Why harvest brains from Los Angeles???
-
danztroniclive — 12 years ago(December 27, 2013 12:11 PM)
My logic is that as an observer of commentary, I felt it my right to express my thoughts, therefore my thoughts are but a contribution to the conversation, that's my logic. I actually don't believe that there has to be any internal logic to a fictitious movie, why must there be a form of guideline to make a movie work?, after all isn't fiction a call of imagination, and isn't imagination thoughts and creativity that astounds us to a level of excursion to another place?. Therefore logic to me is that any art form doesn't have to have an operational concept, as long as the belief of what you are seeing is known to be fiction not fact.
Again my thoughts are, why do people feel the need to get so serious over a work of fiction when in reality it is not a form of true belief?.
Anyway I was simply making an observation and commentary to the topic, again people are so serious about fictitious work that it astounds me that they get so worked up on something that simply is not classified as true. -
king_of_bob — 12 years ago(January 02, 2014 04:36 AM)
My logic is that as an observer of commentary, I felt it my right to express my thoughts, therefore my thoughts are but a contribution to the conversation, that's my logic.
I didn't ask about your logic. I asked what you thought you were contributing to the conversation. Did you even read my post? A contribution to the conversation would be at least speaking to the subject of the conversation, but your post does not.
I actually don't believe that there has to be any internal logic to a fictitious movie, why must there be a form of guideline to make a movie work?
Then you're an idiot who doesn't understand fiction. What you believe and what's true are two completely different things. And apparently you don't even understand what internal logic means. It means that the work of fiction sets up the rules of its own universe, but those rules need to be consistent or you're dealing with bad fiction. Simple as. Consistency is a MUST when it comes to writing.
Again my thoughts are, why do people feel the need to get so serious over a work of fiction when in reality it is not a form of true belief?.
Again, I refer you to the concept of internal logic and suggest you look it up.
Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa! -
dreanmak22 — 10 years ago(June 01, 2015 03:46 PM)
i saw a documentary in youtube where is a little girl that lost half of her brain after a terrible accident that happend to her and she is behave great like nothing happend to her, how do you explain that?
I'm not rich!I'm just a poor man with money.
(from the movie: Love in the Time of Cholera) -
silovik812 — 12 years ago(February 17, 2014 04:17 PM)
It's worse than that. They can GROW APPENDAGES that MANUFACTURE THEIR OWN FOOD! From SUNLIGHT!! And they can breathe a gas that is DEADLY to humans! Nobody can explain that! Once they figure out that walking around thing, our duck will be seriously l'oranged! They're already making a start on it:
http://blogs.usda.gov/2013/12/03/moving-up-and-out-these-trees-were-ma de-for-walking/"Oh, well" said Zanoni, "to pour pure water in the muddy well does but disturb the mud !"
-
acedrinker-1 — 13 years ago(July 01, 2012 08:43 PM)
It's been proven wrong already with the 10% or less nonsense. The people that still carry it on are the idiots that haven't paid attention to scientists for the last 10-20 years. We use our full brain on a regular basis.
-
twodollarshort — 13 years ago(April 01, 2013 12:23 PM)
********** SPOILER WARNING **************** SPOLIER WARNING *****
exactly, the people that keeps spouting that we only use 10% of our brain are the ones that use 10% the rest of us use 100% wich is normal
LOL ! anyways, Skyline was totaly Ok. actually cried a tear or two at the end when Jarod moved his fingers over her face,,showing her " its still me " -
jirjala — 14 years ago(November 01, 2011 05:38 AM)
what's more annoying is the "visitors" are color-blind and insert a "red" brain even though it's fairly obvious to the audience (with our simple, unconditioned brains) that this is a bad idea.
That's the problem with today's aliens, at least in films directed by the brothers Strause. The Predator species in their last film AvP: Requiem forgot to check for dormant-little-xenomorph-lurking-in-hero-alien-corpse just as these forgot to include a QC check for red or blue brains Perhaps aliens find such micromanagement just plain tedious. -
rainofwalrus — 14 years ago(November 01, 2011 06:15 AM)
Perhaps aliens find such micromanagement just plain tedious.
lawl. I think this red/blue "glitch" could be edited easily by a quick scene showing the "red (bad)" brain hypnotizing the workers and jedi-mind-tricking them into inserting a bad brain(s).
this, to nitpickers, would keep the alien's "intelligent," AND make the red brain seem cooler. special. jedi neo.
Of course, we'd find new ways to complain about it.
messageboard rules are serious business. like really serious. -
kitabare — 14 years ago(August 20, 2011 10:34 PM)
In the beginning of the movie Terry is trying to get Jarrod to move to the city and they say that it's Los Angeles. The end of the movie shows the Statue of Liberty in New York, The London Eye in England, and several other large cities to let the viewer know that the attack is taking place world wide.
-
king_of_bob — 14 years ago(August 26, 2011 10:44 AM)
You are wrong. When you see the Statue of Liberty the film maker is showing you various parts of the world where the aliens have landed. The majority of the film absolutely takes place in L.A..
Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa! -
billyfish — 14 years ago(March 05, 2012 12:52 PM)
I'll bite. It was LA for 99% of the film, and at the end they showed a few other world cities that had been conquered, including NYC and London, and maybe a couple of others (Hong Kong?) that I didn't get a good look at
-
king_of_bob — 14 years ago(August 26, 2011 10:42 AM)
They're most likely using brains in place of processors. The people whose brains are taken are not in control of the machines.
Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa! -
zender8584 — 14 years ago(November 01, 2011 04:22 PM)
Thank you for addressing the "we only use X% of our brains" silliness. While this is nonesense, at times I wonder if the people who believe this are the few that IN FACT do only use 4%. Analogous to only those that believe in a given religion get to go to that religion's version of heaven.
-
king_of_bob — 14 years ago(November 02, 2011 04:48 AM)
The idea that we only use a certain portion of our brain is absolutely ridiculous, and only shows that people who make such a suggestion don't really understand how the brain works at all.
Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!