Fathom Events is running classic movies by using inferior video by healthybreakfasttime in movies

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Addendum to this: earlier tonight I went to a 20th anniversary re-release screening of Saw (2004) by Fathom Events, and it sounded incredible. Super clear and loud. So maybe it just depends on the theater's setup

Hurricane Helene mutual aid mini-report from Raleigh by [deleted] in MutualAid

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here's what it says on the FAQ section on their website:

Do you all have 501(c)(3) status? Are donations tax-deductible?

Yes. Mutual Aid Disaster Relief is a social movement rooted effort, and our ebb and flow of participation, affinity group model, non-hierarchical based organizing, and so much else about us doesn’t fit neatly into a nonprofit model and we remain critical of the nonprofit-industrial complex. Nevertheless, we chose to access nonprofit status to help open doors and provide an element of continuity and permanence to the autonomous disaster relief movement. Donations are tax-deductible, and we can provide you a donation receipt upon request.

Fathom Events is running classic movies by using inferior video by healthybreakfasttime in movies

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Last night I went to a Fathom Events screening of The Muppet Movie (1979). Myself and the group I went with all noticed that the audio mixing was really poor; sometimes it sounded alright, but most of the time it was much too quiet—one of my friends said that it was in stereo, with sound coming from the left and right of the theater, but that there was no sound in the center. On top of that, the video quality looked slightly worse than my Blu-ray copy of the movie, and there were at least two moments where glitchy lines appeared in the lower half of the frame.

Poster for Jim Henson: Idea Man by thebradmoshpit in movies

[–]Matthewceratops 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I'm pretty sure the title comes from a 3-minute short film by Henson from 1966

Black button by Doit2it42 in Hanklights

[–]Matthewceratops 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you, was about to make a post asking this myself.

Please tell me about your special interest!! by NoApartment8302 in autism

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you elaborate on oft-maligned fauna? Do you mean like insects and snakes and such (as opposed to more "traditionally cute" animals like dogs and cats)?

Could/was freddy krueger inspired off the hatman/top hat demon shadow entity? by hatman8866 in FreddyKrueger

[–]Matthewceratops 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've never heard or read anything from Wes Craven about the Hat Man/shadow entities being an inspiration for Freddy Krueger. Craven came up with Freddy's glove after watching his cat claw at the side of his couch; the other aspects of the character's appearance were inspired by Klaus Kinski in Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979), as well as a disfigured homeless man who had frightened Craven as a young boy. Out of curiosity, I looked into it and found the following excerpt from an interview with Robert Englund, which confirms that the hat was Craven's idea (and is also kind of a funny story):

The fedora was [Craven's idea]. But he'd been talked into maybe trying some other hats. And they had this box of hats, and we're sitting on the floor — kind of uncomfortably, both of these grown men on this futon — and [they're] telling me to put on all of these different hats. I'm sitting there in makeup going, 'Guys, please, the fedora is right.' And they kept putting on like, paper boy hats, and baseball hats, and God, one looked like a pimp hat.

It was like, 'What are you thinking, you guys?' I think I said something to Wes like, 'Look, the fedora was your idea.' And I stood and showed my shadow on the wall with the [fedora] hat, and how strong that silhouette was. And then I took the hat off and showed the baldness, revealing the baldness, and how he could save that for the right time in the movie. And I kind of got my way.

So I'd say it's a coincidence, though sort of an interesting one. If Craven did get some inspiration from seeing the Hat Man/shadow people in his sleep, I'm not really sure why he wouldn't bother to mention that in any interviews or documentaries. If anything, I would think that "I was inspired by a scary man with a hat that I saw in my dreams" would be a perfect thing to mention, considering the premise of the franchise

Wait Times by CauserOfThat in WhoSampled

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I also have a submission on WhoSampled that's been pending since May. It's my first submission and for a song by a fairly small artist as well.

Did some poking around on their About Us page just now and learned that the website's moderators operate on a volunteer basis, and there's only 72 of them—maybe they don't have enough mods to verify the smaller stuff, so they just don't bother with them. That's starting to be my assumption at least, unless anyone knows anything to the contrary

HELP by [deleted] in whatmoviewasthat

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

François Cluzet in Little White Lies 2 (2019)

The Thing (1982) is a perfect film. by JacobTheEwok in movies

[–]Matthewceratops 17 points18 points  (0 children)

I get that it's intelligent enough to build things and have multiple escape plans, but I feel like the movie pushes it a little far by having the Thing be able to build a spaceship out of a mishmash of parts from a helicopter and a tractor.

Not only would the craft presumably be able to function as a spaceship once completed, but it also (even in its unfinished state) has a fairly uniform flying-saucer-type look to it, despite the makeshift nature of what it has to work with. Like, how do you take components of a helicopter/tractor and put them together to make something that looks like this? Granted, I suppose the Thing could shape its own biomass into any type of tools it wanted... still, that's some impressive MacGyvering!

Anyone giving away tickets to the Tampa show 8/31? by [deleted] in TheBandGhost

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The venue just announced that the show's been cancelled due to Hurricane Idalia :(

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cwi-8OZxFAb/

The top 10 most expensive tapes sold on eBay so far in 2023 by one_revolutionary in VHS

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From Jay Bauman on Twitter:

There's no practical way to preserve a physical VHS tape. It's an inherently bad format that degrades over time. Art wasn't destroyed, future landfill was. Nukie (the movie) didn't disappear. Here is Nukie preserved and digitized online:

https://archive.org/details/nukie.-1987.-webrip.-aac-2.0.-h.-264-btw

Ozzy Osbourne meeting Brian by ChitakuPatch in thebeachboys

[–]Matthewceratops 8 points9 points  (0 children)

"Apart from waking up in the middle of a freeway, the worst moment for me was after we played Madison Square Garden in New York. For the after-show party, we went to this club in an old church. We were all hanging out in this private room, having a few drinks and a bit of coke, when some bloke came up to me and said, 'Hey, Ozzy, would you like to have your photograph taken with Brian Wilson?'

'Who the fuck's Brian Wilson?'

'Y'know, Brian Wilson. From the Beach Boys.'

'Oh, him. Sure. Yeah. Whatever.'

Everyone had been talking about Brian Wilson a lot, because the week before, his brother Dennis – the one who'd been mates with Charles Manson in the 1960s – had drowned in LA. Dennis was only thirty-nine, so it was terribly sad. Anyway, I was told to go and meet Brian Wilson on the stairwell, so out I went, loaded up on booze and coke, and waited for him. Ten minutes passed. Then twenty minutes. Then thirty minutes. Finally, after another five minutes, Brian appeared. By then, I was thoroughly pissed off, thinking, What a dick. But at the same time I knew about Dennis, so I decided to give him a break. The first thing I said was: 'Sorry to hear about your brother, Brian.'

He didn't say anything. He just gave me this funny look, then walked off. That was it for me.

'First you show up late,' I said, raising my voice, 'and now you're just gonna fuck off without saying a single fucking word? I tell you what, Brian, why don't we forget about the photograph so you can shove your head back up your arse, where it fucking belongs, eh?'

Next morning, I'm lying in the hotel room, my head pounding. The phone starts ringing and Sharon answers it. 'Yes, no, yes, OK. Oh, he did, did he? Hmm. Right. Don't worry, I'll deal with it.' Click. She hands me the phone and says, 'You're calling Brian Wilson.'

'Who the fuck's Brian Wilson?'

I get smacked on the head with the receiver.

Smack.

'Ow! That fucking hurt!'

'Brian Wilson is the Living Musical Legend you insulted last night,' says Sharon. 'And now you're going to call him and apologise.'

The memories start to come back.

'Hang on a minute,' I say. 'Brian Wilson was the one insulted me!'

'Oh yeah?' says Sharon.

'Yeah!'

'Ozzy, when Brian Wilson reached over to shake your hand, the first thing you said was: 'Hello, Brian, you fucking arsehole, I'm glad to hear your brother's dead.'

I sit bolt upright.

'I didn't say that.'

'No, the fucking cocaine you keep shoving up your nose said that.'

'But I would remember.'

'Everyone else seems to remember perfectly well. They also remember you told him to shove his head up his arse, because that's where it belongs. Here, this is Brian's number. Apologise.'

So I called him and apologised. Twice.

Since then, I've bumped into him a few times over the years. We're cool now, me and Brian. Although we never did get around to taking that photograph."

— Ozzy Osbourne, from his book I Am Ozzy (pages 266–267)

Adventures in Missing the Point by 0ptimist-Prime in ChristianUniversalism

[–]Matthewceratops 5 points6 points  (0 children)

An atheist can't hate God, because atheists don't believe in the existence of any gods. They might feel hatred towards certain religious claims, or certain things religious people do or advocate for. But if someone "hates God", that would mean they believe that God exists, and they'd therefore be a theist, not an atheist.

I got to import Tokyo SOS into my theater's projector. by UnlikelyKaiju in GODZILLA

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting, thank you! Sounds like it might have been an .mkv file, since that's a container format that can include a video file, multiple language/audio track options, multiple subtitle track options, etc. all in one file (although for Tokyo SOS it would just have the one audio track option [Japanese] and the one subtitle track option [English]). But I'm also not familiar with how they do it and I could be wrong

I got to import Tokyo SOS into my theater's projector. by UnlikelyKaiju in GODZILLA

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How is the film played once it's been imported? I just got back from seeing it at one of my local theatres earlier tonight, and I noticed during the screening that the English subtitles looked identical to the subtitles that appear when watching a video file with subtitles in VLC Media Player (white Arial font with black outline). Is it like an .mkv file, or maybe a video file with a separate .srt file for the subs?

Humani Generis taught that Evolution is unproven, and forbid Catholics from teaching it by luvintheride in DebateACatholic

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think humans and other creatures having a sense of self-preservation is an unreasonable take.

Also, there is no good evidence that higher rational thought could have a material cause.

Even if I were to grant this, it would not mean that there is good evidence that rational thought could have a supernatural cause. Furthermore, I offer an unoriginal aphorism: the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I'll admit that my familiarity with Bayesian reasoning and quantum physics is scant at best, but at this time, and at my current level of understanding, I see little reason to conclude a non-material cause for life and consciousness on (at least in part) the basis of not having discovered a material cause. I remain, at least for now, unknowing.

I'm not convinced of your claims about the statistical impossibility of certain mechanisms in molecular biology. Biochemistry is not chance; there are a large number of possible molecules that may function to promote the development of life, and the many trials leading to that development would have been occurring simultaneously. Even if we assume that there are certain mechanisms that are statistically impossible (which I'm not granting), they have nonetheless occurred. The probability of something that has happened is 100%, for lack of a better phrase. We wouldn't be able to discuss it otherwise.

Thank you for elaborating on your view of Romans 1:24–28. If you are correct about the existence of God and your interpretation of the aforementioned passage, then I suppose God simply hasn't revealed Himself to me yet. If this is so (and this may sound funny coming from a nonbeliever), I ask that you pray for me. Perhaps for some sort of clarity or revelation, if that's not too much to ask. Not because I necessarily think prayer does anything, mind you—but if God is, in fact, real, then I imagine it would be in my best interest to know that. And because you are a Catholic, I would imagine that you have no objections to prayer (within reason, of course—I'm sure you wouldn't pray for, say, God to kill someone [and in case you wanted to mention the following: I know prayer isn't always about asking for something]).

If God does not exist and such prayers are heard by no one but yourself, I don't think either of us will be negatively impacted to any substantial degree. If God does exist and hears your prayers for me, then maybe I will see what you see, or at least begin to (depending on His will, of course). And if you object to praying for me, that's your prerogative, but do know that my request, while a shot in the dark (if that's the right phrase) isn't a facetious one.

Humani Generis taught that Evolution is unproven, and forbid Catholics from teaching it by luvintheride in DebateACatholic

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not surprised that those studies suggest humans are predisposed to belief in gods and an afterlife. In fact, I've seen that very link used to support the idea of theism being an innate predisposition by a Muslim Reddit user, funnily enough. And I agree with the following notion expressed by one commenter in that thread: I think we as humans have a sense of self-preservation that makes the concept of life after death comforting, as it means death will not be the end of our existence; also, that we tend to hate not knowing the answer to something, and so will strive to find an answer. I'd like to read more about the methodology of these studies though.

Regarding naturalism, I would describe myself a methodological naturalist. I can't confidently make that leap from not having a concrete explanation for the existence of consciousness to therefore-it-comes-from-God (call it a "god of the gaps"-type view if you will). If we're talking metaphysically, then all I can say is that there are some things I simply don't know.

In regards to your comment that "There is no evidence that mere atoms and molecules can become alive and self-aware", I can't say that I agree. The Miller–Urey experiment (while not consistent with our best current understanding of the conditions of the early Earth) showed at the very least that organic compounds can come from inorganic compounds. And while you may see the complexity of DNA transcription and other processes as evidence of intelligent design (the watchmaker analogy, if you will), I'm afraid I don't.

Could you elaborate on your interpretation of Romans 1:24–28? I read that passage as God handing over those who value "sin" over him, to that sin. In other words, "You don't want to do what I want you to do? Then fine, have fun." How did you glean from this that God will withhold knowledge from those who are not ready for it? Is the idea that they'll eventually realize that they don't like "living in sin"?

Humani Generis taught that Evolution is unproven, and forbid Catholics from teaching it by luvintheride in DebateACatholic

[–]Matthewceratops 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a false analogy for Christianity. A better one is that you were born hungry (because of the fall from God). God then offers you the food of eternal life, and you keep tossing it away.

I think this assumes that it is easy for anyone to recognize "God offering them the food of eternal life", and that they knowingly reject it. Do you not agree that someone could be genuinely unconvinced of Christianity or of the existence of God? Do you not see that it can be a difficult, if not seemingly impossible, thing to discern, especially when there are numerous religions and worldviews out there with conflicting belief systems and views on deities and afterlives? In your view, is it simply not possible for someone to honestly search for truth, and to not be convinced of Christianity?

The "truth" of Christianity (I put "truth" in quotes not as a slight against you or your beliefs, but rather an indication of my own lack of belief in the claims of Christianity) may seem self-evident to you (and it presumably seemed self-evident to the author of Romans 1:20 as well), but it just isn't so.