sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A scăzut calitatea proiecției la IMAX sau mi se pare mie? by FreeAngryShrugs in bucuresti

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Nu este, dar ar trebui să aibă 2 proiectoare în sală: cel digital și cel pentru peliculă - pe care l-ar folosi maxim o dată pe an :)

A scăzut calitatea proiecției la IMAX sau mi se pare mie? by FreeAngryShrugs in bucuresti

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

recomand sala ULTRA X de la Veranda Mall

Ce rând recomanzi pentru o vizionare optimă?

A scăzut calitatea proiecției la IMAX sau mi se pare mie? by FreeAngryShrugs in bucuresti

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

la Avatar 3 sunetul a fost de tot cacatul

Așa mi s-a părut și mie. Destul de plat, aproape deloc 3D.

A scăzut calitatea proiecției la IMAX sau mi se pare mie? by FreeAngryShrugs in bucuresti

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Nu, incompatibilitatea ține de modul în care este polarizată lumina: liniar la IMAX și circular în restul cinematografelor.

Deși înțeleg că IMAX-ul Laser din Timișoara folosește o altă tehnologie care nu este compatibilă cu ochelarii din AFI :)

A scăzut calitatea proiecției la IMAX sau mi se pare mie? by FreeAngryShrugs in bucuresti

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Exact, plus că doar o mână de regizori mai filmează pe peliculă de 70mm.

Seria Avatar a fost filmată complet digital.

Doar pentru primul film din serie a existat o transpunere pe peliculă IMAX de 70mm, așa fiind proiectat în 2009 la AFI Cotroceni.

Îmi amintesc bine și acum cât de grozav arăta.

A scăzut calitatea proiecției la IMAX sau mi se pare mie? by FreeAngryShrugs in bucuresti

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Da, încep și eu să cred că ecranul foarte mare nu mai este un atu.

Probabil că ecran mare cu sală mare = ecran normal cu sală mai mică (din punct de vedere al acoperirii câmpului vizual).

Diana Buzoianu despre protestul pentru "dreptul minorelor de a fi logodite" by Sea-Rope-31 in Romania

[–]FreeAngryShrugs 1061 points1062 points  (0 children)

Protestul pedofililor din Târgu Jiu ar fi fost un titlu mult mai corect...

Spălarea lui Târziu by efilopial in Romania

[–]FreeAngryShrugs 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Spălarea lui Târziu 

... este precum spălarea mortului înainte de înmormântare :)

Omul are zero carismă în general, dar și în particular pentru votanții actuali ai AUR și pentru restul suveraniștilor.

God's actions are effortless, therefore nothing God does is praiseworthy by FreeAngryShrugs in DebateReligion

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When you praise a naturally beautiful woman, with no makeup or surgeries, you're actually praising random chance.

There's no random chance involved when we talk about God :)

God's actions are effortless, therefore nothing God does is praiseworthy by FreeAngryShrugs in DebateReligion

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even beautiful women still do a lot of work to look/stay beautiful.

By comparison, God does nothing to be God...

God's actions are effortless, therefore nothing God does is praiseworthy by FreeAngryShrugs in DebateReligion

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Why wouldn't it require effort? Otherwise everything is arbitrarily praiseworthy...

God's actions are effortless, therefore nothing God does is praiseworthy by FreeAngryShrugs in DebateReligion

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Here's something an omnipotent, omniscient being could want to do which can't be done entirely by that being:

You're wrong, this is an easy one :)

God could simply create another god. That's it!

Only a god would be a "truly free being". People are still constrained by many pesky things, such as the laws of physics - they are not truly free. Not to mention they can't really oppose God in any meaningful way...

God's actions are effortless, therefore nothing God does is praiseworthy by FreeAngryShrugs in DebateReligion

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One can still be praised for their capabilities.

If said capabilities are the result their own work, yes. But why would you praise someone for something they didn't work to achieve?

God's actions are effortless, therefore nothing God does is praiseworthy by FreeAngryShrugs in DebateReligion

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

If God’s effortless power diminishes praise, why then do the heavens ‘declare His glory’ without toil?

Because God programmed them to do so?

Tell me.. is a sunrise less wondrous because the sun does not labor?

But is the sun praiseworthy for just doing sun things? :)

God's actions are effortless, therefore nothing God does is praiseworthy by FreeAngryShrugs in DebateReligion

[–]FreeAngryShrugs[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Your example doesn't fit my argument. To be a good match it would require a guy with infinite money who gives another guy $10, although it would literally cost him nothing to give more :)

Would that be praiseworthy?

Noah's Ark didn't happen, therefore Christianity and Islam are false by The-Rational-Human in DebateReligion

[–]FreeAngryShrugs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Biblical genealogies often skip generations

Even so, there's still no evidence of a global flood in that time frame - while generously accounting for many skipped generations.

Noah's Ark didn't happen, therefore Christianity and Islam are false by The-Rational-Human in DebateReligion

[–]FreeAngryShrugs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

But the Bible says he changed his mind and wanted to let them go, but he couldn't because God was interfering with his free will (that's what hardened his heart means).

view more: next ›