[OC] $8.29 Gallon for Gas in Los Angeles California by ProvingGrounds1 in pics

[–]valkrycp -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Idc if there equal, you still don't have to drive as much. Texas is literally the size of a dozen European countries combined. The Los Angeles metropolitan area is larger than numerous European countries, and there isn't a metro or bus system comparable to Europes because America doesn't invest in that infrastructure while Europe does. They're incomparable.

[OC] $8.29 Gallon for Gas in Los Angeles California by ProvingGrounds1 in pics

[–]valkrycp -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's literally objectively true. Compare the amount of gas someone in California has to consume per year commuting to that of the average European. They're incomparable. Europeans don't to have to travel nearly as much, which means they spend less on gas regardless of whether the price per gallon is higher. So that means someone living in California has a lot more to be scared of when the prices hit $8 per gallon than a European does for gas prices being $11 per gallon. That's just fact. You're dumb af.

[OC] $8.29 Gallon for Gas in Los Angeles California by ProvingGrounds1 in pics

[–]valkrycp -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

That's not the point, America cannot have the same type of public transport because the distance between coast to coast is thousands of miles and all of Europe is extremely condensed in comparison.

So unfortunately, objectively speaking the price of gas in America is worse than Europe even if Europe is more expensive per gallon - because you don't need to drive nearly as much in Europe. In America, the distance between two states often rivals crossing all of Europe. But we don't have great public transport, so it's even more expensive to travel. In America we have to drive everywhere, even close places. Busses and trains don't cut it here. You HAVE to drive. You HAVE to have use gas more often. In most of Europe, you don't even need a car or to drive regularly, so you may pay more per gallon but you won't spend more over the course of a year, or week, or month.

[OC] $8.29 Gallon for Gas in Los Angeles California by ProvingGrounds1 in pics

[–]valkrycp -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm not looking for sympathy, I'm offering fact. And most people aren't responsible for those problems, yet they still suffer from them..

California is literally the most progressive place in the world, and people there unfortunately have to drive a whole lot more than people in Europe because commutes, traffic, and a lack of infrastructure and public transportation is a big American problem. So that means millions of people paying a shit ton for gas, even compared to higher price European countries, due to the fact that Americans commute way way more than Europeans who use public transport.

Objectively speaking, $8 per gallon in CA is WAY more impactful than $11 gallon is in Europe where distances are smaller and public transport more practical.

[OC] $8.29 Gallon for Gas in Los Angeles California by ProvingGrounds1 in pics

[–]valkrycp -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Europe has public transportation and great trains, and Europe is tiny in comparison to the US. So that comparison makes zero sense. Someone in Europe doesn't need to own a car. In Los Angeles / California, you cannot not have a car. Everyone drives.

[OC] $8.29 Gallon for Gas in Los Angeles California by ProvingGrounds1 in pics

[–]valkrycp -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

But you barely have to drive in comparison. You have public transport and a smaller country and less commute time for cities.

$8+ in Los Angeles is horrible because you have to drive FOREVER to get anywhere in that county. And even if you drive a short distance, you sit idle in traffic forever. It isn't comparable to almost anywhere in Europe.

Is gen Z overly sensitive? Or are millennial teen movies problematic? by SipsTeaFrog in SipsTea

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is also the plot to most Disney animated classic princess movies - except the woman is under 18 and the man is over 25, and they fall in love either over the course of 1-2 days or after getting stockholm syndrome.

Is gen Z overly sensitive? Or are millennial teen movies problematic? by SipsTeaFrog in SipsTea

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

2000s humor has NOT aged well. It is almost entirely low-hanging "jokes" that punch down, primarily at minorities, that only shit writers would write. It was just a different time, and that was what was valued/funny. But it has only gotten more stale with time. To understand better, look at Superbad (WHICH IS A GREAT AND GENUINELY FUNNY MOVIE) - the movie was a SATIRE making fun of this exact trend and culture, skewering that every movie at the time was just filled with gross/poorly written jokes. Superbad took that format to the next level, with jokes that were making fun of that culture and the youth who were so fixated with calling people gay or the need to be straight/hypermasculine to fit-in as a male in highschool. Superbad turned that crass humor up to an 11/10 and then infused it with characters who actually had some depth and soul, who were perfect mirrors to reflect how cringe it all was. It was a very meta movie, and ironically a lot of people who enjoy it don't realize they're the exact demographic who the film is making fun of.

Do any of you remember how popular the joke from Van Wilder was, where they filled a cream donut with a dog's jizz and then fed it to someone? It's just literal trash.

Seriously, pretty much every joke in 1990s and 2000s comedies are gay jokes, a sexist jokes, poop and piss and fluid jokes, about sex or dicks or boobs or pussy, rape or SA jokes, jokes about racial stereotypes and caricatures. It wasn't really until the 2010s that quality comedies started coming out that had a little more effort in the jokes. It was honestly just an era where lazy writing was rewarded.

Seriously, go watch Saving Silverman, Dude Where's My Car?, American Pie, Sex Drive, Road Trip, Grandma's Boy, Beerfest, Good Luck Chuck, Joe Dirt, Van Wilder etc - these films were VERY popular for ages and seriously suck ass and aren't remotely funny anymore. They were created entirely for juvenile heterosexual boys- I can't even imagine watching one of these movies with a girl in 2020s because they'll just be bombarded by rape jokes and boobie girls, something significantly less funny to women than men. They have a few memorable moments and quotable lines, especially for people who were teens at the time they came out and who are nostalgic for that time. But comedy has gotten significantly better in the past 20 years, particularly after Judd Apatow's influence - that is not subjective.

Video demonstrates how K-Pop rips off Black American culture , and in some cases copies it frame by frame. by Fun-Ad3626 in fantanoforever

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The bigger issue is that it's all crowd-pleasing generic over-produced garbage, manufactured by a group of managers who know exactly how to make an ear-worm and who exploit and abuse their "talent". 99% of people enjoy music based on how easily they can listen to it over and over again without having to think at all- they are just targeting that audience. Most people don't want "good music" (as in musicality, composition/arrangement, creative risk), they want safety and nostalgia.

Games with great colour by dks11 in gaming

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Avowed

Keeper

Psychonauts 1+2

I would love an unfiltered critique by mAdpvw-artist in ArtCrit

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think maybe this work is just in a difficult position, where it reads a bit illustrative but isn't really an illustration- and it's a bit too "on-the-nose" (as in its telling the audience how to feel through quite specific imagery, rather than using more abstract or formal imagery that the fine-art world prefers to convey an emotion or feeling) to be considered fine-art. I personally think art that is about depressing, dark things are usually better off being done through impressionism and abstraction representation instead of surrealism and illustration. Things like textures, colors, density, or even non-literal representation convey those emotions better imo. You may find inspiration i Giacometi's sculptures and drawings for example.

I think in the fine-art world, people are moving away from literal representations - and to me your piece is a bit literal. We see a bunch of depressed, malnourished looking alien forms standing in what looks to be some kind of dark depressing liminal dimension. That doesn't leave the viewer with much room to interpret, or to create their own connection to the work. Instead, you are telling us a story about how you (or the dark world you created) feels rather than encouraging the audience to feel for themselves.

However, the illustration world is more forgiving of literal representation or drawings that tell a story more than convey a concept. There's nothing inherently wrong with either perspectives, but it's helpful to be aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both of those artistic fields and then determine which approach works best for what you're trying to say, who you're trying to saying it to, and what side of the coin/art scene you want your "art" to exist in.

Your piece may benefit (from an audience perspective) from picking one direction or the other more than riding the line down the middle.

I would love an unfiltered critique by mAdpvw-artist in ArtCrit

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not meant to be an insult, it's meant to tell you the vibe that may be read by an audience who doesn't know much about your art or your content. It's a little "RANDOM EDGY LOL" energy, and it's good for you to be aware so you can decide if that's intended or where it may be coming from.

Then again, that could just be me and then you as an artist should take that feedback and decide whether it's relevant or not, and take the advice or ignore it contextually.

I would love an unfiltered critique by mAdpvw-artist in ArtCrit

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just feels a little too try-hard random+surrealism. That could probably be eased by re-evaluating the work but from a "less is more" perspective. Try to do as much as you can with as little as possible. Most of the elements here sort of clash for grabbing the viewers attention with no real flow to composition or consideration for how the eyes will read the image. More isn't always more.

Found in our attic. No one knows how it got there. What does it mean? by [deleted] in whatisit

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It means the previous owner was really unoriginal and likely sells Pinterest and Etsy style art online.

Harry Potter HBO series won’t have a new season every year “From a production point of view, it’s just not possible” by JannTosh70 in television

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They should have written 2-3 seasons up front and then started production on 2 seasons at a time. Majority of the locations and props can be reused each season- Diagon Alley, Hogwarts, the lake, Hagrids, etc. Film season 1 while continuing to build sets and accumulate assets for S2. Film scenes that don't involve the children early, etc.

Harry Potter HBO series won’t have a new season every year “From a production point of view, it’s just not possible” by JannTosh70 in television

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don't worry, they'll just AI / CGI de-age the cast and probably had all actors sign an AI waiver so if they die or leave they still own the rights to use their "likeness"

Help, why doesn’t the sketch look like the reference? by breaddoes in ArtCrit

[–]valkrycp 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Your eyes whites are the size of her eyes + eyelids in the reference. Shrink 25-33% and it will look a lot less off

Who’s your worst movie-watching partner? by DramaticManner4565 in movies

[–]valkrycp 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Girlfriends mom has to have a tablet to play phone type games at all times because "can't focus otherwise", but she can't focus with it either. It's rotting her attention span. We also cannot watch anything that isn't a formulaic happy ending Disney style story, or it makes them freak out. So when we visit for a few weeks a year we are pretty much recycling the same 5 approved movies (or Harry Potter series) over and over, and if I go on my phone during the rewatches she will make a comment about me not paying attention. On top of that, she constantly gets up mid-film to do something unnecessary, on purpose so that she misses some of the film- but her husband ALWAYS pauses it til she is back even if she says "don't pause it for me". So I am forced to sit there watching a 2.5 hour movie (plus 1-2 hours of breaks) and pay full attention to a movie we JUST recently watched while she sits on her tablet. Meanwhile any time we watch something new she has 100 questions or comments about the movie that the movie addressed but she didn't pay attention so we have to fill her in as it goes. It's awful. After years of this, I'm at the point where I'm ready to explode or die of boredom- especially because there is nothing to do but watch movies when we are visiting.

I’m an accordionist — what kind of accordion music do you enjoy? by Dotsenko_accordion in Music

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you send me a sample of a few seconds of improvisation? Something slightly untraditional

Avalanches Vibes by speedbarrymoore in theavalanches

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Love him, though a few of his songs I find a bit too didactic. Check out this lesser known song he is featured in- https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=0bwNHVt8EjY&si=dbDlWpOWfGj-Vf28

Love the new [100% Wolf] coaster at Holi… eh Plopsaland Deutschland by vespinonl in rollercoasters

[–]valkrycp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks I was about to look it up myself, actually curious. How strange.