LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
It's a christmas miracle! A podcast!!
- Metcarfre
- Posts: 13676
- Joined: 08 Jul 2008, 13:52
- First Video: Not Applicable
- Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
OF COURSE I left my compy at home so I can't download it!
*
- King Kool
- Quality and Quantity
- Posts: 5987
- Joined: 28 Jan 2008, 19:22
- Location: Rhode Island
- Contact:
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
HOLY CRAP IN A PITA! I can finally Audiosurf the LRRcast! After all these decades! I can continue to ignore my family!
EDIT: FUCK I HIT A GRAY BLOCK AFTER FORTY MINUTES FUCK
Also, as far as them taking properties and trying to shoehorn them into marketable properties, remember the Prince of Persia? It wanted to be Pirates of the Caribbean SO FUCKIN' HARD.
EDIT: FUCK I HIT A GRAY BLOCK AFTER FORTY MINUTES FUCK
Also, as far as them taking properties and trying to shoehorn them into marketable properties, remember the Prince of Persia? It wanted to be Pirates of the Caribbean SO FUCKIN' HARD.
- Vigafre
- Posts: 3920
- Joined: 27 Jul 2009, 13:07
- First Video: Halo: The Future of Gaming
- Location: Oklahoma
- Contact:
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
I'd like to say that James did an awesome job with the titling of this LRRcast.
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
Vigafre wrote:I'd like to say that James did an awesome job with the titling of this LRRcast.
I second this very much, though I should probably go be with my family on Christmas instead of listening to it right now.
*subtly grabs a pair of headphones, just in case*
- Littleman 64
- Posts: 98
- Joined: 19 Mar 2010, 10:52
- First Video: Rejected WiiPlay Games
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
This podcast is in contending for best christmast present.
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
Storm Crow descending, winter unending!
The only defining characteristic between knowledge and belief is the point of view.
And now, my DeviantART! Contact me if you want something drawn.
And now, my DeviantART! Contact me if you want something drawn.
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
Littleman 64 wrote:This podcast is in contending for best christmast present.
Contend nothin'. I love me some LRR.
"Screw the family, I have LRRcast!"
"Flat beer or a lumpy mattress. Take your pick."
"I'd prefer a flat mattress."
"Hmm.. Well, it could be done.. If I take the lumps out of the mattress, and put them in the beer, you'd have a flat mattress and a lumpy beer!"
"I'd prefer a flat mattress."
"Hmm.. Well, it could be done.. If I take the lumps out of the mattress, and put them in the beer, you'd have a flat mattress and a lumpy beer!"
- Mighty Magnus
- Posts: 230
- Joined: 15 Jul 2010, 15:14
- First Video: Phailhaus - 26
- Location: Merry Ol' England
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
YAY, more LRRy podcast goodness.
Hope the team and every one here on the forums had a good Christmas/Festive season or whatever you require to be happy.
Hope the team and every one here on the forums had a good Christmas/Festive season or whatever you require to be happy.
Life is not a race, it's a journey. Stop running, start enjoying.
- Dubious_wolf
- Posts: 2761
- Joined: 30 Nov 2009, 09:52
- First Video: Mercenary Solutions 2
- Location: My room eating YOUR cheese-its
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
Movies based on video games not a good idea. I am really glad that Nathan Fillion isn't in the Uncharted movie, not even he could save that shit.
^( " )^
winner!
winner!
- Pigmy Wurm
- Posts: 195
- Joined: 18 Jun 2009, 11:13
- Location: Massachusetts U.S.A
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
Dubious_wolf wrote:Movies based on video games not a good idea. I am really glad that Nathan Fillion isn't in the Uncharted movie, not even he could save that shit.
the problem with the movie is not that it is shit, the premise sounds promising. The issue is that it isn't uncharted.
I understand why Hollywood feels the need to play around with most video games, a lot of the stuff doesn't translate well and/or has a very niche appeal, but all they had to do was read a plot summery, trim some elements to fit it under 2:30 and you have a movie, its that easy.
As far as the podcast it's self. Really glad you posted it. After a month of no podcast I was getting antsy, but felt it I posted or tweeted anything about it I would come off as a dick. You guys make so much great content that I don't want sound entitled but could you please give us a heads up if you think a podcasst or what not will be a long time coming, at least to save us from constantly checking the site.
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
Stuff about size of moon
The moon appearing bigger closer to the horizon is not because of diffraction through the atmosphere it's just your eyes making it appear bigger because you can see other objects in the foreground, if you take a picture of it on the horizon compared to when it's high in the sky, it's the same size.
- phlip
- Posts: 1790
- Joined: 24 Apr 2010, 17:48
- First Video: Eternal Sonata (Unskippable)
- Location: Australia
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
kais58 wrote:it's just your eyes making it appear bigger because you can see other objects in the foreground
It's not that either - even if you're in the middle of a featureless plain, and there are no objects in the foreground to compare the moon to, it still appears bigger on the horizon than high in the sky.
The best hypothesis I've heard is that for most objects, something directly above you is much closer than something on the horizon... much like how the ground directly below you is closer than the ground at the horizon. Take, say, a bird, or a plane (or Superman) flying overhead... it starts out very distant and small-looking at one horizon, then relatively close and large overhead, then distant and small at the other horizon. And this is going to be the same for any terrestrial thing you might see above you - birds, planes, clouds, treetops... they all work the same: higher in the sky == closer to you.
The only things that don't have this effect, are extraterrestrial... but the stars are too small for you to notice a change in size, and you can't look at the sun directly, so that leaves only the moon. The moon is identically sized at the horizon and high in the sky... but your brain is so used to seeing things on the horizon as "distant" and things high in the sky as "close"... and I'm sure everyone seen the illusions where there are two objects of the same observed size, but where you think one is "close" and one is "distant" - the "distant" one looks much larger than the "close" one... the brain is compensating for the perspective effect that it assumes is there, even when it actually isn't.
It's worth noting that this is entirely a cognitive effect - the actual size of the moon doesn't change. Easiest way I've heard to check this is an appropriately-sized coin held at arm's length will be the same size as the moon, both at the horizon and in the air. The trick being that you're keeping the coin at the same distance from you, so it doesn't have the same effect where overhead objects are closer than ones on the horizon. So if, say, a helicopter would be larger than the moon when it's overhead, then it's still going to be larger than the moon when it's on the horizon - the horizon moon only looks larger, it's still the same actual size. The main difference between them is, again, that the helicopter overhead is going to be relatively close, but the helicopter on the horizon, can be quite distant - so the helicopter can be made small enough to fit inside the moon, rather than making the moon big enough to be larger than the helicopter. But, as they mentioned in the podcast, that would require the helicopter to be absurdly far away, whereas the shot of something silhouetted against the moon in those cutscenes is invariably a close-up.
Finally, a note on the refraction idea - this effect does exist, and it's measurable, but in most cases it's not strong enough to notice by the naked eye. Also, it makes the moon smaller on the horizon, not bigger. And only in the vertical direction, it's unchanged horizontally (it ends up very slightly ellipse-shaped).
While no one overhear you quickly tell me not cow cow.
but how about watch phone?
[he/him/his]
but how about watch phone?
[he/him/his]
- iamafish
- Posts: 4804
- Joined: 22 Feb 2009, 10:28
- First Video: Crime and Punishment
- Location: Oxford/Worcestershire, England
- Contact:
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
wow matt, tell us what you really think! Fun podcast though!
Thoughts From a Fish Bowl<------ my blog...
My Twitter
My Twitter
iamafish never wrote:the male trouser snake is evidence that evolution has no sense of aesthetics
- dex-dex
- Posts: 49
- Joined: 12 Apr 2010, 15:10
- First Video: buttstallation
- Location: Oakville ON (I need to stop leaving my Oakville on)
Re: LRRcast - Decadent Magic Trailers: James Cameron Sucks Xmas
you can not go wrong with a don knotts/Jimmy Stewart impression about ostridges!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests