|
CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK posted:The red scar is actually her power of pure communism Stalin didn't die in 1953. He just shapeshifted into Elizabeth Jennings.
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 12:00
|
|
. It is what gives her the ability to shapeshift and change her appearance.
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 23:25 |
|
|
So yesterday I started up a free trial of Sony's Playstation Vue service, their whole internet TV streaming thing. As long as you don't mind the whole "no live broadcast network" thing it works surprisingly well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 12:05
|
|
|
Lady Naga posted:I've currently watched 3 episodes of Lucifer and it seems really bad. I'm reasonably certain that any praise for Lucifer is within the context of its genre: police procedurals with mixed gender leads and a quirky consultant gimmick. Even then I'm not sure it's better than the first season of Sleepy Hollow. It's definitely not as good as early Castle or iZombie. As someone who likes all of those shows, Lucifer does do a lot of things right, so I think it shows promise. If you don't like that genre or any of those shows, don't waste your time. It's unlikely to break too far out of the mold.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
I'm never not going to be amazed that this is what they pigeonholed a show about Lucifer, broken out of Hell into.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 12:27
|
|
|
Oh yeah there's literally no point in caring about it as an adaption of the source material.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 12:36
|
|
|
It's messed up that a guy with the last name Morningstar does not use a morning star at any point, literal devil or no.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 13:14
|
|
|
Inspector 34 posted:Just started watching The Americans last night and am just now finishing the 3rd episode. It's 2am but I kind of want to watch it again, because I can't figure out what the hell was going on with Keri Russell's face towards the end. Was that a shadow? Or does she have a weird moving red scar or line down her face? I went back and watched the end of that episode on Netflix, it does look really weird but it just a shadow from her hair. Some strange lighting for that scene and a really strong shadow, they should have moved it for those shots or put more bits of hair infront of her face to not make it look weird... Unless it was supposed to look like a scar, given they're talking about grief at the time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 13:37
|
|
|
Snak posted:Oh yeah there's literally no point in caring about it as an adaption of the source material. It's kind of funny how little his being the actual devil has anything to do with anything that happens in the show. It could be about a smarmy nightclub owner who decides to start working with the LAPD and things would be pretty much the same.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
VagueRant posted:The trailer for The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt season 2 has me pining for a feelgood show. I hoped Kimmy Schmidt would be it, but they were more interested in portraying a zany 30 Rock comic reality where the promise of a super optimistic, cheery, innocent and genuine protagonist can be squished into more of a Rachel-from-Friends role. That's not a diss on the writers, they're just making a different show than what I wanted out of their premise. Jim DiGriz posted:Check out Raising Hope and My Name is Earl, if you have somehow missed those. And while not a comedy, and definitely does not claim the world is okay, Leverage always puts me in a good mood. This. Leverage is what you're looking for. I mean, there are down moments. But it's to set up the feel good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
I don't think I even finished My Name is Earl, the prison season was just terrible. But man were the first two seasons something special, I liked them a lot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
They started doing a lot more gimmicks after that. Once he got out of prison he was in a coma for a while. Then Joy and Crab Man go into Witness Protection sometime in season 4.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
Lady Naga posted:It's a kind of mediocre that actively frustrates me because it doesn't have the conviction to be either interestingly bad or legitimately good. Reminds me of why I stopped watching TV for a long time in the first place. Yeah, it's really dull and generic. They don't do nearly enough interesting with the show considering the star is supposed to literally be the devil.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
Nate RFB posted:I don't think I even finished My Name is Earl, the prison season was just terrible. But man were the first two seasons something special, I liked them a lot. Similarly, while the rest of it is really good the last season of Raising Hope is kind of cruddy. Mostly because they changed things up too much moving Jimmy out of his parents' house. Doing so kind of split the focus and they spent too much time on Burt/Virginia while Jimmy/Sabrina/Hope barely appeared.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
The guy that invented Napster is trying to start a service called Screening Room where you can pay $50 and get access to new release, in-the-cinema movies for 48 hours at a time at home on your TV. He's got some big time directors with him and some against him, but what do you guys think of that price point and the service itself?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
zoux posted:The guy that invented Napster is trying to start a service called Screening Room where you can pay $50 and get access to new release, in-the-cinema movies for 48 hours at a time at home on your TV. He's got some big time directors with him and some against him, but what do you guys think of that price point and the service itself? Shrug. Maybe in area's where it costs $17 to see a movie and you have a sweet setup at home, but for me it costs $5 so I'd have no reason to ever do this. Also pirating groups who put out cam copies would love this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
Who the gently caress is Sean Parker? I never heard of him until Social Network. Shawn Fanning is the one that had all the press interviews and magazine covers. But that sounds like a good idea, kind of like pay per view. Gather up a group of people and watch it in the man cave on a projector. Spread it out over like 7 people and the price is nothing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
zoux posted:The guy that invented Napster is trying to start a service called Screening Room where you can pay $50 and get access to new release, in-the-cinema movies for 48 hours at a time at home on your TV. He's got some big time directors with him and some against him, but what do you guys think of that price point and the service itself? I don't see how this is happening in a world where DVD realeses keep getting pushed forward solely to spite pirates.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
quote:had developed a plan to offer new releases for $50 per 48-hour view. Customers would also pay $150 for access to the technology, which is said to be piracy-proof. lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
Xoidanor posted:I don't see how this is happening in a world where DVD realeses keep getting pushed forward solely to spite pirates. I dunno how much it is to simply spite them as it is necessary to compete with them. Movie pirates have forced movie studios not to sit on home releases for a year, and that's one of the best things they've ever done for consumers. Jurassic Park came out on home video more than a year after it left theaters, iirc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
Each purchase is supposed to come with 2 tickets to the same movie in a theater too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:lol Maybe they meant that it's proof of piracy, like, its existence
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Each purchase is supposed to come with 2 tickets to the same movie in a theater too. Yeah, that was to appease the theater chains to get them from boycotting the movies being released on the service. To be clear, I think the STUDIOS would be OK with supplementing theaters with day and date VOD releases. They are mostly afraid of theater chain reprisal. It's expensive, but it's a start. If you get 4 or so people together to watch it, is pretty break even with going to a non-matinee showing. I can also think of a lot of times when friends have had to bow out going to the movies due to babysitter availability, so being able to watch a new release from someone's house would be a boon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:Who the gently caress is Sean Parker? I never heard of him until Social Network. Shawn Fanning is the one that had all the press interviews and magazine covers. You not knowing Sean Parker only says things about your involvement with the news w/r/t tech sector 2000-2010 and nothing about his own notability. Feel free to check out this wikipedia.org for more (protip: they have a references section that even details 105 of the news articles you missed!)
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 16:33
|
|
|
thrawn527 posted:This. Leverage is what you're looking for. If you want a real feel-good, real hilarious show, Broad City works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
zoux posted:The guy that invented Napster is trying to start a service called Screening Room where you can pay $50 and get access to new release, in-the-cinema movies for 48 hours at a time at home on your TV. He's got some big time directors with him and some against him, but what do you guys think of that price point and the service itself? Not a price point I'd find reasonable, but it'll get pirated, which is a perfect price point so I say go for it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
$50 isn't too bad if you have a nice system/setup at home and get 3+ people together to watch/pay for a movie, but the idea that this won't help pirating is pretty hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
More options is always a good thing, I like the theater experience but I'm glad that theaters are losing their ability to throttle new platforms just to keep their three-month head start on new movies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
IRQ posted:Not a price point I'd find reasonable, but it'll get pirated, which is a perfect price point so I say go for it. Excuse me it is 100% pirate proof.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
zoux posted:Excuse me it is 100% pirate proof. But if you're going to show it on a screen on customers hardware then it's impossible to stop the customer from ripping the feed and- zoux posted:100% pirate proof. But can't you see the implicati- zoux posted:100% Fine, take my money and go disrupt the market.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
zoux posted:Excuse me it is 100% pirate proof. Oh darn, foiled again!
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
I mean being convinced that a service is 100% piracy proof because it's from The Guy Who Did Napster is exactly the level of understanding about piracy I'd expect from your average Hollywood exec.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
So do you think the tech can tell if a camera is pointed at it, and does it burn down the theater equipment to prevent piracy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
I'm curious how they see this as 100% piracy proof, but aside from that, I would totally be on board with this. I'm not really a huge fan of the movie going experience anymore. I have a big TV and hope, good sound setup, and off the top of my head, the pros for this: - I get one of the best seats in the house. - I can have the best beer and best food available to me. - I don't have to show up near an hour early for the movie on opening weekend to get a seat that isn't terrible. - I don't have to deal with people who talk through the movie in the theater. - I can pause the movie to go to the bathroom or get a drink or make more popcorn, etc. One con is that watching R rated movies when you have young kids could be difficult, but that's just an argument for theaters still sticking around as well. There are quite a few things that would need to happen to make this even possible, and the piracy thing is a giant question mark, but in a vacuum, I like this a lot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
whowhatwhere posted:So do you think the tech can tell if a camera is pointed at it, and does it burn down the theater equipment to prevent piracy? of course!
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
I'm surprised the MPAA has't managed to force camera companies to include firmware level piracy detection the way a lot of scanners, digital cameras, and photoshop wont open an image of US currency. So theatre film copies have weird flash frames every once in a while that would bricks cameras, or force phones into a "locked" mode you have to pay out the rear end to revert if the camera was pointing at the screen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
bring back old gbs posted:I'm surprised the MPAA has't managed to force camera companies to include firmware level piracy detection the way a lot of scanners, digital cameras, and photoshop wont open an image of US currency. So theatre film copies have weird flash frames every once in a while that would bricks cameras, or force phones into a "locked" mode you have to pay out the rear end to revert if the camera was pointing at the screen. Because lobbying isn't magic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
The system likely embeds an invisible watermark into the stream either visually, acoustically, or both. That would let them ID the source of the leak and hit them with a pretty hefty infringement charge. Not technically piracy proof, but very risky to leak.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
They send a pimply 17 yo to your house as well to run the TV and make sure you don't pirate it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:The system likely embeds an invisible watermark into the stream either visually, acoustically, or both. That would let them ID the source of the leak and hit them with a pretty hefty infringement charge. That would actually be pretty smart. I feel like if you knew it was doing that though, you could scramble it by adding a low-level amount of noise to the video before releasing it. But maybe not. I know that Blizzard does something like that with WoW, but I haven't read about any attempts to circumvent it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 23:25 |
|
|
They do similar things to screeners, doesn't stop them from being leaked, but they can usually track the source. Keep in mind that since this is a connected platform, they can probably do things like vary how the watermark is presented in subsequent viewings or even by stream. It would be constant cat and mouse to update and then figure it out, but you are going to run out of people who want to do it quickly since they'll either be banned from the service or in jail.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 22:16
|
|