niuniu
Jun 6, 03:59 AM
That's what mommy gets for letting the Cheerios run out
damixt
Mar 15, 09:09 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
Cerritos had a reseller asking people to buy him some. **** him.
Cerritos had a reseller asking people to buy him some. **** him.
southernpaws
Apr 23, 11:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you
longofest
Dec 2, 07:26 AM
The mere fact that some kernel vulnerabilities were discovered in an event SPECIFICALLY devoted to finding such things does not mean our OS X is unsafe. It is by far the MOST secure system out there, with 40 million or 400 million users, and nobody has been able to prove the opposite so far.
The guy heading up the MOKB thing said that MacOSX's kernel (XNU) was the easiest kernel to crack. If that makes you feel safe, then go ahead and feel safe, but for me, even though I use extremely good security practices and networking measures, I still would rather have Apple get serious aboud security and start hardening their system more so that guys who are only fuzzing and stress testing can't come up with 10 vulnerabilities in a month.
The only thing I can suggest (which I doubt anyone will follow) is to avoid the hysteria. When a real threat emerges, you'll most likely hear about it long before you are actually in any danger from it.
Funny thing is that I don't see anyone in this forum going into hysteria about this other than the people saying that "this is a load of FUD." Why is it such a shock that MacOSX can be vulnerable? No, it hasn't been exploited to any large extent, but vulnerabilities open up the door to exploits, and the only thing that is keeping us away from having exploits happen is our market share. You may not want to hear that, but as long as we are below 10% of the market, people simply aren't going to target our vulnerabilities, but are going to target MS's vulnerabilities.
The problem of course, is that our Market Share is going up, and so we will likely be a larger target for hackers. So if these vulnerabilities keep popping up in this frequency, that becomes a major issue for the exploitation problem as time goes on.
The guy heading up the MOKB thing said that MacOSX's kernel (XNU) was the easiest kernel to crack. If that makes you feel safe, then go ahead and feel safe, but for me, even though I use extremely good security practices and networking measures, I still would rather have Apple get serious aboud security and start hardening their system more so that guys who are only fuzzing and stress testing can't come up with 10 vulnerabilities in a month.
The only thing I can suggest (which I doubt anyone will follow) is to avoid the hysteria. When a real threat emerges, you'll most likely hear about it long before you are actually in any danger from it.
Funny thing is that I don't see anyone in this forum going into hysteria about this other than the people saying that "this is a load of FUD." Why is it such a shock that MacOSX can be vulnerable? No, it hasn't been exploited to any large extent, but vulnerabilities open up the door to exploits, and the only thing that is keeping us away from having exploits happen is our market share. You may not want to hear that, but as long as we are below 10% of the market, people simply aren't going to target our vulnerabilities, but are going to target MS's vulnerabilities.
The problem of course, is that our Market Share is going up, and so we will likely be a larger target for hackers. So if these vulnerabilities keep popping up in this frequency, that becomes a major issue for the exploitation problem as time goes on.
MacRumors
May 3, 07:33 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/03/apple-releases-new-sandy-bridge-quad-core-imacs-with-thunderbolt/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/03/083647-imacs_2011.jpg
Apple released the much anticipated iMac updates today, upgrading the processors to Quad-Core CPUs across the entire range.
Apple today updated its signature all-in-one iMac with next generation quad-core processors, powerful new graphics, groundbreaking high-speed Thunderbolt I/O technology and a new FaceTime HD camera. Starting at $1,199, the new iMac is up to 70 percent faster and new graphics deliver up to three times the performance of the previous generation.
The new iMacs feature quad-core Intel Core i% processors with an option for customers to choose Core i7 processors up to 3.4GHz.
The 21.5-inch iMac has a single Thunderbolt port while the 27" features two Thunderbolt ports.
21.5" 2.5GHz Quad Core i5, AMD 6750M, 500GB, $1199
21.5" 2.7GHz Quad Core i5, AMD 6770M, 1TB, $1499
27" 2.7GHz Quad Core i5, AMD 6770M, 1TB, $1699
27" 3.1GHz Quad Core i5, AMD 6970M, 1TB, $1999
Core i7 Processors are available as configure-to-order options.[/quote]
Article Link: Apple Releases New Sandy Bridge Quad-Core iMacs with Thunderbolt (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/03/apple-releases-new-sandy-bridge-quad-core-imacs-with-thunderbolt/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/03/083647-imacs_2011.jpg
Apple released the much anticipated iMac updates today, upgrading the processors to Quad-Core CPUs across the entire range.
Apple today updated its signature all-in-one iMac with next generation quad-core processors, powerful new graphics, groundbreaking high-speed Thunderbolt I/O technology and a new FaceTime HD camera. Starting at $1,199, the new iMac is up to 70 percent faster and new graphics deliver up to three times the performance of the previous generation.
The new iMacs feature quad-core Intel Core i% processors with an option for customers to choose Core i7 processors up to 3.4GHz.
The 21.5-inch iMac has a single Thunderbolt port while the 27" features two Thunderbolt ports.
21.5" 2.5GHz Quad Core i5, AMD 6750M, 500GB, $1199
21.5" 2.7GHz Quad Core i5, AMD 6770M, 1TB, $1499
27" 2.7GHz Quad Core i5, AMD 6770M, 1TB, $1699
27" 3.1GHz Quad Core i5, AMD 6970M, 1TB, $1999
Core i7 Processors are available as configure-to-order options.[/quote]
Article Link: Apple Releases New Sandy Bridge Quad-Core iMacs with Thunderbolt (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/03/apple-releases-new-sandy-bridge-quad-core-imacs-with-thunderbolt/)
displaced
Jul 21, 12:34 PM
reassuring to me even if it only means I will be able to buy computers that run a Mac OS for the next 15+ years.
My thoughts exactly.
I wouldn't care if their share is 1%. Just as long as they remain a sound business and keep up the R&D.
My thoughts exactly.
I wouldn't care if their share is 1%. Just as long as they remain a sound business and keep up the R&D.
Mal
Jul 26, 08:53 PM
Mr Blah, your name seems to be appropriate. No one looks at a tower and says, "Hey, that looks like a really innovative computer." However, how many people think that (maybe not in those exact words, but the idea) about the iMac? I'd venture to guess a lot more than ever thought that about a Dell. That's why Apple's viewed as the leader in the computer industry even by a lot of people who don't have or even want Macs. If Apple sacrificed that for the sake of perceived benefit on the part of the same people that go for Dells because they're "tools", they're not going to gain anything. Apple survives and flourishes by being the technology leaders, not by copying overused designs like towers.
jW
jW
Benjamins
Apr 13, 03:36 PM
not that I don't want an Apple brand TV, but it's really hard to see how that's going to happen.
ciTiger
Apr 29, 11:09 AM
Yes. I am sure the number 3-25 top selling smartphones all have hardware keyboards.
The 1 and 2 are both Apple iPhones and they don't have them though.
I suspect the sales figures of the iPhone 4 and 3GS probably surpass the top 8-10 Android devices combined.
That is called marketplace domination. Clearly a lot of people here don't have much business experience or understand how business works, but such control of a marketplace is significant, especially given the number of devices available for sale.
Does HTC sell more smartphones than Apple? Does Motorola? How about Samsung? No, no and no.
I side with you but Apple could launch different models if it wanted...
The 1 and 2 are both Apple iPhones and they don't have them though.
I suspect the sales figures of the iPhone 4 and 3GS probably surpass the top 8-10 Android devices combined.
That is called marketplace domination. Clearly a lot of people here don't have much business experience or understand how business works, but such control of a marketplace is significant, especially given the number of devices available for sale.
Does HTC sell more smartphones than Apple? Does Motorola? How about Samsung? No, no and no.
I side with you but Apple could launch different models if it wanted...
dextertangocci
Jul 28, 07:58 AM
This is great news! When the Zune is at its peak in three-five years, it can coincide with the first release of Vista in 2009-2012.
Do you seriously think VISTA (Viruses, Infections, Spyware, Trojans & Adware) is going to be released that early?:rolleyes: lol.
Do you seriously think VISTA (Viruses, Infections, Spyware, Trojans & Adware) is going to be released that early?:rolleyes: lol.
87vert
Sep 12, 07:17 PM
Played the back 9 at http://www.pittsburghgolf.com/
http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/1205/golffox.jpg
Played terrible but did see a red fox out on the course. :D
Took the photo with my iPhone 4 for a ways away (Probably 50 yards) used the HDR setting, came out a lot better than the non HDR photo.
http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/1205/golffox.jpg
Played terrible but did see a red fox out on the course. :D
Took the photo with my iPhone 4 for a ways away (Probably 50 yards) used the HDR setting, came out a lot better than the non HDR photo.
louis Fashion
Apr 13, 08:22 PM
Might get this, might not. Don't do contracts so it would be a simple case of buying and selling. Something most people I know do. You lot (Americans) should start doing the same and stop being beholden to 24 month contracts.
Good pont London, I don't do contracts either, but I don't think the telcoms here in the US of Corporations will let us go with the UK plan. And if we do go on a 24 month contract I do believe that there is no cost reduction after the equipment is "paid" for. That is the 25 month cost the same as the 24th month.
Good pont London, I don't do contracts either, but I don't think the telcoms here in the US of Corporations will let us go with the UK plan. And if we do go on a 24 month contract I do believe that there is no cost reduction after the equipment is "paid" for. That is the 25 month cost the same as the 24th month.
Stella
Apr 13, 01:57 PM
No thanks, I don't want to have to jailbreak my TV to make it useful.
These TV rumours are bogus IMO. I think the rumour will turn out to be related to the AppleTV box we have today, rather than a TV.
These TV rumours are bogus IMO. I think the rumour will turn out to be related to the AppleTV box we have today, rather than a TV.
DotCom2
Apr 14, 12:35 AM
I originally waited for the white version (back when it was only delayed until "late summer".) but once September rolled around, I just decided to wait until the 5 came out. With the rumors of the 5 being delayed until fall, I might have to seriously consider some backup plans. I'd prefer to stick with an iPhone, but the 3GS is getting long in the tooth and I will not sign a contract for outdated hardware.
Ditto.
This is my story EXACTLY! :(
Ditto.
This is my story EXACTLY! :(
leekohler
Mar 8, 09:16 AM
You have many good qualities, lee, and you just showed us another one: a capacity for introspection; for looking back, recognizing and admitting that you might've made an all-too-human mistake.
A lot of us would probably have done the same thing, were we in your shoes. I take a looooooong time to let people who've wronged me back into my life.
Wow- thanks for the compliment. That was very nice. Yeah, he was a very difficult person to deal with.
A lot of us would probably have done the same thing, were we in your shoes. I take a looooooong time to let people who've wronged me back into my life.
Wow- thanks for the compliment. That was very nice. Yeah, he was a very difficult person to deal with.
Eldiablojoe
Apr 30, 03:29 PM
good job everyone, including plutonius and appleguy
now it is basically one spanking new 6-villagers game, starting tonight, with one wolf, one seer and likely one hunter.
with a twist: both the seer and the hunter could also be the wolf.
everyone is suspect.
make it a short night guys, see you all tomorrowUmmm, I'm not sure this game is over yet... there's still an infected Villager out there...
now it is basically one spanking new 6-villagers game, starting tonight, with one wolf, one seer and likely one hunter.
with a twist: both the seer and the hunter could also be the wolf.
everyone is suspect.
make it a short night guys, see you all tomorrowUmmm, I'm not sure this game is over yet... there's still an infected Villager out there...
OceanView
Mar 16, 10:07 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
They said they have some 16 gig wifi, and some verizons in stock but no at&t's. I don't think they have enough for the whole line though.
I want an AT&T model.
Guess I will skip today.
They said they have some 16 gig wifi, and some verizons in stock but no at&t's. I don't think they have enough for the whole line though.
I want an AT&T model.
Guess I will skip today.
Cheffy Dave
Jun 27, 04:30 PM
Are we keeping this thread up forever, yesterdays news, pull it!:cool:
alphaod
Nov 29, 04:31 AM
I want one of these (which I can probably do without):
Nikon 24mm f/1.4
http://alphaod.com/pics/mr02/mr_24f14-112910.png
But I would really like one of these:
Nikon TC-17E II teleconverter
http://alphaod.com/pics/mr02/mr_tc17e-112910.png
I could definitely use it to increase the focal length of my telephoto and only sacrificing 1.5 f-stops.
Nikon 24mm f/1.4
http://alphaod.com/pics/mr02/mr_24f14-112910.png
But I would really like one of these:
Nikon TC-17E II teleconverter
http://alphaod.com/pics/mr02/mr_tc17e-112910.png
I could definitely use it to increase the focal length of my telephoto and only sacrificing 1.5 f-stops.
mkjj
Jul 25, 09:16 AM
Your kidding?
http://homepage.mac.com/markjjohnson/.cv/markjjohnson/Sites/.Pictures/Collection/AdjKey.jpg-thumb_140_105.jpg
May have been $250! released in 1992, earliest UK price I can find (old MacFormat 1996) it was still �149 GBP and that was 4 years after release
http://homepage.mac.com/markjjohnson/.cv/markjjohnson/Sites/.Pictures/Collection/AdjKey.jpg-thumb_140_105.jpg
May have been $250! released in 1992, earliest UK price I can find (old MacFormat 1996) it was still �149 GBP and that was 4 years after release
iSee
Apr 26, 12:09 PM
Of course they are.
This kind of thing has to be paid for somehow. Common options:
1. Pay subscription
2. Ad supported
3. Loss-leader to help sell something profitable.
This rumor is suggesting that Apple is going with a combination of 1 and 3.
This kind of thing has to be paid for somehow. Common options:
1. Pay subscription
2. Ad supported
3. Loss-leader to help sell something profitable.
This rumor is suggesting that Apple is going with a combination of 1 and 3.
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 26, 05:07 PM
What a freaking RIP-OFF. You could buy 20 new songs a year for that instead (well not on Apple anymore sine they royally screwed everyone on some BS basis of "85 cents songs" to offset the "$1.29" ones except that as most of us predicted, there are hardly any 85 cents songs in existence yet a heck of lot of $1.29 ones. In other words, all they did was jack up prices to cover crap artists who can't sing and don't write their own songs and make farting noises and call it art.)
Meanwhile, what good would this service do? Do you seriously think they're going to let you access your music that you did NOT buy from iTunes??? (i.e. your CD collection dumped to iTunes) NO WAY. You'd have to UPLOAD the entire library first. How LONG would that take? Ridiculous. Then you miss a payment and they delete it all.... It's far more likely it's only for songs you already bought (in which case you could already just 'buy' them again and download them for free; in other words the service is worthless).
What most people would prefer I think is a flat fee music-on-demand service where you can listen to ANY music you want from the entire library. Pandora, Sonus, etc. already offer this service so Apple's "retrieve your own library online" is stupid, IMO. You could rent some storage somewhere and just upload your music there and download it anywhere on the Net WITHOUT APPLE even being involved. The whole thing strikes me as a cash grab from Apple to make you pay for the music you already paid for ALL OVER AGAIN. Bought 100 songs? 5 years you bought 'em again. No value.
My entire music library is only 70GB in AAC without music videos. That would almost fit on an iPod Touch 64GB or USB 64GB stick as it is, let alone my Netbook which has 160GB on it and my MBP which has 500GB. So the ONLY way this service could be useful is if I could access ALL MY MOVIES from anywhere on the Net. That would require 2.6TB of storage, though. I don't see Apple covering that and I wouldn't even want to TRY to upload all those movies from my own library (and Apple doesn't even sell (let alone in good quality) 40% of them and 95% of the HD ones.
No, a flat fee for unlimited rentals (music and movies) would be a good deal. I don't see Apple offering that any time soon, if EVER.
Meanwhile, what good would this service do? Do you seriously think they're going to let you access your music that you did NOT buy from iTunes??? (i.e. your CD collection dumped to iTunes) NO WAY. You'd have to UPLOAD the entire library first. How LONG would that take? Ridiculous. Then you miss a payment and they delete it all.... It's far more likely it's only for songs you already bought (in which case you could already just 'buy' them again and download them for free; in other words the service is worthless).
What most people would prefer I think is a flat fee music-on-demand service where you can listen to ANY music you want from the entire library. Pandora, Sonus, etc. already offer this service so Apple's "retrieve your own library online" is stupid, IMO. You could rent some storage somewhere and just upload your music there and download it anywhere on the Net WITHOUT APPLE even being involved. The whole thing strikes me as a cash grab from Apple to make you pay for the music you already paid for ALL OVER AGAIN. Bought 100 songs? 5 years you bought 'em again. No value.
My entire music library is only 70GB in AAC without music videos. That would almost fit on an iPod Touch 64GB or USB 64GB stick as it is, let alone my Netbook which has 160GB on it and my MBP which has 500GB. So the ONLY way this service could be useful is if I could access ALL MY MOVIES from anywhere on the Net. That would require 2.6TB of storage, though. I don't see Apple covering that and I wouldn't even want to TRY to upload all those movies from my own library (and Apple doesn't even sell (let alone in good quality) 40% of them and 95% of the HD ones.
No, a flat fee for unlimited rentals (music and movies) would be a good deal. I don't see Apple offering that any time soon, if EVER.
awmazz
Mar 9, 07:57 AM
For movies it's different because each one is a narrative of it's own. You can't can't compare Sean Connery with Pierce Brosnan as you can't compare Never Say Never with Tomorrow Never Dies because both movies are done in their individual way.
On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
I'm the opposite. I had no problem with Catwoman changing from Julie Newmar to Eartha Kitt in the Batman TV series because the style and tenor of both the show and character didn't change.
I do have a problem with the modern Batman movie franchise where each movie is a revisioning deopending on which director got up on which side of the bed so every movie has a different feel and you have the Joker played completely differently by Jack Nicholson and Heath Ledger, Catwoman by Michelle Pfeifferand Halle Berry, and every Batman as well by Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, George Clooney and Christian Bale. It's like multiple cover versions of the same song by different atrists and you're expected to like and buy them all, which is ridiculous.
On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
I'm the opposite. I had no problem with Catwoman changing from Julie Newmar to Eartha Kitt in the Batman TV series because the style and tenor of both the show and character didn't change.
I do have a problem with the modern Batman movie franchise where each movie is a revisioning deopending on which director got up on which side of the bed so every movie has a different feel and you have the Joker played completely differently by Jack Nicholson and Heath Ledger, Catwoman by Michelle Pfeifferand Halle Berry, and every Batman as well by Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, George Clooney and Christian Bale. It's like multiple cover versions of the same song by different atrists and you're expected to like and buy them all, which is ridiculous.
innominato5090
Oct 21, 11:06 AM
Its.....October.......:rolleyes:
it's never too early to start saving money for your own xmas's present :D
it's never too early to start saving money for your own xmas's present :D
No comments:
Post a Comment