 | | Re: U.S. Lego (Was Re: What is Samsonite Lego?)
|
|
Not when the Chi-Comm's give you millions of dollars in campaign contributions for the election and nuclear missile technology! Scott S. (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Taking things on faith (was Re: POV-RAY orange color
|
|
< clipped Larry's and John's view on God > That's what makes America great, gentlemen. I don't agree with Larry's assessment, but I won't get gunned down for it either (At least, not yet, who knows in Clinton's America). You have your beliefs, I (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) Sometimes I'm not so sure Lucas is motivated purely by money. He could make a mint right now if he released the first 3 movies on DVD, then PM next year, but he won't. He isn't going to release them till they're all done. Will he make a (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Extropianism
|
|
John Neal wrote in message <37BF0506.AE7F8075@u...st.net>... (...) The (...) like (...) I guess there is an art in getting rich, too. George Lucas seems to have it down pat. If the guy wants to make money (most people in Hollywood (or anywhere else) (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) Agree with everything you say in that paragraph. But a film can still be low quality in my eyes even if there was a lot of time and money spent on it, and the technicians knew their craft. Consider "Waterworld". Conversely, a film can be high (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote in message news:37BF2A50.B6DC18...ger.net... (...) Quality takes time and effort. You can't just throw something together and have it be quality, unless you're some kind of genius. In films, quality can be (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil? (Was Re: POV-RAY orange color (0)
|
|
(...) Yes, in fact it does. The rules are the way they are because the devisers of the rules have desired outcomes and want the game to have certain characteristics. Why the devisers want those characteristics would be a matter for sociology or (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) I apply the "in my living room" rule to art. If I'd be proud to have it displayed in my living room it's valuable art. If not, it may still be art, just not in my living room. Lots of the junk you find on college campuses, in fact most of it, (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) Well, suppose you wanted to make an anti-war movie, and the test audience came out of the theater laughing and playing mock war. Would you conclude that you had done something wrong, or that the audience was just stupid and incapable of (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) Is it possible to evoke *a* particular response? Unless the response you want is for people to give you money for your work. (...) A good artist IMHO works independently of his audience. Pop artists might be a different story. -John (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
