why the fuck does english have a word for
but not for “the day after tomorrow”
???
rb to relieve the back pain of the person u reblogged this from
So a free tool called GLAZE has been developed that allows artists to cloak their artwork so it can't be mimicked by AI art tools.
AI art bros are big mad about it.
Who are the Anti-Stratfordians?
People who think Shakespeare wasn’t actually Shakespeare, but that ‘Shakespeare’ was a secret pseudonym for someone more important and better educated, like the Earl of Oxford.
See also: imbeciles.
I passed an amazing follower milestone last month, and I’m having an ASOIAF Art Giveaway to celebrate!
PRIZE: Commissioned watercolor art of YOUR CHOICE by metalshell, subject to certain restrictions.
You can see some examples of metalshell‘s beautiful work here on deviantart. The examples of metalshell‘s art featured above are Winter Roses and Sharp Steel and Little Birds.
RULES:
You must reblog this post to enter, and you must be following me.
You can reblog as many times as you want, but don’t spam your followers.
Likes count as an additional entry.
No giveaway blogs.
The giveaway closes on my birthday, October 14! You have until then to reblog this post.
The winner will be chosen on October 14 at 11pm PT. The winner must have their askbox open, and they must respond within 3 days, or a new winner will be chosen.
Read the detailed rules & restrictions.
Thank you all so much for following me, and good luck!
She haunts it, mostly.
Ian and Barbara are both unnerved by how casual the Doctor seems about it. Since their arcs, and especially Ian's, are about embracing their adventures and having fun rather than suffering through them, they sort of have the same transition the show has once she's gone.
During the one scene from the Doctor's POV, he wonders about what's going to happen to her; at the end, he decides his next adventure will be to go to her wedding. (or, more accurately, to get her a wedding gift)
Since there isn't a Susan subplot, Ian and Barbara go through the vast majority of what her story would presumably cover, and one of the POV Venusians is more or less a teenager, so that seems to take care of the rest.
Also, lacking Vicki, there isn't really a comedy subplot (or, at least, not a significant one), and the Doctor spends most of the story on his own, largely stalking the edges of the story until the last act. Because of that, Vicki's absence is also felt, in a subtle way.
Venusian Lullaby? I read it over Thanksgiving, and thought it was a fantastic take on the Hartnell era, particularly for its success in aiming at roughly the same target as The Web Planet and nailing it.
Not one I’ve read. Interesting TARDIS team though. How does it deal with Susan’s absence, given that placement?
Actually, I think MI-5 bombing would be at least a mild shock - the last one made $200 million US, $700 million worldwide, and was extremely well received. Additionally, Christopher McQuarrie's Jack Reacher, while not as big a hit as the studio wanted, ended up doing fairly well thanks to solid word-of-mouth, and had outstanding action scenes (including one of the best recent car chases). Edge of Tomorrow, too, had a solid reputation, even if it disappointed at the box office.
While those two Cruise films underperforming may look bad, MI-4 similarly came after Valkyrie and Knight & Day did so-so business. It's a reliable franchise with a good pedigree behind the camera. Nor does it have particularly strong competition - it's two weeks after Ant-Man, comes out the same day as the Point Break remake (which will almost surely flop), and a week before Fantastic 4, which it should hold up well against. And the rest of August certainly shouldn't stand in its way.
Those others probably are doomed, though.
So, completely separate from any judgment as to whether the movie looks good or is going to be an interesting take on the source material…
Fantastic 4 is in the running with Man from U.N.C.L.E. as the most obvious bomb in waiting of 2015, yes?
(And man, 2015 is looking to be a fucking dire year for film in terms of tentpoles. So many things that could bomb. Terminator Genisys, Mission: Impossible 5, and Jurassic World would all surprise nobody if they flopped.)
While I kinda hate to add a giant block of text to Phil's beautiful explanation, if you want a more complex answer, here it is:
This is the box office chart on its opening weekend, new releases in bold:
1. The Expendables, $34 million
2. Eat Pray Love, $22 million
3. The Other Guys, $17 million
4. Inception, $11 million
5. Scott Pilgrim, $10 million
Different films attract different demographics, and a lot of Scott Pilgrim's were sucked away by its competition. Scott Pilgrim is a wacky, video game- and comic-book inspired romantic action comedy full of wild visual tricks, starring Michael Cera. Strangely, that doesn't appeal to everyone, but a lot of it is down to the other films.
The Expendables sounded like a spectacular idea, what with Stallone, Statham, Schwarzenegger, Willis, etc. in a violent, R-rated romp blessed with exceptional marketing; given the choice, older males flocked to that rather than the sillier, more romantic Scott Pilgram. (If you want the demographics, 61% of the audience was male, 60% over 25) Even if the movie ultimately stopped just short of delivering the goods, it had that first weekend in the bag.
Eat Pray Love was an adaptation of an incredibly popular book starring Julia Roberts, returning to the romantic comedy roots that made her so popular to begin with. In a choice between A) a romantic comedy that centered on a beloved actress, tackled relatable issues like depression and self-worth, and subtly indulged in a lot of fantasies that appeal to older women, and B) a flashy, video-game inspired fantasy about Michael Cera trying to win a girl's heart through fighting and modern indie rock The appeal for older women was naturally to Eat Pray Love. (in fact, 72% of its audience was women, 56% over 35)
As for teenager guys, the primary audience, a lot of them were showing up for the second weekend of the rather funny The Other Guys, which teamed Will Farrel with Mark Wahlberg, or finally catching up to (or watching for the second time) Inception, which was a word-of-mouth smash that, whatever its intellectual merits, was at the least a phenomenal action flick.
Finally, by the third weekend of August, most teen guys are a bit worn out from the deluge of movies targeting them through the summer and busy going back to school anyway; business really dies down around then.
On a cleaner weekend, it might have been an easier sell, but its wild genre-bending just didn't appeal to any individual audience as much as anything else.
And with the summer over, it's really hard for a non-drama release in the middle of August to catch on. There are exceptions (Superbad, Inglourious Basterds, District 9), but they're relatively rare. And with five wide releases on its second weekend, it didn't have much of a chance. For all that, $10 million does still seem a little on the low side, which suggests that the marketing couldn't figure out how to scale the cliffs it was facing.
The last piece of the puzzle is the film's quality - for all its dazzling visuals, originality, and clever comedy, it stops short of really connecting emotionally for most people, and that, more than anything, is what gets word-of-mouth going.
Which, as noted, is just too bad, because not only was it a good flick, but it should have been what launched Edgar Wright into the mainstream.
So why did the Scott Pilgrim movie flop?
Because not enough people bought tickets to see it. Which is sad, as it was pretty good.
The most misanthropic black comedy this side of a David Fincher joint.
My review of Robot of Sherwood.
"The meeting between these two fantastic figures should be the most revolutionary and politically explosive episode since...
... oh, no, wait, it's a Gatiss script."