Prefacing a sentence with…

[_Simon_]

Nudity?

If I were a film maker, I’d do my very best to ensure the first of my franchise was amazing to ensnare as many as possible into the sequels.

When I go on a first date, I don’t wear scruffy training shoes, ripped jeans and go unshowered. I’m shaved, I have my Savile Row suit on and Aqua di Parma cologne and am witty and urbane to secure a second date.

Car insurance companies send me an annual quote that is considerably more expensivethan the previous year so, I go elsewhere. When they subsequently say they could’ve given me a cheaper quote I say, “Why didn’t you put that cheaper premium in your original letter?”

When I used to spar, my first counter-attack was a decisive tree-feller!

Sorry to labour the point….

Hahaha nah no nudity! And all good I gotcha! Still love the first movie though, has some great starting themes and sets up the characters and the whole magical world etc, and it's more that the following ones evolve and develop deeper from there rather than get better.

I'm not a movie dude at all, just don't watch them at all frequently, but love HP, highly recommend!

 

[Gyakuto]

Hahaha nah no nudity! And all good I gotcha! Still love the first movie though, has some great starting themes and sets up the characters and the whole magical world etc, and it's more that the following ones evolve and develop deeper from there rather than get better.

I'm not a movie dude at all, just don't watch them at all frequently, but love HP, highly recommend!

I think when one is a fan, you can appreciate the less thrilling instalments of a film franchise because of the deeper understanding you have for the characters and oeuvre of work. For example, Star Trek-The Motion Picture and Star Trek V…I really like them but most non-obsessives think they’re cringe-worthy!

You know what i also dislike? Those films with the gold robot and squeaky dust bin. That lizard character with the floppy ears… ?Leon Spinks?….WTF?

 

[tkdroamer]

Haha, you missed out. The first film is VERY tame. It gets much darker and adult-like after that one. Best movies!

I gonna be that guy, what is a HP film?

 

[Gyakuto]

I gonna be that guy, what is a HP film?

Bless you! 'Hewlett Packard'. It's about a boy who develops magical powers and uses them to make a printing device and take over the computer peripheral market... (no, Harry Potter...I was trying to be cool when using HP!)

 

[tkdroamer]

Bless you! 'Hewlett Packard'. It's about a boy who develops magical powers and uses them to make a printing device and take over the computer peripheral market... (no, Harry Potter...I was trying to be cool when using HP!)

Never had an interest to see any of them. Just not my thing. Our son never saw them until he met his fiancee who is a huge Potter fan.

 

[Gyakuto]

Never had an interest to see any of them. Just not my thing. Our son never saw them until he met his fiancee who is a huge Potter fan.

Yay...my long lost brother! We are a minority.

I know some people who would suggest that not showing one's children HP films is a form of neglect

 

[granfire]

I like the movies (particularly the first 2 or 3) for the atmosphere they have, the stuffy castle with the huge fireplaces. Makes for good winter watching.

Considering the audience originally was between 10- and 12.

I don't think I have ever watched the movies from front to back, in one sitting (per movie) and in order.
I have seen them all though, I am sure, walking into the breakroom at work at various times of 'Potter day'

Like Naruto, the story gets dark in a hurry. And by movie 2(?) the first student dies.

In all fairness, now that the franchise is over 20 years old, somebody described the books as something something, mixed with 'Enid Blyton Claptrap'
She was a British author who wrote a lot about girls in boarding schools. The English seem to have a real fascination with those.

The series got people to read.
And is by far superior to the Twilight series or 50 Shades. (which naturally does not mean all that much. The Chicago Telephone book is as well)

 

[Gyakuto]

In all fairness, now that the franchise is over 20 years old, somebody described the books as something something, mixed with 'Enid Blyton Claptrap'
She was a British author who wrote a lot about girls in boarding schools. The English seem to have a real fascination with those.

Yeah, 20yrs old...surprising how time has flown. We were forced to read Enid Blyton a school, when I wanted to read Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov! She wasn't a very...awakened person but that can be excused away as the time in which she lived.

Boarding Schools...yes...where most of Britain's elite were forged and sodomised!

The series got people to read.
And is by far superior to the Twilight series or 50 Shades. (which naturally does not mean all that much. The Chicago Telephone book is as well)

I'm not sure reading story books is that good for kids compared to, say the TV. I'd rather a child watched 'Horizon' or 'Carl Sagan's Cosmos' than read Harry Potter or Peter rabbit. We shove made-up story books at our kids and yet they appear to be more uninformed than ever! I likes the right type of TV.

 

[granfire]

Yeah, 20yrs old...surprising how time has flown. We were forced to read Enid Blyton a school, when I wanted to read Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov! She wasn't a very...awakened person but that can be excused away as the time in which she lived.

Boarding Schools...yes...where most of Britain's elite were forged and sodomised!


I'm not sure reading story books is that good for kids compared to, say the TV. I'd rather a child watched 'Horizon' or 'Carl Sagan's Cosmos' than read Harry Potter or Peter rabbit. We shove made-up story books at our kids and yet they appear to be more uninformed than ever! I likes the right type of TV.

well, specialists in child development to disagree with you that reading story books is not good for people. There is, however, enough room to also watch non-fiction. Or read it.
I did forego many a homework assignment reading about Leeuwenhoek, Pasteur, and such folks, while also devouring Lord of the Rings, Agatha Christy (and similar authors), Enid Blyton, Alexandre Dumas, anything with a horse in it (and Steinbeck's Red Pony sucks buttcheek!)
Reading fictional accounts is elementary to developing empathy.
Reading non-fiction makes one smarter in other aspects.
And watching less Simpsons makes one less cynical.
BTW, I was referring to the movie franchise, The books are over 30 now. Damn, I feel old now.

And yet, there are a lot of books on those 'you ought to/must read this that I would not touch with a 10 foot pole.

And I wonder if those SciFi classics all aged as well.
I find there are a lot of books that are often quoted but few people actually read them.
Like Macciavelli's Prince, The Art of War....
How many people crowing about it actually read Fahrenheit 451? I started in on 'The End of Eternity'.....I found it labored.
I had the honest intention to read The Hitchhikers Guide, but I find the style cumbersome. (and the old BBC show is stuck in my mind)

 

[Gyakuto]

well, specialists in child development to disagree with you that reading story books is not good for people. There is, however, enough room to also watch non-fiction. Or read it.

What do they know?

Agatha Christy

I live in Christie’s place of birth and her favourite cove is a regular haunt of mine!

Alexandre Dumas,

He heh heh…he said ’dumb-***’

And yet, there are a lot of books on those 'you ought to/must read this that I would not touch with a 10 foot pole.

There is much snobbery attached to certain books. ‘Catcher in the Rye’? Merde

And I wonder if those SciFi classics all aged as well.

I’m rereading ‘Rendezvous with Rama’ and it’s still fresh and exciting. I read that Denis Villeneuve is making a film of it after the next Dune is completed.

How many people crowing about it actually read Fahrenheit 451? I started in on 'The End of Eternity'.....I found it labored.
I had the honest intention to read The Hitchhikers Guide, but I find the style cumbersome. (and the old BBC show is stuck in my mind)

What was that quiz question in ‘Friends’…

Ross: ”Which film does Rachel say is her favourite?”
Chandler and Joey: “Dangerous Liaisons”.
Ross: “What’s her actual favourite film?
Chandler and Joey: ”Dumb and Dumber”

 

[punisher73]

I’m very dubious of such claims otherwise every lie or half-truth would relatively easily be uncovered.The interviewee might just be inarticulate or very stressed (likely) etc. Post-hoc analysis is, by it’s nature, very accurate…the retrospectivescope is a very powerful instrument! But advanced predictions are in the realm of clairvoyance.

Not sure you caught the words "CAN BE...".

A good interviewer would hear the phrase and do more digging and ask more probing questions to figure out if it is a idiom of speech that they use, or if they are trying to be deceptive. Just like body language, certain things CAN BE signs, but require more information to see if it is something the person always does or if it is a cue.

It is also not an "advanced prediction". When people talk, they phrase things a certain way when being deceptive (notice, this is NOT the same thing as lying sometimes). If you know those language patterns, you recognize them and then ask more probing questions in regards to that line. There is NO 100% method on ANYTHING when it comes to human interaction. But, recognizing things like this do raise your success rate when trying to spot deception and lies when you understand them.

 

[Gyakuto]

I used to work in the same department as a ‘micro-gestures’ expert…world expert, indeed. He is one of the very few psychologists who’s had a paper published in the premier scientific journal, ‘Nature’ and did so in 6 months from idea to publication….quite incredible (about the micro-gestures Margaret Thatcher displayed)! It was noticed he only ever made post-hoc analyses of people’s gestures (famously, he ‘analysed‘ the footage of G. W. Bush receiving the news about 9/11 in that nursery school). When others pointed this post-hoc analysis-only out, he was quite defensive and when it was suggested a little test of him making a prediction from their gestures, he always made excuses.

That’s when I remembered Nobel laureate, Sheldon Cooper’s statement, “Psychology, the doofus of the sciences”

 

[punisher73]

I used to work in the same department as a ‘micro-gestures’ expert…world expert, indeed. He is one of the very few psychologists who’s had a paper published in the premier scientific journal, ‘Nature’ and did so in 6 months from idea to publication….quite incredible (about the micro-gestures Margaret Thatcher displayed)! It was noticed he only ever made post-hoc analyses of people’s gestures (famously, he ‘analysed‘ the footage of G. W. Bush receiving the news about 9/11 in that nursery school). When others pointed this post-hoc analysis-only out, he was quite defensive and when it was suggested a little test of him making a prediction from their gestures, he always made excuses.

That’s when I remembered Nobel laureate, Sheldon Cooper’s statement, “Psychology, the doofus of the sciences”

In that I would agree. There is a distinct difference between speech patterns that are observable AT THE TIME and can be acted upon for further investigation and what you are talking about that you can only see them when watching film at slow replays (Remember the show "Lie to Me"?) and always after the fact.

That is the important aspect, they CAN be deceptive. It is NOT saying that if person A does X, then they are lying. It IS saying that if person A keeps doing, x, y, z then it should draw attention for more investigation and questioning in the manner to find out.

For example, if I ask a person if they did something (doesn't even have to be a big deal). We would expect a "yes" or "no" response. If I get a response like, "do you think I'm the type of person who would do something like that?" with no other answer or elaboration. That is not a normal response and would lead me to more questions. It takes into the account that I might be dealing with someone who views their integrity to a high level and is genuinely offended that they are being asked that question. I don't automatically assume that they are lying, but I do note that it is an unusual response to a question. People use speech patterns in a deceptive manner all the time, many times because they want to be polite or not offend someone. For example, you really don't like someone's new whatever. When asked if you like it, some people will just lie and say "yes". Others who don't want to lie, but don't want to hurt the person's feelings may answer, "It's very unique", "It fits your personality" or a number of responses that don't answer the question. If I cue in on that, then I might ask follow up questions to that answer, such as "what makes it unique", "How does it fit my personality" etc.

Like Freud said, "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar".

 

[Gyakuto]

Like Freud said, "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar".

I used to love bringing up Freud in the Psychology department! The psychologists would squirm, deny and generally change the subject What surprised them was that disciplines such as English Literature and Film and Theatre studies still used universally discredited Freudian ideas to ‘analyse’ their story’s and ditties

It was the best place I ever worked…a great bunch of people.