  The one possible exception is a tale by Cyrano de Bergerac, that I believed used a rocket to travel to the moon... putting it into a sort of proto-sf category... but nothing else in the story dealt with science.  To be a science-fiction story, science has to be critical to the plot structure, and the science must be speculative in nature (otherwise Medical Center would be considered sf).  In fact, I believe you'll find today a tendency by authors to want to replace science-fiction with the term Speculative Fiction.  

When I was in college, this was the subject of one of my term papers (although it dealt strictly with sf in cinema).  As I recall, at the time (late '70s) I put forth that fewer than a dozen true science-fiction movies had been made to that point.  By "true sf", I meant a story that could not exist outside the genre of science-fiction, as opposed to merely having sf trappings.  Thus Forbidden Planet and 2001 are "true sf" films, whereas Alien is a haunted house movie adorned with sf designs, and Star Wars is a WW2 movie set in "space".  Looking back, this was probably too narrow of a definition (but it got me an "A", so that's what counts).

Great post! Thanks

On 11/27/2023 at 4:53 PM, squidmo2000 said:

 

Have you seen the new season?

Drop average?

Shakespeare and Thad?

On 11/28/2023 at 12:07 PM, Dr. Balls said:

I might drop in there for a burger recipe or two. My wife's the gardener, if I can convince her to hang out she could lend some gardening tips. However, she'd also see what I buy here on the boards so...

Was it you who mentioned peanut butter on a burger? There was a diner in my town that served them and man, they were amazing! 

On 11/28/2023 at 11:50 AM, VintageComics said:

Sure. Every story is built on it's predecessors.

"What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun."

The story of Frankenstein just happens to be THE classic cautionary tale that has managed to transcend the centuries. It was a warning to mankind that came out of the industrial revolution. 

And, science still is often not very cautionary so it resonates with people even today. 

Remember the second or sub-title to Frankenstein - the earlier cautionary tale.

I don’t see science in such a villainous light but I imagine people will tell stories of hubris as long as there’s someone to listen.

Though I’m sure Shelley was influenced by cautionary tales as well, I fell like we can see that blueprint throughout Gaines EC comics, especially the Science Fiction/Fantasy runs. 

On 11/28/2023 at 9:40 AM, Bosco685 said:

It was. And he made it clear it was tied to Disney+ to fill the pipelines. Still writing off those expenses.

It amazes me that he made it back as CEO given the crippling legacy of that debt. 

The 20th Century Fox purchase was an Iger move, was it not?

I couldn’t believe the price at the time and still can’t. 

Just saying that great stories have many elements and in Frankenstien in particular, the means is sci-fi - especially of the day - and the ends, or the outcome is the horror.

There is a recent interview with Yngwie on the Rick Beato Youtube channel. It’s pretty good.

On 11/26/2023 at 4:07 PM, namisgr said:

On 11/26/2023 at 4:04 PM, Prince Namor said:

Who tries to convert people to their way of thinking MORE than Roy?

It may be a draw with religious zealots.

Is there a difference?

On 11/26/2023 at 11:30 AM, VintageComics said:

I believe that knowing more about the world around you benefits society, and people with roots outside of the North America will generally agree with this. Talk to anyone from outside of North America and they know more about America than the Americans know about the other country.

Americans in particular have a very different view of the world in that they generally don't know or care what goes on outside of their borders. 

Your answer is in the @WolverineX post which you quoted with mine, but to expound:

Tik Tok is a Chinese invention, which is an important point, and in the West Tik Tok used very differently than in China. 

In China there are time limits and the content is different. People use it to promote their personal educational accomplishments, etc. 

In the West Tik Tok is used by the crack smoking, trashy crowd to promote things like the Tide Pod challenge.

If Westerners knew about this, it may influence how they use Tik Tok. Again, knowing more about the world around you makes society better overall.

Social media has had a very negative effect on the West - that is indisputable, and some experts believe that Tik Tok is actually (either inadvertently or purposefully) dumbing down the West while maintaining higher social standards in the West. To be more blunt, some believe Tik Tok is a CCP device used to socially dumb down society in the West. We're at a level of foreign policy warfare now that this is actually very possible. 

That is an entirely different discussion, but you asked, so...

So sorry to hear this! RIP 

On 11/24/2023 at 2:40 PM, VintageComics said:

Condescension implies intent.

I sometimes have trouble condensing my thoughts (obviously, duh ), I get eager being ADHD and probably somewhat autistic, but I never intend to sound condescending. 

We have a very broad audience with varying levels of understanding and I just wanted to put it in crayon for people who may not understand where I'm coming from, which happens regularly on the internet. 

There are condescending people here in this very thread, and they've trolled me for years but I'm not one of them. My intent has ever, always been to learn, have fun and foster positive discourse and this thread is proof of how a conversation can be great and educational when people are not trying to cancel the conversation, get someone banned, bait them into difficult situations or just plan attack them to shame them like you're doing now. 

Condescending people shut conversations down. When is the last time someone saw me shut down a conversation?

Now when is the last time you saw someone try to shut me down? 

People have been trolling me for years trying to paint me for a dummy and they did it by trying to shut me up mid sentence all the time. I'm very thankful that Moderation is allowing longform conversation and moderating all the people who used just bring unproductive insults into the convo. 

You've been trolling me for a long time and Mike has already asked you stop. Now I'm asking you stop. 

Did you have something to add of value?

On 11/24/2023 at 11:31 AM, VintageComics said:

Agreed. 

They won't kill the comics line because these 'incubators' as you so well put, create the food. They provide the seeds that fill the farm, but their goals changed once media expanded into a worldwide audience. 

The goal of the 'incubators' used to be to fill the farm and feed a family, or take the food to market to feed other families through a one market. 

The incubators no longer take the food to one market as the end goal, the incubators take the food to corporate distributors who feed entire countries through multiple markets, and they do that by artificially, digitally multiplying the food source and marketing it as being the same as the original, small family food source when the two are entirely different.

The quality of the food matters much less in the 2nd example, because the quantity of the food matters much more. 

You can't have both. They're diametrically opposed. 

--------------------------------------------

I made this point that I'm about to make below, many years ago:

What is happening is that ideological / philosophical paths are being exposed. There are two of them, they are wholly incompatible, and they diverged a long time ago. 

One path believes in working along strict, ideological, objective TRULY sustainable principles. This path never compromises on it's own principles because they are time proven. To put out quality, you need consistency in things like a code of behavior, and operating principles. Quality over profit plays a much longer game and is much more successful at longevity. This is how empires are built.

The other path believes it can make up the rules as they go along and tosses out objectivity for subjectivity, so it will absolutely cross it's own principles for profit every chance it gets. This path ALWAYS compromises on it's own principles for profit. It must, because if there is more profit, it must be searched out at the expense of anything else. The 'long game' on this path is really just a bunch of constant short games, being presented as an 'equal' long game through media manipulation, advertising, marketing, corporate espionage etc. JUST LIKE WE OUTLINED IN THIS THREAD. 

And we all know that in any equation, when there is one false premise, everything built on it will be incorrect. That's how corporate business works. 

-------------------------------

I always go back to the old world thinking in the automotive industry, which everyone can see and understand.

In the 1980's, corporate boardrooms hadn't het corrupted German manufacturers and they were still building cars that were supposed to last forever. 

America was already building cars in the new world way, using corporate driven board rooms that were sold as quality but were absolute junk.

What happened in the 90s, was as media exploded, the digital age began to commence, and the world became wildly aware of how big of a market there was, the American corporate boardroom invaded all economic systems and greed drove even the staunch German auto manufacturers to compromise their products. 

I was there. The mid to late 90's Benzs became the most problematic cars in their entire history. One single model, built in conjunction with the US had more recalls than all other models combined in their 100 year history. 

That is what is happening today everywhere. You're being fed junk, being convinced it isn't junk and most people have been dumbed down too far to be able to tell the difference. 

Time for consumers to wisen up.  

 

On 11/9/2023 at 4:55 PM, Prince Namor said:

Barda tries to go soft, but Scott reminds her of just how powerful she is. 

An example of Lee's sexism.

When I reread the silver age FF a fews years back, I would stop at these moments, because there are many and read them to my wife because comedy is where you find it. It got a bit better for Sue in the bronze age age but I feel like Byrne was the first to take her seriously. Stan never did.

On 11/22/2023 at 9:40 AM, Dr. Balls said:

We watched it this past weekend. It was a lot of fun. It struck me as very bizarre, like a Terry Gilliam movie. It crossed back and forth from Me Too social commentary to hilariously insane spectacles. It was a crazy mix of adult themes with adolescent-geared visuals. It was just a super weird movie, but fun. I also have no children, so I probably took something different away from it than most people.

Gilliam is a good comparison. I liked the practical sets as well. It kept my interest to be sure.

Sue Storm as she is in the Byrne run would be awesome. That, I would happily pay to see.

On 11/21/2023 at 6:51 PM, VintageComics said:

There are 3 important characteristics that make the Silver Surfer who he was. 

1, he was a man

2, he sacrificed himself for the preservation of his world

3, he was forever trying to escape Earth to get back to Shalla-Bal

He was also always a beloved character in fandom. Even if he couldn't carry his own title, he was highly esteemed as a character and had a deep, rich history through Marvel stories. 

The last point (3) is what made The Surfer different than every other hero. He was an emotionally charged man with a high emotional EQ, which was very ahead of it's time in comics in the 1960s. In effect, he was extremely effeminate for being one of the most powerful male beings in the cosmos. 

This would have been the perfect opportunity to actually show how men can be more sensitive and break the traditional male stereotype.

They are literally willing to throw everything that made him unique and stand head and shoulders above other characters under the bus, and use his avatar to sell out and turn the character into something completely homogenous and bland. Wow. 

That a man showing emotion cold be seen as effeminate is about the most ludicrous thing I’ve ever heard. 

I’m sorry Mike and also to my fellow boardies for the unnecessary distraction. I know better and it won’t happen again.

On 11/20/2023 at 10:21 AM, VintageComics said:

 

Disingenuous minds pretend to discuss but only pontificate, looking for ways to sneak in prefabricated blocks of dogma and seek attention.

Side effect - inability to hold on to a microphone.

On 11/18/2023 at 11:44 AM, VintageComics said:

You're twisting the reality.

Fanboys don't "hate it", the GENERAL PUBLIC hates it. 

You can't build the argument in one thread that "fanboys don't even make up the majority of movie goers" (like Jaybuck - a true media expert by trade made) and then in another thread just say "it's the fanboy's fault".

Ridiculous but typical if you only see the world through selfish glasses. 

No

Ad Astra

If there had been at least a decent B-movie script then much could be forgiven. But the lack of any engaging story leaves bare the idiocy of its execution. Terrible!

On 11/15/2023 at 6:35 PM, 1950's war comics said:

finally a potentially good movie without having to have some stupid modern day message being crammed down our throats 

Sounds like you have a sore throat.

Some tea with lemon and honey maybe?

Reed definitely works better as older imho. 50 is the new 48 after all.

Just give him a good script and all else will follow.