The last movie you saw...

[dinky]

another ep of crusade. gideon just had sex with lochley.

[maxpayne2409]

Night of The Living Dead 3D, wasn't that bad actually, its basically NoTLD moved into 2006 and done in 3D

Also watched I Want Candy, which was ok but reeked of Orgazmo

[dinky]

couple more eps of crusade. it's getting a bit better now that gideon is using the "apocalypse box" thing.

[maxpayne2409]

watched a few documentaries recently, one on the other nostradamus (History Channel - Decoding The Past, The Other Nostradamus), one on time travel (Ultra Science - Time Travel), one on the potential mission to, arrival, terraforming, and eventual colonisation of mars (Science Channel - The Mars Underground)

all pretty good and interesting

[dinky]

on the mars thing (and I'm assuming terraforming is impossible and even if possible, the sun'll prolly go supernova before we manage that feat) what would be the point of colonizing Mars? simply population pressure relief? cuz I don't think we've identified one useful natural resource on that planet, have we? just the possible existence of frozen lakes/oceans miles beneath the surface? or something like that? what I'm really asking is if the docu cared to address any of those things or if it was one of those sci-fi wet dream things like the creation of a space shuttle and other tonka toys in space kinda stuff?

[maxpayne2409]

it was kind of a bit of both, it did explain how terraforming could be achieved with existing properties on mars, but also the guy who they interview a lot about it is so excited by the prospect you get the feeling off camera he's out the back wanking over a mars bar

basically the ideas are, mars contains in its air all the same gases as earth with the exception of oxygen, so for astronauts (its all astronauts as its an american docu) to survive they would send a habitat pod first that would contain oxygen tanks to filter into the equpiment contained in the first pod, that would comine that oxygen with the hydrogen in mars atmosphere to create water and also the pod would contain enough fuel to get the shuttle back to earth, as carrying enough fuel for both ways would weigh the shuttle down too much.

Then a year and a half later a shuttle goes up with the astronauts, complete with a second habitation pod which will connect up with the one already there, transfer over the return fuel, and filters on the sides of the pods will filter the co2 out of the air creating oxygen for the astronauts, who will mine, and build factories that will pump out super greenhouse gases, after all we use them and are heating our world, so to heat up mars we can use that to block heat causing the frozen lakes etc on mars to melt until they can substain their selves, and plant genetically enhanced vegetation once the water and heat levels are ok, plants of course produce oxygen, eventually over 1000s of years making mars terraformed into another earth.

This is current theory with 21st century (the doc was made in 2003) thinking, of course with constant new technology this speed could be faster.

anyway thats the essential guide to what the doc contains, aswell as the space vehicles and methods used to get the astronauts there, the history of the project, and the futures of the project. Its only about 45mins long so your not losing anything by watching it

[spudthedestroyer]

Managed to squeesh in a cinema trip yesterday and saw the Simpsons movie.

We all know simpsons has been a rather lack and shitty on tv, but the movie... i dunno, I enjoyed it. The script wasn't overly tight but it had the guy who voiced Hank Scorpio (best... episode... ever!) in a big roll and there were some great jokes.

Its plot was a bit sporadic, just like the new series is, but there was a bit more attention than is shown to the recent series.

Overall, I enjoyed it and think its well worth watching. There's some stuff they just can't do on tv, really crude stuff that you just don't expect which will make you laugh, but its not at what simpsons was like at its height.

[dinky]

There's some stuff they just can't do on tv, really crude stuff that you just don't expect which will make you laugh, but its not at what simpsons was like at its height.

yeah. that's what I liked best too.

matt groening is actually a lot dirtier than simpsons or futurama would lead you to believe. I think james l. brooks did a fair bit of reigning him in for the tv series.

his comics stuff like life in hell is supposed to have more edge to it.

edit: finished crusade. it's 13 eps of crap. seriously. crap. according to JMS, it was supposed to be s1 of a 5 season story, making it the rough equivalent of half the first season of b5. and just so I'm not taken completely out of context, I would have thought b5 was worthless drivel from its first 13 eps too. For some odd reason, i thought the deal with crusade was that jms got into a creative struggle with TNT (the station funding them) so he said fuckit and turned the series into a mini (meaning he still had the last couple eps to wrap up the actual story). but noooooooooooooo. not even close. the series just stops. crappity crap. I don't recommend watching. there's no story. it just ends. I suppose the 2 commentaries try to explain something more, but I don't have any desire to sit through them. I didn't hate watching the 13 eps (although a couple were true turds); it's just that, as I said, it just ends. nothing happens. there's no point to watching the series.

[MyK]

On that terraforming Mars thing... It's an awful idea. Mars most likely already had an atmosphere (not like anything that's on Earth now, mind you) once it was more geologically active and gasses spumed out of volcanoes and such. If they terraform Mars they'd still not recognize why it lost it's atmosphere in the first place. Low gravity combined with no magnetic activity whatsoever or at least not enough (read: no protection from the Sun's deadly rays vaporising anything in the atmosphere) simply spells disaster. Unless they're thinking of sending lawyers, politicians, and other excess refuse there first. That'd be simply brilliant!

[dinky]

what's the earliest "terraforming" in a movie? I think it's in aliens, isn't it? that would be as early as I can recall. it's a really cool "mechanic" for "gritty" sci-fi (read: anything that isn't star trek).

so Mars has no atmosphere? are you sure? it doesn't look much like the moon as far as all the impact craters. or...I didn't notice it before if it does.

anyway, I'm still searching for the reason for being on Mars in the first place. other than the generic coolness of space travel and the like.

[MyK]

It has a very thin atmosphere and density of it also ain't that much. Some smaller asteroids could prolly quite easily disintegrate (depends on what material they'd be, I guess) while larger would produce impact craters and Mars has plenty of those. When it was more geologically active in the past some craters were eroded or filled with other materials (lava comes to mind) thus Mars doesn't look like a Swiss cheese like Moon does. It still has plenty of craters, some extremely huge and it is speculated that that huge "crack" on it (once thought they're "Martian channels") was also produced by an impact of a massive object.

The main problem with any atmosphere on Mars is that it ain't stable and long lasting. As Sun has 11 year cycle any increased activity on it could produce solar flare on collision path with Mars and large enough to scorch Mars' atmosphere and surface as Mars has no magnetic poles to speak of (might have them, but certainly not strong enough) to deflect such flares.

So... while it's possible to terraform Mars (not even all that difficult to achieve, just send there some anaerobic bacteria that produces oxygen and carbon dioxide and would thrive on such surface), it still wouldn't be a place any sane person would want to live and/or raise family on.

Hence, I'm of the same opinion like you, Dinky. I might have different reasons for it but still wouldn't want to live on Mars if it was made of chocolate. Say, why don't we keep quiet about this "problem" with living on Mars. Who knows when it'll come handy to get rid of (in a *khmmm* "humane" *khmmm* way) certain morons that do want to live there

[dinky]

or who liked transformers (2007).

[maxpayne2409]

i agree mars and the terraforming of it does make for good scifi such as total recall etc (who can forget how easy terraforming mars was in that)

i guess terraforming mars would most likely be the lazy governments answer to population overcrowding.

The documentary was still interesting though, or at least it was a pleasant way of passing 45 minutes.

Transformers on the other hand is jsut kind of "we are big robots, we must fight now"

Also watched the first episode of The Lost Room, i enjoyed it, looking forward to watching eps 2 and 3 tonight, would've watched last night but i had to be at work for stupid o'clock today (ie anytime before 11 am)

[maxpayne2409]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO1YUjqaF84

i tried embedding it but i guess its turned off

this guy has it bang on, and i can also easily iimagine this is actually spud, i dno why but i just imagine spud looking and sounding, and talking something like this guy

[dinky]

Transformers on the other hand is jsut kind of "we are big robots, we must fight now"

sadly no. I only wish it made that much sense. although that does pretty much describe the toy line.

just got back from the bourne ultimatum. it was good. somewhere between a 7 to an 8 out of 10. it was a little more personal than the sequel, which I did not really like (but didn't hate). but it wasn't as good as the first one. ionno. there's nothing new. I suppose if you disliked the first two, this won't change your opinion of the series. it's also quite similar to casino royale. it's better (although not as cool) as mr. and mrs. smith. I mention this cuz doug liman pulled out of the bourne series after having directed the first series so that he could do mr. & mrs.. paul greengrass, who replaced him on both movies and supposedly did a fantastic job on united 93 (I have no interest in such a movie), is certainly competent. iunno. the whole thing just felt superflous. I understand that it was a book trilogy before the first movie was ever made. but I can't shake the feeling that the two sequels were just trying to cash in on the success of the first. plot wise, the first is self contained. it ends. the middle one is the same as most middles are. there's and ending and a beginning. but three was like watching a slightly more shallow rendition of one all over again. it's not to the point of parody. it's also not nearly the mess from di hard to die harder, but there you have it: same basic movie. leaves me wondering what's the point?

[dinky]

watched 2 movies after I finished crusade last night. but can't remember the first one...

anyway, second was drive me crazy.

[maxpayne2409]

drive me crazy? wasnt that the melissa joan hart thing?

[maxpayne2409]

[dinky]

nice!

drive me crazy? wasnt that the melissa joan hart thing?

and yes.

remembered the other movie. it was stealth. was ok. lemme put it like this, the transformers apologists who say it's stupid and silly but cool only WISH that trainwreck was as compentent as stealth, and the latter is no work of art, let me tell you....

[maxpayne2409]

yeah i heard steatlh was pretty bad, never seen it personally