Nied
-
Posts
1346 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Nied
-
-
All I can say is thank god this isn't F-16.net, because you'd have already been shouted down with cries of "OPSEC OPSEC!!!!1 Teh ENEMY will hear you!!!!!!!!!1111one1" Great source of information, but good god are they paranoid over there.
-
-
If you want to say arwen isn't a major character, well, okay... sure... I don't see where you get there... you know, as she was one of the driving forces behind aragorn and all... and saves frodo in the first movie... but sure, yeah, not a major character.
She has maybe five scene's and is completely dropped by the third act. She barely adds anything to the story at all. Hell in the books she appears almost completely in footnotes.
And all those characters were introduced well into the 2nd act of Heaven's gate... Bailin defeats the Lt's man early on, I'll give you that, but the king, jeremy iron's character, the queen, all introduced somewhere in the middle.Again it's been a while since I saw Kingdom of Heaven.
and proximo is not a major character? Let's see... he owns maximus, turns him into a gladiator, he's the one who explains how he can win his freedom and then gives up everything he has including his life to free maximus.. hmm.. yeah, not major plot points at all... those are only some of the key points in the movie, but maybe that's just me not understanding the movie, since I didn't go to film school or anything.He has a handful of scenes, and a handful of lines. He's a plot device to move the story forward and a side character at best.
I'll add Aliens to the list... the little girl is introduced way late in the game. and since she's the primary motivating factor for ripley, I'd say she qualifies as a major character.Which would be great if true. Newt is introduced in the first act (depending on the cut of the film very early in the first act).
-
Home Win XP pro+Firefox, at work it's a combo Win Xp pro+IE for work stuff (it's the only browser we support) and Portable Firefox running off my USB key for personal browsing during downtime.
The nice thing about portable Firefox is that I can just slip my USB key into any computer and have all my bookmarks right there ready for use.
::edit:: Oh yeah. Holy crap did I just see Lebhead?!
-
off the of my head:
in Lord of the Rings Fellowship:
Arwen was introduced fairly late
Aragorn was introduced fairly late
I've already adressed the Fellowship of the ring, it has the most bizzare narrative structure i've ever seen (it's what happens when you try to squeeze a book and half into movie form, I gotta give it to Peter Jackson for pulling it off though). So Aragorn gets introduced in act two of a four act movie, and Arwen? In the Fellowship she hardly counts as a major character, she has a total of four or five scenes and is promptly dropped.
In the second movie,Theoden was introduced late
He got cured during the second act, he was introduced during the first.
Kingdom of Heaven:Jeremy Iron's character is introduced late, as is the King and the Queen and Saladin and his Lt... actually, all of the major characters with the exception of Bailin and the priest are killed off fairly early.
IIRC they all get introduced on the bridge between the first and second acts. It's been a while since I saw Kingdom of Heaven though.
Gladiator:Proximus is intruduced fairly late in the game.
That's really streatching the definition of major character. Proximo has a handful of scenes and does little to drive the plot. He's interesting sure (that's good screenwriting) but hardly major.
-
There's a very good reason why the camera angle and her pose was so weird... she's barely recognizable as the hottie she once was.
Maybe it's just me, but I actually think she looks a little better.
-
Also, while I find it the best place to read about real planes, it is first and foremost a MODEL airplane forum. And most discussion is related to that in some way. Most people talking on the forums are doing it while waiting for a primer coat on their Hasegawa F-16 to dry.
Oh, another thing. Do not bring up the topic of what position a Super Hornet's control surfaces are in when the plane's shut down. (can't believe that one was forgotten)
Also do not ask about Academy vs Tamiya F-16 kits.
See I've been lurking on ARC for two months now and that one is news to me. Care to give us a rundown David?
-
OK Nied I just wanted to save myself the relief of not getting flamed by some guy that's hostile to noob's that's all. I just wanted ask you guys the do's and don't do's before I make a fool out of myself and get lampooned by the rest of the users. Like it's best if you checked to see if you locked the doors in your house before you go out somewhere. I'm using this and Shin's previous thread as a reference for my knowledge aircraft. So far I;m on page 52 of the first thread and I got 53 more pages to go.
My advice (and this goes for pretty much any message board I go to): Lurk for at least a month to get a lay of the land, that way you don't start posting stuff that might have been covered last week or last month. You're going to get a far better feel for how to act there by actually observing yourself for a whle rather than asking us and then going on a posting spree.
-
Phalanx WTF are you talking about? Seriously with forums like ARC and F-16.net it's best to lurk for at least a month or two before you start posting, they're not noob freindly.
-
Uh-huh. I'm stil waiting for those major characters.
-
Just to settle the argument over the transmition in the movies it's manual:
-
Used for spares probably. Either that or they were destroyed (again to avoid them getting into the hands of the IRIAF).
-
As much as I am loathe to defend Dick Cheney, the more I think about it, the more I can see a certain logic behind his shooting the F-14 in the face (*badum ching*). It's not hard to imagine some of that fine, brand new tooling for F-14D Super Tomcats falling into the hands of the IRIAF for their Ali Cats. His Jihad against the F-14D is still questionable, but once the decision to buy the Super Hornet was made, destroying the Tomcat tooling was at least logical.
-
Apparently the name Fury is out for the JSF and Lightning II might be in (though I can't help but think it fits the F-22 better than the F-35).
Name for F-35 will soon take flightAir Force to choose moniker by June 30; Lightning II is favorite
12:00 AM CDT on Tuesday, May 30, 2006
By RICHARD WHITTLE / The Dallas Morning News
The Air Force chief of staff will name the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter by June 30, choosing from six monikers that range from the historic to the arcane, military and industry officials say.
Officials at Lockheed Martin Corp., which largely builds the new multiservice stealth aircraft in Fort Worth, hope President Bush will announce the winning name in a visit to the factory proposed for July 7.
The six finalists being considered by Gen. T. Michael "Buzz" Moseley, according to officials who spoke on condition of anonymity, include two based on famed World War II fighters: Lightning II – the odds-on favorite – and Spitfire II.
The P-38 Lightning was built by Lockheed and flown by Richard Bong, the leading American ace of World War II with 40 kills of enemy aircraft.
The Spitfire was the British fighter credited with winning the 1940 Battle of Britain by taking on German fighters and bombers.
The F-35, which got its numerical designation after Lockheed won the contract five years ago, is to make its first flight this fall.
The plane is to be built in three versions, including an F-35B that can take off and land vertically, for three U.S. services and eight allies, including Britain.
The Air Force and Navy both proposed Lightning II, while the Marine Corps advocated Spitfire II, said a U.S. officer familiar with the deliberations.
The Air Force also submitted finalists Cyclone and Reaper, this officer said.
The finalists also include two more curious suggestions – Black Mamba and Piasa.
They were among several submitted by some of the allies that are partners in developing the F-35, industry and military officials said.
Black Mamba
The Black Mamba is one of the longest venomous snakes in the world and one of Africa's most feared. Col. Jaap Reijling, air attaché for the Embassy of the Netherlands in Washington, said his country proposed Black Mamba because the snake and the F-35 have much in common.
Among their shared features, according to a statement from the Dutch F-35 office: "Both can target a prey without being discovered. Both are very fast and lethal but not aggressive by nature."
"I think that is a definite Dutch feature: 'fast and lethal but not aggressive by nature,' " Col. Reijling said with a laugh.
Far less clear, those familiar with the list said, was why Denmark proposed Piasa, the name of a mythical man-devouring bird that appears in the lore of the Illini Indians of Illinois. A call to Denmark's representative for the F-35 program went unanswered.
The Piasa – pronounced "pie-a-saw" – was described in a diary kept by Father Jacques Marquette in 1673, as he and Louis Joliet explored the area near today's Mississippi River town of Alton, Ill.
Winnowed out
A review by Air Force lawyers for potential trademark violations and other objections has winnowed out names proposed by other allies, the U.S. officer said.
Britain proposed Fury, a favorite of many Lockheed and military officials but a name that risked a trademark conflict with the Plymouth Fury auto, this officer said.
Other rejects and the countries or services that offered them include Phantom, Australia; Scorpion, Canada and the Marine Corps; Mustang, Marine Corps; and Skyruler, Turkey.
However they managed to become finalists, Black Mamba and Piasa appear to have little chance of passing Gen. Moseley's muster.
"I don't want to speculate on what he will choose, but Gen. Moseley is a huge military history buff," offered Maj. Glen Roberts, the chief of staff's spokesman.
Given Gen. Moseley's love of military history and the proximity of the Grand Prairie native's hometown to the Lockheed plant, the smart money among those privy to the final list is Lightning II.
That's the name Lockheed originally wanted for its F-22 Raptor, the Air Force's newest stealth fighter.
The Air Force ultimately rejected Lightning II for the F-22, a decision made by one of Gen. Moseley's predecessors, and instead chose Raptor, a name in keeping with the service's late 20th century tradition of naming fighter planes for birds of prey.
The F-16 Fighting Falcon and the F-15 Eagle were the F-22's immediate predecessors.
Importance of heritage
In naming planes, the Air Force takes into account "a lot of different things," Maj. Roberts said, but especially heritage.
"That's a hugely important aspect of where we're going," he said.
Bill Sweetman, technology editor for the defense publishing company Jane's Information Group and author of several books on aircraft, said there were "a lot of different traditions" in naming planes.
The Army traditionally names its helicopters after Indian nations, he noted.
Army pilots fly the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior and the AH-64 Apache, for example.
During the early history of fighter planes, the companies that built the aircraft usually named them.
"The former Grumman Co., its fighters all had cat names, going back to the 1940s," he noted.
Those included World War II's F4F Wildcat, F6F Hellcat, F7F Tigercat and F8F Bearcat, as well as the modern F-14 Tomcat, a swing-wing jet just retired by the Navy.
Another former fighter plane company, Republic, included thunder in the names of its planes. And in the early years of the jet age, Lockheed favored names that included star, according to aerospaceweb.org, a nonprofit Web site run by aerospace engineers and scientists.
Lacking consistency
"There's been no real consistency to it, as far as the Air Force goes," Mr. Sweetman said. The P-51 of World War II was the Mustang, he noted, and the Korean War F-86 was the Sabre.
The Army Air Corps, which became the Air Force after World War II, used P, for pursuit, to designate fighter planes.
The Air Force switched to F for fighter when it was founded in 1948.
No matter what name Gen. Moseley chooses, other services and countries could still call their F-35s by a different name, Maj. Roberts said, "but historically, that has not happened."
But like people, planes don't always go by their given names.
In the Air Force, "very few guys I know call the F-16 the Fighting Falcon," Maj. Roberts said. "It's the Viper."
And Mr. Sweetman observed that the A-10, a ground attack jet still in use, is officially the Thunderbolt II but is affectionately called the Warthog because of its clunky lines.
"It's silly business, really," Mr. Sweetman said, "because the aircraft are very seldom known by their real names."
-
Just don't start a "which is better?" or "this plane vs. this plane" thread. We *HATE* those kind of discussions over there (it's academically proven that they'll get out of hand there). The moderators take a pretty hard line on stuff like that these days (they even went as far as to completely shut down one of the forums for a few days because people couldn't keep their ignorant thoughts to themselves)
Ditto with the F-16.net forums. To paraphrase the Simpsons: "Your forums reward knowledge. Our forums punish ignorance!"
-
Abovetopsecret.com? Ugh. Don't hang out there, buncha loony UFO conspiracy nutters. Go to places like F-16.net or the "Real Aviation" section of The Aircraft Resource Center forums.
-
I let the blood on Wolverine's shirt slide because incredibly easy to make simple wardrobe mistakes like that. Stuff like going from night to day like flicking a light switch is a lot worse. If I had to guess I'd say they set the Alcatraz battle in the middle of the night to save money. A daytime setting would have required either actually filming on location at Alcatraz (which given the buildings and locations that don't actually exist in real life would have been a nightmare), or filming in Vancouver with giant blue or green screens on all sides (which would require matching up the shots with San Francisco background plates in post production $$$). I actually think a daytime fight would have been much more impressive visually, but would have been a huge and expensive PITA to actually produce.
-
BTW:
Lord of the Rings
Kingdom of Heaven
Gladiator
all introduce major characters in the middle of the movie.
What you're really is saying, is that no movie that YOU like breaks these rules, doesn't mean that the movie is bad. Just that you have narrow taste and were well programmed by your professors.
Lord of the rings I'll give you (I'm assuming you're referring to the Fellowship of the Ring), it's more the exception that proves the rule, as part of a larger story arc it's got a royally f*cked up narrative structure to begin with.
As for Kingdom of Heaven and Gladiator, I'm not sure who you're referring to (remember I said major characters).
Making a film is like building a house, you need to structure it properly or it won't stand up. If you throw main characters at people in the middle of the film you have no time to develop them so that the audience can understand why they're doing what they are. Kitty just gets thrown into the film right in the middle, we don't know anything about her character other than the fact she's upset that Professor X is dead, and we never do find out anything more about her. She's not a character with her own motivations, she's a thing put there by the screenwriter to do the things he wants to have done so that he can move the story forward to more special effects.
Hell if they put her in the middle of the film to act as a foil to drive the Rouge/Iceman storyline forward that would make sense (that's essentially the role Bobby played in the first film). Or if they dropped Rouge from the film and used the time gained to introduce Kitty into the film earlier that too would have worked. In the end they did neither and gave us a flat character who goes nowhere.
-
While we don't see his face until the beginning of the third act, it's tough to argue that we aren't more than a little familiar with John Doe as a character by that point.
2. Bohoo, so in a world were people can read minds, move bridges, shoot lasers out of their eyes, the fact that in one scene the time changed a bit to fast makes the movie worthless?As bsu pointed out, being a sci-fi movie doesn't suddenly absolve the movie from basic workmanship standards. JsARCLIGHT is most likely right, in every film theres someone who's charged with maintaining that kind of shot-shot continuity (usually in a big budget film like this, multiple people) it's pretty much impossible to what they did by accident. Instead they banked on people being too stupid to notice. Frankly I don't like paying $10 and staying up till 3:00am to have my intelligence insulted like that.
3. This film students seem to forget that movies are supposed to be first and foremost entertaining. Not every movie is made with the objective of winning 10 academy awards.Unfortunetly this movie did neither. If you're busy insulting the audiences intelligence with blatant continuity gaffes and supposedly uber-powerful characters that stand around and do nothing you're not really doing much entertaining.
-
The problem with the F-35 is that in trying to please so many different parties they're begining to make enough compromises to please no-one.
-
fart you.
Name me one other good movie where a major character is introduced in the middle of the film. Tell me one other good film where the time of day abruptly changes in the middle of a scene. You can't becuase good movies don't do that. All the nifty special effects and big explosions in the world can't cover a vrappy film. My knowing the technical terms for what's going wrong doesn't mean it isn't.
-
3.5 out of 5.
fanboys suck and this movie proves it. Pheonix's motivation for killing professor was pretty obvious and having her kill her husband and then her mentor quickly establishes her as a real threat and shows that any of the X-men were game... Since x-men was one of the first comics to be anchored in real human drama, it's only fitting that their characters have to deal with what can actually happen when you run around throwing that sort of fire power at each other.
It quickly establishes her as a threat, however she does nothing but stand there silent for the next hour of the movie. People talk about how powerful she is but we never really see even an inkling of that until the last 15 mins of the film, that's stuff you learn not to do in screenwriting 101.
Why did magneto have the grunts rush in? So he could find out where the defenses were. Unlike the uber magneto in the comics, this magneto can't deflect playing cards and other non metal objects with magnetism. And this magneto wants to turn the mutant community from an underground community that is uneasy with itself into a unified and proud army, one that he can wield to remake the world.Indeed, he told us as much in yet another example of poor scripting (film is a visual medium you show don't tell, that's why the Matrix sequels were so awful).
This was a very servicible movie... was it brilliant? Nope. Does it have plot holes and continuity issues...? Yes. did it stay true to the characters and to the spirit of the X-men? Yes. Is it entertaining? Yes.The only thing serviceable in that movie were the action sequences. In every other sense it was awful, it had inconsistent characterisation, poor dialogue, bad acting, continuity errors worthy of Ed Wood, and a truly awful narrative structuring (like introducing characters in the middle of the movie). None of that has anything to do with whether or not it follows the comics closely enough, lord knows the first two films don't do that, and they were great. It has everything to do with whether or not it's a good movie that can stand up on it's own if it didn't say "X-men" in the title.
-
With the add blitz preceding the premiere I'm not surprised. What will really make the critics eat crow is if it can do anything close to this next week. Another reason that ticket sales are declining (other than the "failing up" problem I mentioned on the last page) is because studios have settled on a strategy of building up an incredible amount of hype for a movie in an attempt to get the opening weekend gross to a high enough level to push the movie to break even, even if it bombs for the rest of it's showing. Considering the overall quality of this one I'm guessing that's the strategy here.
The problem with this strategy is that it gets diminishing returns. People eventually get burned to many times and decide to ignore the hype and wait to watch it on DVD (if ever).
-
I kinda let the daytime to nighttime misshap go b/c some others pointed out on another thread that the daytime can change rather rapidly in San fran. I had a larger problem with Angel at the end of the film. He isn't shown aboard the X-jet and He suddendly pops up at Alcatraz. WTF
I would be impossibble for him to fly from upstate NY to San Fran in the alloted time in the film. The effects for Collosus were terrible. He looked like someone covered him in aluminum foil.
Note the location listed in my profile. That doesn't happen.
)
Aircraft Vs Super Thread! 2
in Hall Of The Super Topics
Posted · Edited by Nied
I'm guessing it's something that can't be cold on the ground. As Knight already said these planes regularly fly at 50,000ft where it's cold all the time, so it's got to be something that needs to be working down low (landing gear, APU, ingress/egress that kind of thing).
::Edit:: It's also interesting that they're deploying in the middle of summer, when temperatures should be around what they had over the winter at Langley. ::edit::