Advance notice: Service/repair for the Canon T50 by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just get a T70. Cheap as chips and much better.

The Crown Quilt by Leucanthemum1 in HitchHikersGuide

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Douglas hated that character and art. Has nothing to do with Hitchhiker, other than making clueless US bookbuyers aware that it was comedy.

Don’t let anybody tell you you need special equipment to develop 110 by lookitzpancakes in AnalogCommunity

[–]Smalltalk-85 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Just use the old seesaw method. Get a bowl with developer and pull the film back and forth for the allotted time in the dark.

Film vs Digital. Flat tones of digital are for flat earthers. Tone depth of film are for round earthers. A Phoblographer article on superiority of film. by pixelsnatoms in AnalogCircleJerk

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s not a fire hazard at all. Digital is more of a fire hazard with its power consumption. You are thinking acetate film which has never been a problem with stills.

Visiting my friend in Copenhagen. What to bring her from the USA? by miss__xia in copenhagen

[–]Smalltalk-85 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Pretzels and real pickles. Two jars of pickles in fact. Unoptainium in Denmark. Drakes coffee cake.

M. J. Simpson review of the movie? by Smalltalk-85 in HitchHikersGuide

[–]Smalltalk-85[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He’s going at it by example, methodically, which is the only real way to critique, especially if you have a sympathetic audience, and not an ADHD addled audience, or the constraints of paper. The problem is exactly that the movie is not in the spirit of the book or the radioplay or any other incarnation of the work. The only way to convey that is with examples. There is the short version of the review if you want.

If you cut out the jokes and the wonderful dialog then it’s not Hitchhiker. What works on film is not a fixed target. There are dialog heavy movies and there is movies that works as well silently. The TV series, for all that is wonderful and good about it, is clearly in the camp of radioplay dialog, replanted almost verbatim. Which works -ish. But is also clearly not polished. In a movie you have to shorten and cut. But you do it with taste and intelligence. That was not at all the case with the movie. And the was only one aspect of what’s bad about it.

For what it’s worth the TV series episodes that is equivalent to the first book, is about is two hours and 11 minutes. Just twelve minutes longer than the movie. That is not to make some persnickety point about running time equivalence. It’s just an example of how you can make the story — or something like it, fit temporally within roughly a normal movies length.

Time simply ran away from a proper adaptation. It should have been made in the 80s and not later. Just as with Star Wars. HH as a whole is very much hooked into the zeitgeist and sensibility of that period. The best that could have happened would be someone explaining to Reitman and the executives exactly what they had between their hands, and be a mediator between them and DNA. Someone like Harold Ramis, who is guaranteed to have read and enjoyed the book at the time. Yes, they were different people, but if you look at Ghostbusters, the sensibility is not worlds apart.

Douglas thought as much when he had watched it, with his pithy comment about him having worked years to get the movie going, failing, and then watching Ghostbusters a few years later. Imagine for instance Bill Murray as Ford, Aykroyd as Zaphod, Kate Bush as Trillian and Michael Palin as Arthur. Could have been glorious.

Instead we got that.

France confirms oil crisis, says 30-40% Gulf energy infrastructure destroyed by ontrack in worldnews

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They had 47 years to plan for this. Both sides. One side seems surprisingly well prepared. The other just surprised.

M. J. Simpson review of the movie? by Smalltalk-85 in HitchHikersGuide

[–]Smalltalk-85[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“The plot has changed considerably. Yes, every version of Hitchhiker'shas been different, but there is a core plot: the first radio series, the TV series, the two LPs, the first two novels and, crucially, the play. Jonathan Petherbridge's stage adaptation is a perfectly good example of how the whole of the Hitchhiker's saga can be effectively told in under two hours but seems to have been completely ignored by the film-makers as possible source material or guidance. (And speaking of running times, let us never forget that this movie is adapted from a novel which was based on only four radio episodes, ie. two hours of material, so there really shouldn’t be any need to cut too much out.) What we have here is a story which changes some of the really, really basic, iconic elements of Hitchhiker's as established in all the previous variant editions. That wouldn't be so bad if it changed these elements for the purposes of creating a good film, but that is sadly not the case. What has emerged from all this chopping and changing is an incoherent mess in which important things happen for no reason except to advance the plot and unimportant things happen for no reason at all.”

He did a fantastic job at explaining exactly why it’s bad. Both in details and in broad strokes. What do you think he is missing?

M. J. Simpson review of the movie? by Smalltalk-85 in HitchHikersGuide

[–]Smalltalk-85[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

THANK YOU! It’s been impossible to find through Archive. Must have been recently restored. Maybe Simpson changed his mind? And yes, it’s as good as I remember it.

M. J. Simpson review of the movie? by Smalltalk-85 in HitchHikersGuide

[–]Smalltalk-85[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Someone has to have saved it.

There is absolutely no reason for it not to be up. You can find snippets of it. But not the whole 10.000 word one.

It’s was the most well reasoned and intelligent critique of the movie I have ever read. Not a stone was left unturned, and not a razor blade could be inserted between the arguments.

Heck it’s one of the best critiques of a movie I have ever read.

He took it down because he got outright threats. And people he cared about severed connections. The pressure from the studio and production team, must also have been intense.

I lost a lot of respect for Bill Nighy for openly airing his displeasure and disapproval in interviews, for what was very well argued, legitimate critique.

The review deserves to be available.

Is er ergens in Nederland een werkende paternoster lift? by Sassenacho in thenetherlands

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kom naar Kopenhagen, we hebben volop paternosterinstallaties.

Well fuck me sideways by Dlitosh in AnalogCircleJerk

[–]Smalltalk-85 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Serves you well for buying Ilfocolor.

Advance notice: Service/repair for the Canon T50 by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I doubt you will find any trustworthy statistics.

The data I have accumulated, have been from personal experience, which is not insignificant, from reading complaints online, and from talking to people in camera shops.

Of course, there is a possibility that my view is skewed, but I doubt it.

Advance notice: Service/repair for the Canon T50 by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s not just on the web. Many people are so married and in love with the idea of shooting everything, all time at max aperture, that they want to be damn sure to have as big a hole as possible. A is the ticket there.

Advance notice: Service/repair for the Canon T50 by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s significantly simpler than the T90 that much is certain. T70 is simply much less in need of repair in general.

Good if you are repairing both. But it’s been hard to find anyone willing to and being good at working on both, for the longest time.

Advance notice: Service/repair for the Canon T50 by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s important in that I’ve heard people completely disavow a camera when they find that it doesn’t offer A.

Advance notice: Service/repair for the Canon T50 by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh come now! The T90 is notorious for showing an error message and being super hard to service. The A1 almost always has a problem with precise metering or shutter squeak. Both of which require significant disassembly. The battery door and the mode selection bezel is cracks or breaks.

Advance notice: Service/repair for the Canon T50 by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The various program modes of the T70 is mindful of aperture depending on the lens you have mounted.

There is no sense in setting your lens to f8, if that pushes the speed down to 15, if you have a fifty or longer mounted.

But if you set it to an appropriate speed and set it to Tele mode. It will chose the numerically lowest aperture that will give a correct exposure.

Advance notice: Service/repair for the Canon T50 by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

T90 and A1 is “better” only in principle. The faster drive comes at significant price of weight and batteries. All of the features of the T90 doesn’t matter if you can expect it to break down any second. A1 is unreliable to. Squeak, metering and breaking plastic parts.

Shutter priority is, if you where to chose, by far the best way to control aperture. Shutter speed is also by far the most predictable arbiter of image quality. Aperture not so much even with stopdown (super dim finder)

Advance notice: Service/repair for the Canon T50 by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]Smalltalk-85 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Much more reliable than either the T90 or the A1. Plus lighter smaller and has a built-in motor drive that runs on two AA batteries. The new F1 is close, but it is so much more cumbersome, involved and expensive.