Spoilers? Maybe.

I’ve been watching with interest the somewhat extreme views that people have been expressing about Snowpiercer in recent weeks. It seems like people either think it’s enthralling, or they think it’s idiotic nonsense. Maybe that’s we way we talk about culture now that we only have 140 characters in which to state an opinion, but it feels like something more.

It seems to be both aesthetically and narratively polarising.

For mine, the art direction was nothing short of spectacular. The scene (above) when the masked horde appears is as visually arresting as anything I’ve seen in A Del Toro film, and I’ve found the image popping into my head unsummoned for the past two weeks.

What interests me, however, is that some people have been scathing about the film’s narrative. A film with a high concept like this gets a lot of passes, as far as I’m concerned –– you don’t see a film about a train circling a post-apocalypse Earth and then complain about its inherent lack of realism. The lack of realism is the conceit that allows the telling of the story.

And what a story it is –– Snowpiercer is in essence Anabasis, on a train, with a Wizard of Oz twist. You might not know Anabasis, but you’ve probably seen two films that have borrowed heavily from it –– The Warriors and Falling Down

Anyway, like I said, I enjoyed the film and intend to watch it again in a couple of weeks. In the interim, I’m going to swallow my prideful distaste for comics and read the source material and get a handle for exactly how much changed between the page and the screen.

I gather it’s dramatic. I can’t wait.

Not long after the shoot-down, Iran asked the United Nations Security Council to censure the United States for its “criminal act” against Iran Air Flight 655. Vice President George H.W. Bush, who was running to succeed Ronald Reagan as president, said on the campaign trail, “I will never apologize for the United States—I don’t care what the facts are.”
The Vincennes’ downing of Iran Air Flight 655: The United States tried to cover up its own destruction of a passenger plane.
ARGUS is an advanced camera system that uses hundreds of cellphone cameras in a mosaic to video and auto-track every moving object within a 36 square mile area. ARGUS is a form of Wide Area Persistent Surveillance that allows for one camera to provide such detailed video that users can collect “pattern-of-life” data and track individual people inside the footage anywhere within the field of regard. This is accomplished by utilizing air assets (manned aircraft, drones, blimps, aerostats) to persistently loiter and record video of an area 36 square miles in diameter with enough detail to track individual pedestrians, vehicles or other objects of interest as long as the air asset remains circling above.

ARGUS-IS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So this is a real thing.

Episode 22: Compromise with Mike Monteiro — The Nudge

One of the hardest things in design is knowing the right time to compromise, if there ever is one. The very idea of compromise might send some precious designers into fits.

That’s why we spoke to Mike Monteiro about this topic. The man has a reputation that makes him seem absolute about everything. So when is it ok for him to compromise?

Josh and Ross investigate that idea with Mike which leads into discussion of all sorts of design problems.

Ok so every day I take two of these. One in the morning, one in the evening. From what I can tell, a twice-a-day dose is pretty standard for this medication (it’s for nerve pain). I wonder why, that being the case, they don’t mark the blister packs with “morning” and “evening”?
That seems weird to me.

Ok so every day I take two of these. One in the morning, one in the evening. From what I can tell, a twice-a-day dose is pretty standard for this medication (it’s for nerve pain). I wonder why, that being the case, they don’t mark the blister packs with “morning” and “evening”?
That seems weird to me.

Page 1 of 627