[HN Gopher] Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sne...
___________________________________________________________________
Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes
Author : codenberg
Score : 268 points
Date : 2022-03-22 11:05 UTC (11 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (journal-doi.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (journal-doi.org)
| V__ wrote:
| > Editor's Note: The claims in this paper have not been verified
| because the researchers have refused to yield their full dataset
| and methodology, citing "intellectual property rights," "the
| sanctity of the First Amendment," and "the Wright brothers never
| had to show their work." We are publishing their paper here
| because they won't stop mailing hard copies in triplicate to our
| homes and offices.
|
| Love it.
| 0xfeba wrote:
| Also:
|
| > We prefer subtitles over machine-learning-based detection
| because the presence of a cough in subtitles means it was
| prominent enough for a person to write it down. Also our
| postdoctoral fellow was the only one who completed the
| Tensorflow tutorial.
|
| lol
| hiccuphippo wrote:
| In my experience Closed Captions almost always describe
| sounds, specially if they happen offscreen or things like the
| type of background music; Subtitles don't, I assume they
| expect you can hear the sounds.
| JadeNB wrote:
| > Subtitles don't, I assume they expect you can hear the
| sounds.
|
| Many--though not as many as it should be--(English-
| language) movies explicitly include two English-language
| subtitles, "English" and "English SDH", standing for
| "English (subtitled for the deaf and hard-of-hearing)". The
| latter includes subtitling for sounds.
| chockchocschoir wrote:
| Which makes sense, "Closed Captioning" (CC) is different
| than "Subtitles", in that the purpose of CC is to provide
| on-screen text (captions) for deaf/near deaf viewers, while
| subtitles is captions for just dialogue.
| specialist wrote:
| During the apocalypse, I leaned on video for "company"
| while doing chores. I stumbled onto the Descriptive Video
| Service, which I guess is super duper Closed Captions.
|
| I love it. I can half watch the show while fussing without
| missing anything. Even when the show has my complete
| attention, the added detail is kinda great. Not all the
| time, but enough to keep things interesting.
|
| https://help.pbs.org/support/solutions/articles/5000673860-
| a...
| Cd00d wrote:
| I accidentally turned this on at the beginning of Toy
| Story 4. The narration had me convinced that the movie
| was taking place in a future where Andy was in film
| school and we were watching him working through his first
| film based on his childhood toys.
|
| Felt like a fool when I realized it was really super
| caption for the visually impaired.
| mitchdoogle wrote:
| I feel like the terms "subtitles" and "closed captions" are
| interchangeable in this instance
| soneca wrote:
| Also, Closed Captions always describe sounds and lines of
| background dialog (like TV) that I definitely can't hear in
| the sound.
|
| As a non-native English speaker who can hear I often see
| movies and shows with English audio and English closed
| captions, the redundancy helps me. It happens all the time
| that the CC tell things that you just can't hear in the
| movie.
| mcv wrote:
| Subtitles frequently describe entire background
| conversations I can't hear when I'm watching at home. Maybe
| I should turn up the sound to a ridiculous level.
| JadeNB wrote:
| This was taken to a ridiculous extreme in the marvellous
| _The Spanish Prisoner_ , where _the whole point_ at the
| end is that you can 't hear a certain conversation--but
| it's still subtitled!
| [deleted]
| finnh wrote:
| I love that movie. Now I need to re-watch with subtitles!
| Well_Keen wrote:
| > only one who completed the Tensorflow tutorial
|
| Surprised one did, it is a real pain in the arse
| drnonsense42 wrote:
| Would love to see these folks hijack certain conferences :).
| Might be good for "science" in the long run
| willis936 wrote:
| Assuming "science" = pseudoscience: yes but pseudoscience is
| already doing a bit too well these days.
| somat wrote:
| But... The Wright brothers did show their work.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkpQAGQiv4Q
|
| https://www.loc.gov/collections/wilbur-and-orville-wright-pa...
| yellowstuff wrote:
| There was a _lot_ of skepticism that their planes were real,
| even years after they had first flown publicly. Information
| spread more slowly in those days.
|
| https://generalaviationnews.com/2011/05/09/fliers-or-
| liars/#....
| marcosdumay wrote:
| They just took their time, and it became a joke because other
| people were already flying around when they came in public
| saying they were flying first.
|
| Overall, an entirely irrelevant issue.
| skrebbel wrote:
| wow looks like the entire domain https://journal-doi.org/ was
| made just to make this look like a real journal article, love
| the attention to detail.
|
| the only reason i checked was because the layout and typography
| was too pretty for a real journal site :)
|
| <3 pudding.cool
| usehackernews wrote:
| Sitting alone, laughing in a coffee shop while reading this. Good
| start to the morning.
|
| I enjoyed Dune, and believe it should win best picture. Partly
| because I haven't seen the other movies mentioned.
|
| After learning about the coughgeist, I'm more convinced than ever
| they will win. Sound research.
| twic wrote:
| The best bit about this is that the authors registered that
| entire domain purely so the article could have a vaguely
| official-looking URL.
| PennRobotics wrote:
| Going to a wrong URL shows the Github Pages 404. Searching
| Github:
|
| https://github.com/journal-doi/cough
|
| https://github.com/the-pudding/cough
|
| https://github.com/arp242/goatcounter (bonus material)
| [deleted]
| throwawayp0rn wrote:
| grapescheesee wrote:
| Oddly fascinating.
| bitcharmer wrote:
| Like most films directed by Dennis Villeneuve I found Dune to be
| a work of art and visual masterpiece. His recount of how they
| prepared the set and the scene for the Gom Jabar ritual just
| shows how commited he is and how much passion he puts into his
| work. Absolute delight to watch.
|
| https://youtu.be/GoAA0sYkLI0
| [deleted]
| carapace wrote:
| _Dune_ is very _very_ pretty, and there are some good
| performances in it, but over all I found it a terrible movie
| and a bad rendition of the source material. I think it 's so
| visually and aurally overwhelming that folks don't notice how
| lousy it is.
|
| For one thing, most of the characters are elided, they appear
| but they have so few lines and so little consequence that they
| might as well have been left out. Thufir Hawat especially was
| woefully neglected. Piter De Vries? No one even says his name!
| If you haven't read the book you wouldn't know who David
| Dastmalchian is supposed to be.
| sendfoods wrote:
| which other movie(s) by him can you recommend most?
| not_math wrote:
| Incendies is his first movie that got him a nomination at the
| Academy Awards. The budget is smaller than Dune and it's in
| French and Arabic, so the mass appeal isn't there, but it's
| well worth the watch. To quote Denis Villeneuve: "[it's] a
| modern story with a sort of Greek tragedy element".
|
| The movie is filmed in Jordan and Montreal, which have a
| similar feel to Dune, and I would say that he probably took
| inspiration from his Incendies days to make Dune.
|
| The movie is based on a play by Wajdi Mouawad, who now works
| at the very prestigious theatre national de la Colline as the
| director.
| foo_foo_can_do wrote:
| prisoners, incendies
| andy_ppp wrote:
| Bladerunner 2049 is amazing as is Arrival and Sicario.
| jstx1 wrote:
| Bladerunner 2049 is so slow with such a bland uneventful
| story and I don't think that cinematography or visuals are
| enough to compensate for a weak story. I just found the
| whole thing incredibly boring.
|
| To make a parallel between cinematography and special
| effects - I think at this point people are kind of
| dismissive of movies that emphasize special effects and
| there's this old George Lucas quote that "a special effect
| without a story is a pretty boring thing". But swap
| "special effect" for "cinematography/visuals" and suddenly
| movies like Bladerunner 2049 are treated like they are
| masterpieces even though they hardly have any story to
| tell.
| rado wrote:
| It's great. The rift between sentimentality and
| rationality holds the full spectrum of the human
| experience.
| the_gipsy wrote:
| Not everything is a space opera (Lucas' is terrific!).
| 2048 has strong emotions stretched over a weak story.
| 1984's somehow had more story, but also quite slow paced.
|
| Some of my favorite movies almost don't have a story at
| all, neither sfx.
| toyg wrote:
| _> Bladerunner 2049 is so slow with such a bland
| uneventful story_
|
| Well, it follows a similarly slow and relatively
| uneventful story in the original, so that's not really a
| critique. That's not really the point of BladeRunner,
| anyway - the point is the ambience, the worldbuilding,
| and the philosophical questions it raises, which 2049
| provides in good amount. It will never have the same
| cultural impact that the original had, but it is an
| extremely respectful sequel with incredibly beautiful
| cinematography.
| [deleted]
| MikusR wrote:
| By visuals you mean when it's teal or when it's orange?
| sendfoods wrote:
| Sicario is his work?! Didn't know that, but liked it a lot.
| mhh__ wrote:
| Everything he's ever done is excellent, but work backwards
| from Dune.
| Apocalypse_666 wrote:
| Arrival
| morganvachon wrote:
| This is one of the few movies of the last two decades that
| brought me to tears at the reveal towards the end. Once it
| hits you, you'll look back at the entire movie in a
| different mindset and it's emotionally jarring. It also
| helps not having read the source story.
| nindalf wrote:
| Consider editing your comment to not mention anything
| spoiler related. I feel the movie hits different if
| you're not expecting anything.
|
| Arrival is truly a masterpiece though. I won't forget it
| as long as I live.
| rmnclmnt wrote:
| Don't know if you have but may I recommend reading the
| original novel from Ted Chiang named "Story of your
| life"? It's a bit different from the movie but still
| incredibly mind bending.
|
| Also, any novel from the collection "Story of your life
| and others"[1] is worth reading and thinking about. Ted
| Chiang is an exceptional writer.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stories_of_Your_Life_an
| d_Other...
| nindalf wrote:
| Thanks for the recommendation. I bought this book in
| December, will get to it soon.
| morganvachon wrote:
| Too late to edit now unfortunately. I had tried to word
| it so it wasn't spoilery, I guess I failed on that.
| hef19898 wrote:
| David Lynchs version of it is vastly underrated, Villeneuve's
| Dune is so much better so! Really looking forward to part two!
| SeanLuke wrote:
| The Lynch version deserved all the drubbing it received.
| Weirding modules, heart plugs, and rain on Arrakis: trampling
| all over the novel. The exposition by way of overdubbing was
| horrible too.
| usrbinbash wrote:
| > vastly underrated
|
| Sorry but no, it really really isn't.
|
| Just a few highlights:
|
| * Why would soldiers sent to fight on a Desert-Planet wear
| black, vulcanised, full body rubber Hazmat suits?
|
| * What on Earth is a "Wyrding Module" supposed to be?
|
| * What exactly is achieved by charging into battle while
| holding a pug on ones arm?
|
| * It says "Ornithopter" in the books, implying something
| vaguely animal-shaped, not a hovering metal box.
|
| * Why do communication devices in the far future resemble
| telephones from the early 1900s?
|
| * What exactly was the point of bringing the late-stage
| navigator to the meeting in a room-sized spice-tank, when his
| subordinate did all the talking anyway?
| hef19898 wrote:
| just speculating (usually set design isn't accounting for
| anything beyond "looks cool"):
|
| - Hazmat suites can contain climate control, and the Tuareg
| wear dark clothing as well
|
| - Wyrding Module: In Lynch's words: He didn't want Kung-Fu
| on sand dunes
|
| - No idea what you mean, but charging into battle has since
| been proven to be viable tactic by the Avengers, so it has
| to work
|
| - Ornithopter refers to the propulsion, like a bird,
| instead of a simple helicopter; I'd have to watch Lynch's
| Dune so to see how those actually look like in his film;
| Villeneuve nailed them pretty well
|
| - Same reason why the first Enterprise under Archer used
| fancier screens than the ones under Kirk or Picard; IMHO
| Lynch borrowed a lot of his aesthetics from WW1, and the
| Dune universe is surprisingly low tech anyway
|
| - The navigator: A wild guess, I always understood it as a
| way to show the importance of Spice and Arrakis to the
| Guild when they had to send one of their Navigators to talk
| directly to the Emperor instead of using proxies
| andrewflnr wrote:
| Re: charging into battle, I think the focus of the
| question was the pug.
| hef19898 wrote:
| Ok, I take Lynch pug and raise you by a guy carrying a
| shield but no sidearm then. The charging into battoe
| after breaking formation is similar in both cases.
| mhh__ wrote:
| Lynch-dune is mostly good, but Villeneuve's is so much better
| in a beautifully indescribable way that only cinema can
| really do.
|
| Villeneuve has been dreaming of making his Dune since he was
| a boy and it shows. ignoring the visuals, the tone is just so
| much more ominous and alien than Lynch's. One thing that
| really dates old movies versus their modern counterparts (of
| sorts) is the sound design. Dune's sounds are absolutely
| fantastic.
| skywal_l wrote:
| > Dune's sounds are absolutely fantastic.
|
| Really? I can't understand a word they're muttering.
| mhh__ wrote:
| You're either deaf or unlucky. The copy of Dune I have on
| my hard drive sounds fine on headphones, speaker, phone,
| crap TV.
|
| Also sound design != Mixing dialogue.
| technobabbler wrote:
| A lot of theaters have awful mixes that make dialog
| harder to hear. Think there was an article about that
| recently.
| hef19898 wrote:
| Absolutely! Villeneuve caught the Dune-universe as I
| pictured it in my head incredibly well, from visuals over
| story telling to sound. And it showed just how alien and
| dangerous / harsh Arrakis is.
|
| I'm just a tad worried about Feyd-Rautha so, Sting was just
| brilliant in that role!
| mhh__ wrote:
| Arrakis is alien but it's depicted as relatively friendly
| in the dream-sequences. They used sounds of waves
| crashing on beaches, which makes a lot of sense as to the
| Fremen it is their home.
|
| My only gripe is that Arrakis doesn't feel hot enough,
| but I also don't really care.
| ableal wrote:
| The Mongolian Gobi desert seems to top out at 27C -
| https://www.amicusmongolia.com/climate-average-monthly-
| tempe...
|
| (Low of -33C, harsh)
| SeanLuke wrote:
| Sure, but in the novel, Arrakis really _is_ hot. In the
| Appendix, it 's stated that the sand surface reached
| 76.85 Celsius (170.33 F).
| hef19898 wrote:
| Sand surface =/= ambient temperature, with all the
| research that went into Dune, I think Herbert was aware
| of that
| SeanLuke wrote:
| [sigh]. You could have just googled this, but from the
| Appendix:
|
| > He found that in the wide belt contained by the
| 70-degree lines, north and south, temperatures for
| thousands of years hadn't gone outside the 254-332
| degrees (absolute) range
|
| That's -2 F to 137 F in the arctic circle.
|
| > Kynes and his people turned their attention from these
| great relationships and focused now on micro-ecology.
| First, the climate: the sand surface often reached
| temperatures of 344deg to 350deg (absolute). A foot below
| ground it might be 55deg cooler; a foot above ground,
| 25deg cooler.
|
| That's 114 to 125 degrees Fahrenheit for "a foot above
| ground".
|
| So once again, yes, very hot.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| Old Dune is kind of trippy view that happened once and I
| can't imagine it happening ever again, not with that budget
| and quality actors. Its still most approachable of all of
| Lynch's work. I like it a lot for sort of nostalgic feeling
| for the 80s vision of the future like from some pulp
| comics.
|
| New Dune is completely different beast, can't wait till
| second part comes. That universe is rich for other stories,
| tv series etc. which seems to be the direction all major
| studios are moving to.
| mhh__ wrote:
| I think Villeneuve might go more in the trippy direction
| with the next one.
|
| If you compare (say) 2049 and dune you can tell that the
| latter has been made to hold the audiences hand a lot
| (blade runner didn't make it's money back). Now he's sold
| the concept I imagine he'll have more confidence/freedom
| with part 2.
| usrusr wrote:
| There are very different kinds of trippyness though. The
| Lynch version seems quite determined about avoiding that
| cheesy "bunch of swirling colors" brand of trippyness.
| Sequences like that exist, but they aren't the trippy
| bits. The trippy qualities are more between the lines.
| The TV serial... not so much, that one was more "oh, he's
| having a vision, switch on the mood light vfx!". Haven't
| seen the Villeneuve yet, which one would it be?
| bena wrote:
| I think there's a better version of Dune somewhere between
| Lynch and Villeneuve.
|
| Lynch didn't trust the audience enough. The wierding
| modules, the amount of voice-over, the limitations of the
| special effects of the time, etc. Also, the studio didn't
| fully trust the material, forcing Lynch to cram everything
| in one movie. The movie starts off well-ish enough. But
| after Paul and Jessica escape the Harkonnens, we just sort
| of yadda yadda years away and jump to Paul getting ready to
| attack Arrakeen. I think only the last 30 or so minutes is
| after the escape (excluding credits). Could be longer, but
| the jump is jarring. The movie moves at a decent clip
| otherwise. Set up with the emperor whinging about the
| Atreides, the Atreides getting ready to leave, the arrival,
| establishing the Atreides are not the Harkonnens, the coup,
| the escape, the time jump montage, the final attack.
|
| Villeneuve's movie covers up to the escape and that's it.
| Villeneuve's film is 19 minutes longer. So Villeneuve
| basically had the opportunity to expand the beginning of
| the story by about an hour. He's going to be able to cover
| the same ground as the last 30 minutes of the Lynch movie
| with at least 2 hours.
|
| The issue is that Villeneuve kind of wastes his time. We
| see Dr. Yueh. And that's really it. We never get even a
| mention of imperial conditioning or why it's shocking that
| it's Dr. Yueh that betrays the Atreides. Piter is seen, but
| I don't think ever named. We don't meet Feyd at all in the
| movie. We get way more backstory about a bull's head than
| we do any character.
|
| If we had more of Lynch's development and Villeneuve's
| aesthetic, we'd have a near perfect version of the film.
| Fricken wrote:
| Dennis Villeneuve has been watching David Lynch's Dune
| since he was a boy, and it shows. Villeneuve lifted dozens
| of shots directly from Lynch's version, and relied on the
| same key scenes as the 1984 Dune. I started out impressed
| by all the homages to Lynch's Dune, but beyond a certain
| threshold "homage" becomes "ripoff".
|
| In Lynch's the Harkonen's were brutal. In Villeneuve's Dune
| Gurney had to explain to us that they were brutal, because
| no actual brutality made it to screen. Baron Harkonen was
| lower energy than Jeb Bush.
|
| Villeneuve basically just took Lynch's Dune and drained the
| colour out of both the imagery and the performances.
|
| The biggest criticism of Lynch's Dune us that it doesn't
| make any sense, and I still totally lost the plot 2/3 of
| the way through the new Dune as well.
| robocat wrote:
| Why Modern Movies Suck - The Soft Reboot
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyU63LJV3AE
|
| Not entirely relevant, but mentions many of the same
| issues, although presumably there is more about how
| investors drive some of the outcomes.
| Tycho wrote:
| They are based on a book. They adapted the key scenes
| from the book.
|
| Also Lynch's _Dune_ descends into farcical whimsy, it's
| not a good movie, although it has some good costume and
| set design.
| toyg wrote:
| I don't think it's been underrated, in critics' circles, for
| 15-20 years or so by now. Since the tales about its
| production, and the related art, have fully emerged, it has
| been widely re-evaluated - also because Lynch has gone on to
| become a bit of a sacred cow after Twin Peaks and his later
| work.
| thathndude wrote:
| Twin Peaks was one of my Covid binges. So trippy.
| toyg wrote:
| The original series set the bar for thriller tv series
| from then on - both on the good elements (always one more
| secret, one more cliffhanger; living on the edge of
| fantasy) and the bad (making up stuff as they go along;
| disappointing finale; unceremoniously cut).
|
| I have only watched a couple of episodes of series 3 but
| by now I've seen enough Lynch to dread his output,
| narratively speaking.
| thathndude wrote:
| Agreed 100%. Lynch's Dune is his own, unique style, and it's
| solid.
| blindmute wrote:
| Dune is not a good movie though, unfortunately. It's like 1/3
| of a good movie. By any conception of storytelling, it doesn't
| constitute a story. As its own piece of media, without
| knowledge of the book, it doesn't stand as a coherent work.
| Compare it to something like Fellowship of the Ring which could
| be watched alone.
| rado wrote:
| It got progressively bad and by the end the director's touch
| was nowhere to be seen, just rushing to finish the story and
| blasting that overbearing Hans Zimmer score. Then the final
| line "This is only the beginning" came. Meanwhile, "Blade
| Runner", "Arrival", "Prisoners", "Sicario" are all great.
| eganist wrote:
| That's a hot take. What didn't you like about it,
| specifically? Aside from the best score ever made by Hans
| Zimmer?
| tokai wrote:
| It has always weirded me out that Zimmer keeps getting
| jobs. His overly pathetic drone has always been like a
| parody soundtrack. But people plays it straight as if he is
| actually making something that adds to the movies. Dune was
| peak Zimmer so if you like him I guess it makes sense to
| call it his best. But to me it was him making fun of
| himself with a straightface and nobody calls him out on it.
| Tycho wrote:
| The score was actually quite thoughtful, attempting to
| use rhythm and harmony and vocal style that was fitting
| for the universe, ie. very far removed from our current
| styles.
| eganist wrote:
| Please give this a watch with an open mind:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93A1ryc-WW0
|
| I promise it's worth your time. Being honest, I fell in
| love with the score before I even knew it was Zimmer's,
| and once I found out, my first thought was "of course."
|
| To each their own, but if you want an idea of what went
| into the score, that video above is insightful.
| tokai wrote:
| I have seen it. Appreciate you sharing it though. Point
| is I don't buy his angle. To me it wasn't a fresh take on
| sounds of the future. It meshed bad with the movie and
| was a bunch of trite tropes like detached arabic-like
| wails and dry buzzers. Soundcloud is full of amateur
| electronic artists doing it better. But in the end its
| all taste, and I wouldn't call the movie (and soundtrack)
| bad. Just not anything near good. I'm kind of envious of
| you who like it.
| zuminator wrote:
| Would you mind a giving a few links of SoundCloud artists
| doing it better? I love weird atmospheric spacey music
| but it too often sounds derivative.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| While I loved the overall production, for me the choice of
| actors for several of the side characters actually made it
| feel like a more generic Hollywood action movie.
|
| For me it had been better to pick less well-used actors
| than Jason Momoa, Josh Brolin, Javier Bardem etc. Just
| robbed it of some of the mystique I think.
| kevinventullo wrote:
| Totally agree. Casting both Bardem and Brolin was
| particularly rough for me since my mind jumped
| immediately to No Country.
| theshrike79 wrote:
| You need big names if you want big bucks nowadays.
|
| Unless you're a studio onto yourself, there's no way you
| can get $150M+ of funding for movie with only no-names as
| leads.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| Not saying they had to go no-name though, plenty of good
| known actors out there who hasn't been in a bunch of
| blockbuster movies recently etc.
|
| But I get what you're saying. Sad, because it really
| detracted from the movie for me.
| theshrike79 wrote:
| Mid-price movies disappeared when streaming became a
| thing.
|
| We either get low-budget stuff (10-20 million), mostly
| horror. Or movies that are huge gigantic blockbusters
| that MUST succeed.
|
| The mid-price stuff is gone. The ones that have enough
| budget to make a director's vision come true, but not so
| much that it brings in people from The Company suggesting
| their pet things to be added.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| I'm sure they're out there, but it just boggles my mind
| that someone would decide to go watch Dune or not based
| on say Jason Momoa having a few minutes on screen.
| rado wrote:
| Jason Momoa was 100% Jason Momoa. His (lack of)
| characterisation was so bad I stared at his scenes in
| disbelief.
| bena wrote:
| To be fair, Patrick Stewart was 100% Patrick Stewart when
| he played the role.
| jhbadger wrote:
| Although that's really only recognizable in hindsight. In
| 1984 Stewart was still a fairly obscure character actor
| who had minor parts in BBC shows like _I, Claudius_.
| rado wrote:
| The first half was about world building. It was atmospheric
| and interesting, however elusive. Right in the middle when
| the s** hit the fan, the film started sinking in the
| quicksand of plotting and by the end the director was MIA.
| The second half was so Hollywood I felt it was written by
| Kathleen Kennedy.
| theshrike79 wrote:
| "the end the director's touch was nowhere to be seen"
|
| ...did we see the same movie? It's a Villeneuve piece through
| and through.
| technobabbler wrote:
| It was really beautiful but the pacing was horrible for modern
| attention spams. I loved the movie, but only because I read way
| too many of the books and played all the games and watched
| every Dune before it. My partner had no idea what was going on
| and fell asleep 1/3 of the way through... even though she is
| normally a movie completionist.
|
| That dude had a certain style, cinematic intellectualism with
| beautiful cinematography. It's definitely not for everyone.
| Dune is that unique blend of world building, political
| intrigue, religious exploration, coming of age, and a tiny bit
| of action. Hard to get all of that in one movie, and the
| trailers made it seem more Star Wars than Blade Runner.
|
| It's the sort of movie to watch when you're seeking quiet
| contemplation, not popcorn pulp...
| criddell wrote:
| If somebody is going in expecting a space western like Star
| Wars or Star Trek, then I agree with you about the pacing. I
| think the movie moved along beautifully.
|
| I didn't expect to like it because I didn't really like the
| book. For me, this is one of the few times where I think the
| movie is better than the book.
| Tenoke wrote:
| >It was really beautiful but the pacing was horrible for
| modern attention spams.
|
| It's also pretty horrible from past audiences' point of view
| given that they'd expect to see more than a prologue in a
| 155m film. Villenueve makes truly beautiful movies but it
| comes at a cost.
| gunshai wrote:
| I hear this criticism a fair amount. I felt the polar
| opposite. I felt like Dune was made for me. I really enjoy
| that engrossing feeling of scale(both visually and aurally)
| that I am constantly bombarded by.
|
| I am glad that a film like that can even be made these days
| given that I think you're right about modern attention spans.
| thorin wrote:
| I can't stand the Avengers/Marvel style of pacing and switch
| off immediately with the constant CGI and fighting scene.
|
| I was completely gripped with the new Dune but God help her
| if she tries to watch Lawrence of Arabia, Tarkovsky (e.g.
| Stalker), or 2001. For me it works, I appreciate others might
| not like it but I thought the style was great.
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| I'm never going to be able to watch a movie now without counting
| coughs
| hallway_monitor wrote:
| Well I hope you can count to three. Or 9 if you're watching a
| thriller
| sam_goody wrote:
| Coughing is satisfyingly human and easy to connect to, but is
| also slightly distracting.
|
| So, when it is just the right amount, it makes for awards, but
| when too much - especially in a thriller - it gets panned.
|
| By extension, eating and sleeping could work, though that is
| boring.
|
| Now, if there was just some other vice that wasn't boring....
| wait! So _that_ is why porn is so popular ;)
| edmcnulty101 wrote:
| I wonder if the COVID effect will have desensitized people to
| coughs so the coughgeist is way higher than usual.
| interestica wrote:
| How about this (/s): During a pandemic, people are hyper aware
| of coughing in their environment. It becomes a subconscious
| trigger (like a baby's cries). Every time a cough occurs in a
| film, it causes that same shift and elevated processing -- and
| has the side effect of making a viewer better pay
| attention/enjoy a scene.
| edmcnulty101 wrote:
| So instead of desensitization, coughing becomes comfortable,
| reassuring, or perhaps even attractive due to it's being such
| a common part of life...hence the coughgeist may be reduced
| due to the appreciation of each cough.
| a_shovel wrote:
| When their initial theory of cough count produced a trend line
| that didn't really work well, with some major outliers, they
| introduced the implausible, ad-hoc mechanisms like the Thriller
| Tripler effect and the Batman effect to make it fit. This is the
| part that isn't just parodical silliness, but has actual
| applicability. This is something you might see in a bad research
| paper.
| spiffytech wrote:
| The best part of the Batman factor is that since it relies on
| data from the future it destroys the model's predictiveness!
| ouid wrote:
| Au contraire, it just predicts a new thing. Viggo Mortensen
| as Batman.
| Erwin wrote:
| A good candidate for https://improbable.com/ig/winners/#ig2021 ?
|
| The 2021 Biology winner was:
|
| > Susanne Schotz, Robert Eklund, and Joost van de Weijer, for
| analyzing variations in purring, chirping, chattering, trilling,
| tweedling, murmuring, meowing, moaning, squeaking, hissing,
| yowling, howling, growling, and other modes of cat-human
| communication.
| mothsonasloth wrote:
| Surely by publishing these findings it will now sabotage the
| predictions as it will affect the unconscious criteria/bias by
| raising awareness of it?
| jerf wrote:
| When I took my AI class, my professor would assign one paper a
| week and we had to turn in a "critique" of that paper. These
| papers were, of course, the seminal classics in the field,
| because what else would you want your intro class to be reading?
| I complained a bit to the professor that it was a bit silly to
| critique the _seminal papers in the field_ and if you want to be
| sure we read it, we could just turn in a summary (which our
| critiques typically started with anyhow), but we were supposed to
| learn how to critique papers.
|
| In hindsight, I suppose I should have appealed to the fact that
| critiquing the _seminal papers in the field_ is a serious data
| set bias and that trying to "learn to critique" on the _best
| papers ever written_ in a field was less likely to produce a
| useful "critiquing" skill and more likely to produce some
| overfitted garbage skill, but, hey, I hadn't taken AI yet! I
| didn't know how to express that.
|
| (It did produce a garbage skill, too. I tried writing "real"
| critiques using my brain, but after getting Cs and Ds for the
| first couple, I learned my lesson, and mechanically spit out
| "Needs more data", "should have studied more", and as
| appropriate, "sample sizes were too small". Except for that last
| one, regardless of the study. Bam. A series of easy As. Sigh. I
| liked college over all, but there were some places I could
| certainly quibble.)
|
| Anyhow, _this_ is the paper that needs to be assigned towards the
| end of the semester, and students asked to "critique" it. It's a
| much better member of the training data set for this sort of
| skill.
| ViViDboarder wrote:
| I had to do something similar in a Physics class of mine. We
| had to write a paper critiquing and arguing against a well
| known physics theory. I was really into Special Relativity at
| the time, so picked that one.
|
| My professor was a Nobel laureate, so already pretty
| intimidating. After we each picked a theory and wrote an
| outline he asked that we review with him. Well, he said, "I
| don't know why you'd pick that. That's going to be too hard."
| So I asked if I could change, but he said that it's too late
| for that and wished me luck... I was more than happy with the
| C+ I got.
| turdnagel wrote:
| Had a very similar experience in philosophy classes. The good
| thing about critiquing seminal works is that there's often a
| rich body of criticism already available. I found the only way
| to do well in those classes, since I lacked the mental
| horsepower to produce my own seminal critiques, was to parrot
| the literature that was out there already.
| jerf wrote:
| I think in philosophy it's a bit more valid. Still not maybe
| the best case, since these are still the papers that stood
| the test of time, critiquing some marginal paper would
| probably be a better practice of "critiquing", but philosophy
| always has a critique. The form may be impeccable, the
| writing may be spectacular, etc., but the philosophy itself
| always has room for rumination, discussion, etc.
|
| For a science paper, if it's something people are still
| reading 30-50 years later, it was apparently _good enough_. I
| can always critique the paper for failing to solve String
| Theory and then draw out from String Theory a mathematical
| demonstration of how their solution for getting robots to
| navigate around boxes is very good, but that 's more a
| reflection of me than the paper.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| Yeah, any "critique" or "argument" assignment seems to have
| weird grading biases.
|
| In my freshman Composition class we needed to pick a
| controversial topic and argue one side. Highest grade on that
| assignment went to someone who argued that smoking causes lung
| cancer (this was 2003). The instructor explained that it was
| the most convincing paper. Those who picked an _actually_
| controversial topics got the lowest grades because their
| arguments were less of a slam-dunk.
| yummypaint wrote:
| Would love to see more satire like this for different research
| areas. It's just subtle enough that the realization builds
| slowly, like reading one of those internet stories that ends with
| pulling up in bel-aire.
| cturtle wrote:
| If you haven't already seen it, you may enjoy SIGBOVIK, The
| Association for Computational Heresy [0]. An annual conference
| mostly focused on computer science, but any field is welcome. I
| immediately thought of SIGBOVIK when reading this paper.
|
| [0]: http://www.sigbovik.org/
| ape4 wrote:
| Counting helicopters is a counter indicator.
| http://0at.org/blog/movie_suck
| twic wrote:
| What do you mean, all these pictures are superb:
| https://twitter.com/chopperfireball
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| I count 0 helicopters in the entire film.
| TreeInBuxton wrote:
| Technically, I suppose they're ornithopters
| omarhaneef wrote:
| Before anyone takes this too seriously -- and it is surely too
| late for that -- I should point out that they did nothing to
| disambiguate the length of the movie. It may not be the
| coughgeist but the ... er ... timegeist (they should have a
| german word for it).
|
| Anyway, the point is, coughs per hour would help us know if
| audiences simply favor longer or shorter movies at different
| points in time.
| obfuscator wrote:
| Dauergeist [dowr-ghaist]
|
| = Durationgeist :)
| JoBrad wrote:
| That still requires some calculating before comparing movies,
| since it's much harder to compare a short film to a bladder
| buster. Using an average runtime as standard length F, then
| calculating coughs (C) per F would yield a value that can be
| more easily compared between films, regardless of length.
| edmcnulty101 wrote:
| They said they normalized the cough count, which I'm assuming
| means time adjusted?
| theejazz wrote:
| > We calculate the Coughgeist for each year by determining
| the median expulsion count of that year's nominees and then
| normalizing it.
|
| Probably adjusted for the number of nominees per year
| edmcnulty101 wrote:
| Ah missed that. They normalize for the coughgeist not the
| number of movie coughs.
| waffl wrote:
| The German word for 'time' is 'Zeit', so that would be
| 'Zeitgeist' :)
| hhmc wrote:
| Wouldn't want to leave the joke unexplained now, would we
| enkid wrote:
| As a non-German speaker I found the joke about the joke
| informative and humorous.
| bhaak wrote:
| waffl is likely a German speaker. So of course not.
|
| German speakers also can't resist replying to rhetorical
| questions.
| Garlef wrote:
| > German speakers also can't resist replying to
| rhetorical questions.
|
| This should have been, "German speakers also can't resist
| replying to rhetorical questions, can they?", should it?
| willis936 wrote:
| There's a metajoke in here somewhere.
|
| https://youtu.be/llE7wT1BKt8
| snorkel wrote:
| Love it! The sordid truths of data science laid bare! "We prefer
| subtitles over machine-learning-based detection because the
| presence of a cough in subtitles means it was prominent enough
| for a person to write it down. Also our postdoctoral fellow was
| the only one who completed the Tensorflow tutorial."
| usrbinbash wrote:
| Why it should win best picture:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxFQbjQbPq0
|
| Do I _need_ another reason?
| belter wrote:
| Raising you the original:
|
| DUNE (1984) - Brian Eno - Prophecy Theme:
| https://youtu.be/t4onBqilHvc
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| Flow state achieved.
| inopinatus wrote:
| ... because of a fifteen second ad for chocolate?
| Sophira wrote:
| The video is the "Sardaukar Chant", not an ad for chocolate.
| inopinatus wrote:
| Ah, right you are, thanks.
|
| This sounds like an hour of throat singing, which whilst
| technically interesting, I don't quite see (or rather,
| hear) how it guarantees an Oscar. No-one coughs at all
| FirstLvR wrote:
| sure the music was fine, it might win best achievement on music
| score, or music edition... but best picture? you cannot
| evaluate a picture from the music lol
| rmnclmnt wrote:
| Is "march fools day" a thing now?
| lanewinfield wrote:
| related: https://everymoviecough.com/
| jollofricepeas wrote:
| Ah comedic tennis, funerals and research are a thing.
|
| Is there anything so mundane or horrific that we as a species
| haven't attempted to make light of it yet?
|
| Maybe this dichotomy is what makes us human.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-22 23:02 UTC)