Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

MIND-BLOWING FACT: Old movies actually have HIGHER resolution than your iPhone photos. Wait... what? How do we get flawless 4K versions of movies like The Wizard of Oz (1939) or Back to the Future (1985) when 4K digital cameras didn't even exist until the 2000s? The secret lies in...

PeachProof23's profile picture

PeachProof

44,968 subscribers

102,839 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

KunstWissenschaft & Technologie
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Cinematographer Frank E. Johnson explains why modern audience connect with forgotten B-movies like "Raw Force" (1982) more than the movies made in Hollywood today: "These were times of bootstrap filmmaking and it was truly an adventure. Those days of course we shot on film and had to have it developed in a local lab in The Philippines. Hollywood still makes movies in remote locations, but has new digital technology that takes a lot of risk out of the day-to-day operations of shooting on location. I always felt that when we were making 'Raw Force', it must have been much like making 'The African Queen' (1951) in Africa in the 40s. Nowadays we could make 'Raw Force' without having to leave Hollywood. I think modern audiences are more aware of the fact that most big movies are computer generated with a lot of green screen shooting. When they see films from the 80s and before, they connect with the film knowing that it was created under those real conditions." ("The Bad Movie Bible: The Ultimate Modern Guide to Movies That Are So Bad They're Good", Rob Hill, 2017)
1:33

Cinematographer Frank E. Johnson explains why modern audience connect with forgotten B-movies like "Raw Force" (1982) more than the movies made in Hollywood today: "These were times of bootstrap filmmaking and it was truly an adventure. Those days of course we shot on film and had to have it developed in a local lab in The Philippines. Hollywood still makes movies in remote locations, but has new digital technology that takes a lot of risk out of the day-to-day operations of shooting on location. I always felt that when we were making 'Raw Force', it must have been much like making 'The African Queen' (1951) in Africa in the 40s. Nowadays we could make 'Raw Force' without having to leave Hollywood. I think modern audiences are more aware of the fact that most big movies are computer generated with a lot of green screen shooting. When they see films from the 80s and before, they connect with the film knowing that it was created under those real conditions." ("The Bad Movie Bible: The Ultimate Modern Guide to Movies That Are So Bad They're Good", Rob Hill, 2017)

DepressedBergman

51,683 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

💬: has there been a moment when a fan discovered something from your songs or your music videos that you never even discovered before? they gave it another meaning? 🦮: oh well i think if you're an ENHYPEN fan, if you're an ENGENE, you know that we have a lot of story behind all the things we do, and all the music videos we film. all the details, we really look into the details, we take care of the details. 🦮: so there are indeed a lot of hidden messages and hidden, but you know, they're hidden for a reason, so we can't really say the answer right here, right now, but.. in the future, there's going to be a lot of messages and all the little details that we want to put in and we want to make it into not just in the music videos, but in all of our content. so hope you guys look forward to it and just keep on, you know, guessing what it is
1:01

💬: has there been a moment when a fan discovered something from your songs or your music videos that you never even discovered before? they gave it another meaning? 🦮: oh well i think if you're an ENHYPEN fan, if you're an ENGENE, you know that we have a lot of story behind all the things we do, and all the music videos we film. all the details, we really look into the details, we take care of the details. 🦮: so there are indeed a lot of hidden messages and hidden, but you know, they're hidden for a reason, so we can't really say the answer right here, right now, but.. in the future, there's going to be a lot of messages and all the little details that we want to put in and we want to make it into not just in the music videos, but in all of our content. so hope you guys look forward to it and just keep on, you know, guessing what it is

샐마•𝗘𝗡╸(rest)

199,240 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Catherine Austin Fitts describes the 3 key components of "the digital control grid," including— Digital ID, programmable money, and surveillance infrastructure "We can see the Flock cameras" "America has [roughly] 4,500 data centers" "[It all] depends on a digital ID" This clip of Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, investment banker, and founder of the Solari Report (The Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts), is taken from a Liberty Forum of Silicon Valley (The Liberty Forum Of Silicon Valley) presentation posted to Rumble on May 16, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "I want to talk about— I showed you all the different pieces of the digital control grid. There are three parts of the digital control grid that you need to understand. The first and most important to me is programmable money. "This is what Solari is working to put guardrails up to stop programmable money from interfering with your financial freedom. It depends on a digital ID. One of the reasons we fought so hard against digital IDs is, and there are many excuses used to justify digital IDs, whether it's online safety or vaccinations or election fraud or immigration. Don't believe it. We had tight borders before we had digital technology. We don't need digital IDs. "The reason they want a digital ID is you need a high-quality global, interoperable digital ID to do programmable money and put into place that third lock. You need digital IDs for the third lock. The last thing you need is you need a hardware infrastructure. And this is what's been happening in America, because now more and more people can see that hardware infrastructure. "We can see the Flock cameras. Does everybody know about Flock cameras? We can see the Flock cameras. We can see the drones overhead. We can see the huge data centers. Utah just approved a data center that 63 miles wide or long, and they estimate a full capacity is going to use three times more energy than the entire state of Utah does currently, okay? "If you look at the numbers, America has approximately 4,500 data centers. Guess how many China has. About 368, I think. So we have more than 10 times China, even though our population is much less. I suspect that's because one of the things they want to do with those data centers is they want to collect data and put that third lock not just on American citizens, but everybody has got one of those stable coins or is trading one of those digital tokens worldwide. "Okay, now, what's interesting is the more the hardware becomes present, the more people are starting to see it and object and push back. Particularly the young people. They don't want to be part of this."
2:09

Catherine Austin Fitts describes the 3 key components of "the digital control grid," including— Digital ID, programmable money, and surveillance infrastructure "We can see the Flock cameras" "America has [roughly] 4,500 data centers" "[It all] depends on a digital ID" This clip of Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, investment banker, and founder of the Solari Report (The Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts), is taken from a Liberty Forum of Silicon Valley (The Liberty Forum Of Silicon Valley) presentation posted to Rumble on May 16, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "I want to talk about— I showed you all the different pieces of the digital control grid. There are three parts of the digital control grid that you need to understand. The first and most important to me is programmable money. "This is what Solari is working to put guardrails up to stop programmable money from interfering with your financial freedom. It depends on a digital ID. One of the reasons we fought so hard against digital IDs is, and there are many excuses used to justify digital IDs, whether it's online safety or vaccinations or election fraud or immigration. Don't believe it. We had tight borders before we had digital technology. We don't need digital IDs. "The reason they want a digital ID is you need a high-quality global, interoperable digital ID to do programmable money and put into place that third lock. You need digital IDs for the third lock. The last thing you need is you need a hardware infrastructure. And this is what's been happening in America, because now more and more people can see that hardware infrastructure. "We can see the Flock cameras. Does everybody know about Flock cameras? We can see the Flock cameras. We can see the drones overhead. We can see the huge data centers. Utah just approved a data center that 63 miles wide or long, and they estimate a full capacity is going to use three times more energy than the entire state of Utah does currently, okay? "If you look at the numbers, America has approximately 4,500 data centers. Guess how many China has. About 368, I think. So we have more than 10 times China, even though our population is much less. I suspect that's because one of the things they want to do with those data centers is they want to collect data and put that third lock not just on American citizens, but everybody has got one of those stable coins or is trading one of those digital tokens worldwide. "Okay, now, what's interesting is the more the hardware becomes present, the more people are starting to see it and object and push back. Particularly the young people. They don't want to be part of this."

Sense Receptor

13,593 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Wim Wenders on 'Bad Day at Black Rock' (1955): "A dusty American colour film by John Sturges where everything’s so right and correct that it is almost unbearable. You could say of this John Sturges film that it doesn’t show a succession of images, but of sentences. A whole dozen of these sentences are written up in the display cases of the theatres showing 'Bad Day at Black Rock' Stills of old colour films have a peculiar charm, because they seem completely detached from the film and tend to look more like old hand coloured postcards than the actual scenes in the film. You can recognize, though, with surprise, the stills from 'Bad Day at Black Rock' when you’re watching the actual film; you can even spot the precise moment they captured. The film retains the impression that the coloured photographs have left behind. All the way through it looks hand-painted. The backdrops of the landscape that constantly show through windows or doors have more in common with paintings by Magritte than with the real landscape shown in the outdoor scenes. But even these look much more like a mile-wide, sky-high stage-set built in a gigantic studio. This endless artificiality confused me a lot at the beginning of the film, because I could only trace it back to the colours. It was only after a while that I suddenly discovered what was really happening in this film, when I saw the worn-out seats in the foyer of the hotel in Black Rock: these seats didn’t simply stand around there, they stood around as precisely the chairs that had to be there, the ashtray beside them was the only possible ashtray for these seats, the one-armed bandit was the only conceivable slot-machine for a hotel like that in a town in the Mid West. Every thing in this film, by itself, was the most exact and the most right and the most suitable that could be. Every object was so right that it could form a completely self-contained sentence, it could be distinguished from all the others around it, but for precisely this reason it suited everything else perfectly. In this film all details were really details!" ('Re: Bad Day at Black Rock', Wim Wenders, 1970)
2:40

Wim Wenders on 'Bad Day at Black Rock' (1955): "A dusty American colour film by John Sturges where everything’s so right and correct that it is almost unbearable. You could say of this John Sturges film that it doesn’t show a succession of images, but of sentences. A whole dozen of these sentences are written up in the display cases of the theatres showing 'Bad Day at Black Rock' Stills of old colour films have a peculiar charm, because they seem completely detached from the film and tend to look more like old hand coloured postcards than the actual scenes in the film. You can recognize, though, with surprise, the stills from 'Bad Day at Black Rock' when you’re watching the actual film; you can even spot the precise moment they captured. The film retains the impression that the coloured photographs have left behind. All the way through it looks hand-painted. The backdrops of the landscape that constantly show through windows or doors have more in common with paintings by Magritte than with the real landscape shown in the outdoor scenes. But even these look much more like a mile-wide, sky-high stage-set built in a gigantic studio. This endless artificiality confused me a lot at the beginning of the film, because I could only trace it back to the colours. It was only after a while that I suddenly discovered what was really happening in this film, when I saw the worn-out seats in the foyer of the hotel in Black Rock: these seats didn’t simply stand around there, they stood around as precisely the chairs that had to be there, the ashtray beside them was the only possible ashtray for these seats, the one-armed bandit was the only conceivable slot-machine for a hotel like that in a town in the Mid West. Every thing in this film, by itself, was the most exact and the most right and the most suitable that could be. Every object was so right that it could form a completely self-contained sentence, it could be distinguished from all the others around it, but for precisely this reason it suited everything else perfectly. In this film all details were really details!" ('Re: Bad Day at Black Rock', Wim Wenders, 1970)

DepressedBergman

66,878 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Mathieu Kassovitz on how "La Haine" (1995) changed many people's lives: “When you want to make a political movie you want it to be relevant. No point in pleasing people. There are already many movies that can please people. 'Monty Python' or Disney movies are passed on from generation to generation but to be able to do a political movie that stays relevant 25 years later is amazing and terrible at the same time. Because it also means that the problems are still here. They are even worse now, they are combined with other problems that we didn’t have 25 years ago. That movie changed a lot of people’s lives. I met people who became policemen or lawyers because of the film. That’s why we are releasing it again, because it’s a movie people can relate to. It’s what you’re looking for when you make a political film. People are more than just entertained. My memories stem more from the audience than from the movie itself. The way it was received and the way people see it today. Either they were from the projects and it changed their way of looking at a problem. Art can really help with that. On a political level, it gave the kids from the suburbs a certain strength. It also gave cops another angle at looking at those kids. Many people were inspired to produce new work. Even this year’s César winner is inspired by 'La Haine', not by the movie itself but by the theme. The end is almost the same. JR was 13 years old when he watched the film and his artwork is very much inspired by the poster. The film actually helped to create a new generation of filmmakers and artists. It wasn’t just a trend. It’s an adventure that we shared together. So that’s the point of making movies like that and I’m proud of it. There is no music in La Haine but it’s a hip-hop movie. As it’s political, hip-hop and street culture has to be a part of it. Hip-hop is educating and entertaining at the same time. It’s the best way to learn, we call it ‘edutainment’. After all, 'La Haine' is also a comedy, except for the last 20 seconds of course.” ("La Haine Turns 25 – And Is As Relevant As Ever", Arijana Zeric, Another Magazine, 2020) P.S: On this day, 31 years ago, "La Haine" (1995) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.
1:18

Mathieu Kassovitz on how "La Haine" (1995) changed many people's lives: “When you want to make a political movie you want it to be relevant. No point in pleasing people. There are already many movies that can please people. 'Monty Python' or Disney movies are passed on from generation to generation but to be able to do a political movie that stays relevant 25 years later is amazing and terrible at the same time. Because it also means that the problems are still here. They are even worse now, they are combined with other problems that we didn’t have 25 years ago. That movie changed a lot of people’s lives. I met people who became policemen or lawyers because of the film. That’s why we are releasing it again, because it’s a movie people can relate to. It’s what you’re looking for when you make a political film. People are more than just entertained. My memories stem more from the audience than from the movie itself. The way it was received and the way people see it today. Either they were from the projects and it changed their way of looking at a problem. Art can really help with that. On a political level, it gave the kids from the suburbs a certain strength. It also gave cops another angle at looking at those kids. Many people were inspired to produce new work. Even this year’s César winner is inspired by 'La Haine', not by the movie itself but by the theme. The end is almost the same. JR was 13 years old when he watched the film and his artwork is very much inspired by the poster. The film actually helped to create a new generation of filmmakers and artists. It wasn’t just a trend. It’s an adventure that we shared together. So that’s the point of making movies like that and I’m proud of it. There is no music in La Haine but it’s a hip-hop movie. As it’s political, hip-hop and street culture has to be a part of it. Hip-hop is educating and entertaining at the same time. It’s the best way to learn, we call it ‘edutainment’. After all, 'La Haine' is also a comedy, except for the last 20 seconds of course.” ("La Haine Turns 25 – And Is As Relevant As Ever", Arijana Zeric, Another Magazine, 2020) P.S: On this day, 31 years ago, "La Haine" (1995) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.

DepressedBergman

12,731 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

The Circle (2000, Panahi)/ Iran "Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date." --- Jafar Panahi Full Excerpt: "Interviewer: The subject matter of 'The Circle' (2000) is controversial. You mentioned that the film is still banned in Iran. In fact, when I was watching the film, I realized that through the characters, there’s a lot of fear about the system, the establishment, the police. The women can’t smoke; they have to wear the chador; they seem to want to hide every time. This is all very clear from watching the film. Did you deliberately want to make a statement about the political situation in Iran? Panahi: I have to tell you again that I’m not a political person. I don’t like political movies. But I take every opportunity to comment on the social issues. I talk about the current issues. To me it’s not important what is the reason for what has happened. Whether it’s political reasons or geographical reasons: these are not important—but the condition, the social issues. It is important to me to talk about the plight of humanity at that time. I don’t want to give a political view, or start a political war. I think that the artist should rise above this. Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date. So it doesn’t really serve a political purpose. Then it can be everlasting, for always, and it could be for anywhere. But I know that politically, with the film authorities, with any kind of film that has some political background in it, they would take issue with it. And for this reason, that is what the problem is. Interviewer: Still, your film makes a very strong statement about the problems that women face in Iran. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. Interviewer: So that is humanitarian, of course, but it’s also political. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. It has the elements. It all depends on how you look at it. If a person has only political views, then he will only see the political. But if you are a poet or an artist, then you see other things as well in the movie. If you are a socialist, you see political or economic or whatever different points of view. You mustn’t look at a film with only one point of view. If you want to see 'The Circle' (2000) as political, then it is one of the most political movies in Iran. By political, I mean partisan politics. But even the police, I didn’t want to show them as bad. In the first instance, you are afraid of the police. Because you are looking at them from the point of view of someone who is now in prison. And normally you see him in a long shot, but when they come nearer and you see them in a medium shot, you can see their human faces. Then it comes down to, “Do you need any help?” But he goes back again and becomes frightening. If I were being political, then I would always show the police as dangerous or bad persons." (Jafar Panahi's interview with Stephen Teo, Senses of Cinema, 2001)
3:01

The Circle (2000, Panahi)/ Iran "Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date." --- Jafar Panahi Full Excerpt: "Interviewer: The subject matter of 'The Circle' (2000) is controversial. You mentioned that the film is still banned in Iran. In fact, when I was watching the film, I realized that through the characters, there’s a lot of fear about the system, the establishment, the police. The women can’t smoke; they have to wear the chador; they seem to want to hide every time. This is all very clear from watching the film. Did you deliberately want to make a statement about the political situation in Iran? Panahi: I have to tell you again that I’m not a political person. I don’t like political movies. But I take every opportunity to comment on the social issues. I talk about the current issues. To me it’s not important what is the reason for what has happened. Whether it’s political reasons or geographical reasons: these are not important—but the condition, the social issues. It is important to me to talk about the plight of humanity at that time. I don’t want to give a political view, or start a political war. I think that the artist should rise above this. Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date. So it doesn’t really serve a political purpose. Then it can be everlasting, for always, and it could be for anywhere. But I know that politically, with the film authorities, with any kind of film that has some political background in it, they would take issue with it. And for this reason, that is what the problem is. Interviewer: Still, your film makes a very strong statement about the problems that women face in Iran. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. Interviewer: So that is humanitarian, of course, but it’s also political. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. It has the elements. It all depends on how you look at it. If a person has only political views, then he will only see the political. But if you are a poet or an artist, then you see other things as well in the movie. If you are a socialist, you see political or economic or whatever different points of view. You mustn’t look at a film with only one point of view. If you want to see 'The Circle' (2000) as political, then it is one of the most political movies in Iran. By political, I mean partisan politics. But even the police, I didn’t want to show them as bad. In the first instance, you are afraid of the police. Because you are looking at them from the point of view of someone who is now in prison. And normally you see him in a long shot, but when they come nearer and you see them in a medium shot, you can see their human faces. Then it comes down to, “Do you need any help?” But he goes back again and becomes frightening. If I were being political, then I would always show the police as dangerous or bad persons." (Jafar Panahi's interview with Stephen Teo, Senses of Cinema, 2001)

DepressedBergman

43,871 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Anne Hathaway reveals film footprints were not fixed in post-production because everything was shot in-camera Anne: "I said, 'Yeah, but on the sand, how are they going to get rid of everybody's footprints in time?' And this person goes, 'Well, they're going to fix it in post.' And I went, 'No, that's the thing, they're not.'" Anne: "So that's one of the things I'm excited about for young people who are so used to the idea that so much of what movies are created in a computer." Anne: "I think it's so exciting for young people in particular to understand that this was all created in a camera." Matt: "And also to know that the reason for that is that when you do a special effect, you film on this film and you get the negative. If you do a special effect, you have to run the film through another stage in order to and so there's a slight degradation of the film." Matt: "And Chris wants every single film print that you see to be a direct print right from the negative, a positive print right from that negative, so that there's nothing separating you and this experience that we all had."
1:51

Anne Hathaway reveals film footprints were not fixed in post-production because everything was shot in-camera Anne: "I said, 'Yeah, but on the sand, how are they going to get rid of everybody's footprints in time?' And this person goes, 'Well, they're going to fix it in post.' And I went, 'No, that's the thing, they're not.'" Anne: "So that's one of the things I'm excited about for young people who are so used to the idea that so much of what movies are created in a computer." Anne: "I think it's so exciting for young people in particular to understand that this was all created in a camera." Matt: "And also to know that the reason for that is that when you do a special effect, you film on this film and you get the negative. If you do a special effect, you have to run the film through another stage in order to and so there's a slight degradation of the film." Matt: "And Chris wants every single film print that you see to be a direct print right from the negative, a positive print right from that negative, so that there's nothing separating you and this experience that we all had."

Moyhin 🤍

227,933 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

jihoon wants us to promise to have more fun at treasure concerts, film with your left hand and have fun with your right hand 🤙🏻 #지훈 🐶 you’re asking how yesterday was? yesterday was seriously so fun. it really was fun, but hmmm you guys need to have even more fun.. 🐶 you guys need to have more fun. teumes can def go harder than this, but you’re holding back. you guys can def do more, seriously, you really can but everyone kind of hesitates a little. just go out there and enjoy the atmosphere, got it? ok~? 🐶 i’m not saying don’t film or anything like that. you can film, it’s fine, i don’t mind it, because i think that’s the fans’ freedom. but i mean… film with one hand, your left hand, and use your right hand to hold your lightstick and have fun 🐶 but when both hands are on your phone like this… and i’m right in front of you… why are you looking at me through a camera filter first? you came to see me, so why… when i’m standing right in front of you, are you still only looking at me through your phone? it’s just a little disappointing to me 🐶 i’m not saying anyone is doing something wrong or anything like that, i’m just saying it feels a bit sad. i’m literally right in front of you, so why are you still looking at me inside your phone even when i’m right here? 🐶 and i know you want to take pictures, it’s okay. you can film it, keep it. it’s fine, because it’s not prohibited. in concerts where filming isn’t banned, ofc you can film. you want to take photos. ofc you want to take photos when your favorite singer is right in front of you, ofc you want to film it. i know that, we all know that. you can film it but film with your left hand and have fun with your right hand. let’s all make that promise. seriously, let’s really do it, film with your left hand and have fun with your right hand 🐶 because… when i’m like this, from up on stage when we look out like this, your gazes, your lightsticks, those kinds of things... when i feel like i’m directly interacting with each and every one of you like that.. i get out of breath like i might die, i get dizzy and everything, and my adrenaline gets pushed to the limit. but then if it’s all just iphone 17 pro maxes everywhere… it feels a bit disappointing 🐶 but i really do like that you film. i just feel a little regretful like if you film with one hand and have fun with the other.. like use your right hand properly to have fun, and use your left hand to film and capture everything… that’s how it should be, i guess. that kind of feeling 🐶 i’m not saying this to hear sorry from you guys. that’s not what i mean. i’m not saying you’re doing anything wrong, i just mean let’s all have fun together like that 💬 but oppa, if you’re playing with your right hand, the video in your left hand does get shaky so i just jump around and go all out 🐶 but even that shaking… i think of it as part of the live feeling
2:11

jihoon wants us to promise to have more fun at treasure concerts, film with your left hand and have fun with your right hand 🤙🏻 #지훈 🐶 you’re asking how yesterday was? yesterday was seriously so fun. it really was fun, but hmmm you guys need to have even more fun.. 🐶 you guys need to have more fun. teumes can def go harder than this, but you’re holding back. you guys can def do more, seriously, you really can but everyone kind of hesitates a little. just go out there and enjoy the atmosphere, got it? ok~? 🐶 i’m not saying don’t film or anything like that. you can film, it’s fine, i don’t mind it, because i think that’s the fans’ freedom. but i mean… film with one hand, your left hand, and use your right hand to hold your lightstick and have fun 🐶 but when both hands are on your phone like this… and i’m right in front of you… why are you looking at me through a camera filter first? you came to see me, so why… when i’m standing right in front of you, are you still only looking at me through your phone? it’s just a little disappointing to me 🐶 i’m not saying anyone is doing something wrong or anything like that, i’m just saying it feels a bit sad. i’m literally right in front of you, so why are you still looking at me inside your phone even when i’m right here? 🐶 and i know you want to take pictures, it’s okay. you can film it, keep it. it’s fine, because it’s not prohibited. in concerts where filming isn’t banned, ofc you can film. you want to take photos. ofc you want to take photos when your favorite singer is right in front of you, ofc you want to film it. i know that, we all know that. you can film it but film with your left hand and have fun with your right hand. let’s all make that promise. seriously, let’s really do it, film with your left hand and have fun with your right hand 🐶 because… when i’m like this, from up on stage when we look out like this, your gazes, your lightsticks, those kinds of things... when i feel like i’m directly interacting with each and every one of you like that.. i get out of breath like i might die, i get dizzy and everything, and my adrenaline gets pushed to the limit. but then if it’s all just iphone 17 pro maxes everywhere… it feels a bit disappointing 🐶 but i really do like that you film. i just feel a little regretful like if you film with one hand and have fun with the other.. like use your right hand properly to have fun, and use your left hand to film and capture everything… that’s how it should be, i guess. that kind of feeling 🐶 i’m not saying this to hear sorry from you guys. that’s not what i mean. i’m not saying you’re doing anything wrong, i just mean let’s all have fun together like that 💬 but oppa, if you’re playing with your right hand, the video in your left hand does get shaky so i just jump around and go all out 🐶 but even that shaking… i think of it as part of the live feeling

행복지수 314%

23,355 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Catherine Austin Fitts argues that Donald Trump was installed by bankers to construct a digital control grid comprised of programmable money, digital ID, and a social credit system. She maintains that Trump is expendable now that the infrastructure for this system is complete. "So let's look at the control grid. There are three general baskets of what you need to do. The first is programmable money. The second is digital ID... And then the third is you need the hardware and the software infrastructure to do the social credit system." "And so you need all the data centres... But you also need a surveillance infrastructure and enforcement infrastructure to back it." "So how do you persuade conservatives... to embrace building that infrastructure? The way you do it is you say, oh, we have election fraud, or oh, we have an immigration problem. And so we need a digital ID to identify who everybody is so we can't have fraud." "If you look at everything [Trump has] done to build the control grid, or to put the conditions in place to do it, they now have what they need." "Trump is basically expendable now."
2:40

Catherine Austin Fitts argues that Donald Trump was installed by bankers to construct a digital control grid comprised of programmable money, digital ID, and a social credit system. She maintains that Trump is expendable now that the infrastructure for this system is complete. "So let's look at the control grid. There are three general baskets of what you need to do. The first is programmable money. The second is digital ID... And then the third is you need the hardware and the software infrastructure to do the social credit system." "And so you need all the data centres... But you also need a surveillance infrastructure and enforcement infrastructure to back it." "So how do you persuade conservatives... to embrace building that infrastructure? The way you do it is you say, oh, we have election fraud, or oh, we have an immigration problem. And so we need a digital ID to identify who everybody is so we can't have fraud." "If you look at everything [Trump has] done to build the control grid, or to put the conditions in place to do it, they now have what they need." "Trump is basically expendable now."

Wide Awake Media

148,643 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

The Trump admin is GASLIGHTING us re: no CBDCs They know they can't do CBDCs because of the Constitution, so they're backdooring them with stablecoins Iain Davis explains— "the idea of a [CBDC] is that it will give these private institutions total control of a new digital international monetary and financial system" "CBDC is programmable money that slots into that system. That's why they want it" "That's not going to work in the US because... it's a constitutional right in the United States that the people, and only the people, oversee what they call the power, quote–unquote... to coin money" "So what are you going to do about it? You need some sort of work-round" "So stablecoins and things like deposit tokens or tokenized deposits are variations of programmable digital currency. But rather than being issued by a central bank, they're issued by a commercial bank" "stablecoins... slot into the system of programmability just as easily, if not more so than a central bank digital currency. So you can attach smart contracts to any kind of digital transaction using digital currency" "Programmable digital currency and stablecoins do exactly the same thing, serve the same purpose, as central bank digital currency" This clip of Iain Davis (InThisTogether), author of The Technocratic Dark State, is taken from a Flashlights podcast (Flashlights Podcast) episode posted to Rumble on May 17, 2026. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "It's a constitutional right in the United States that the people, and only the people, oversee what they call the power, quote–unquote, it says this in the Constitution, to coin money. So the power to coin money is overseen by the people. "Now the idea of a central bank digital currency is that it will give these private institutions total control of a new digital international monetary and financial system. That's CBDC is programmable money that slots into that system. That's why they want it. "That's not going to work in the US because even though Congress, you know, Congress is the, is the dog which is wagged by the tail in this of the Fed, the Fed, you know, the Fed tells Congress what to do, not the other way round. But theoretically it could be the other way round. And theoretically the people could assert their control over the Fed if they only knew about it, which, not many people do, but they could do it, right? It's in the US Constitution. "Now that's a problem if you're going to embark on a global transformation of the entire international monetary and financial system when your leading reserve currency is the US dollar. So that's, you know, that could all go wrong very badly. "So what are you going to do about it? You need some sort of work round. How are you, how are you going to do which for the, you know, I, for many years, well, since central bank digital currency has been something that I've been looking at, I couldn't figure out why the US wasn't more enthusiastic about central bank digital currency. "Because it's the type of thing that the US administrations are usually right up— You know, they're really gung ho about that kind of centralized control of everything. That's right up their alley. So why, why don't they like it? And then it was the work of John Titus who pointed out this problem that they've got in the US with the Constitution that made me look at that and think, right. And then I started investigating that further. And he's right about that. That is a problem. "But then they obviously need some sort of workaround. How are they going to have. Because the main point of central bank digital currency from the surveillance and control aspect is that we will all need digital identity in order to access our digital wallets, which will contain the currency and the currency and the wallets and our, digital identities will all be programmable so conditions can be set on everything that we do. "Every transaction we make will be subject to condition through some sort of smart contract probably, which will control it. Right. So you know, if you say the wrong thing or you know, you, you just write the wrong thing online, you could be punished by algorithm by controlling your access to money... "And so the key to that is central bank— the programmability of central bank digital currency. But obviously that's not going to, may not work. There's a good chance that won't work in the United States which has got the US dollar reserve is an important currency. "So what are you going to do? So stablecoins and things like deposit tokens or tokenized deposits are variations of programmable digital currency. But rather than being issued by a central bank, they're issued by a commercial bank. So or in the case of stablecoins, a non-bank, a non-bank institution like Tether. So it's not a bank. "But you can use stablecoins for exactly the same. They slot into the system of programmability just as easily, if not more so than a central bank digital currency. So you can attach smart contracts to any kind of digital transaction using digital currency. Programmable digital currency and stablecoins do exactly the same thing, serve the same purpose as central bank digital currency or the other version, the commercial bank version is deposit tokens. Any of those will do. "Now in the US they've gone down the stablecoin route so they can issue the stablecoins which will be backed by US Treasuries, just like the dollar or just like any kind of dollar instrument will be one to one convertible for the US dollar. So the stablecoins are effectively the US dollar in, in digital form. "But instead of calling it a central bank digital currency, they call it issued by, it wouldn't have to be issued by the Fed. They call it a stablecoin, which is issued by a company like Tether or you know, someone like that. So it's the same system but using a workaround. And that workaround came with the Genius Act which, which came from an executive order that Trump made when he first came to office. "Because the Americans, quite rightly when they were electing their president, were concerned about central bank digital currency. I mean anyone that understands what it is should be terrified of it. So they didn't want it, and Trump promised that they wouldn't have it. Probably. I don't know whether he knew, but certainly the gaggle of technocrats that were around him knew that they weren't going down that path. Anyway, no chance of the US introducing it because of these problems we've just outlined."
6:11

The Trump admin is GASLIGHTING us re: no CBDCs They know they can't do CBDCs because of the Constitution, so they're backdooring them with stablecoins Iain Davis explains— "the idea of a [CBDC] is that it will give these private institutions total control of a new digital international monetary and financial system" "CBDC is programmable money that slots into that system. That's why they want it" "That's not going to work in the US because... it's a constitutional right in the United States that the people, and only the people, oversee what they call the power, quote–unquote... to coin money" "So what are you going to do about it? You need some sort of work-round" "So stablecoins and things like deposit tokens or tokenized deposits are variations of programmable digital currency. But rather than being issued by a central bank, they're issued by a commercial bank" "stablecoins... slot into the system of programmability just as easily, if not more so than a central bank digital currency. So you can attach smart contracts to any kind of digital transaction using digital currency" "Programmable digital currency and stablecoins do exactly the same thing, serve the same purpose, as central bank digital currency" This clip of Iain Davis (InThisTogether), author of The Technocratic Dark State, is taken from a Flashlights podcast (Flashlights Podcast) episode posted to Rumble on May 17, 2026. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- "It's a constitutional right in the United States that the people, and only the people, oversee what they call the power, quote–unquote, it says this in the Constitution, to coin money. So the power to coin money is overseen by the people. "Now the idea of a central bank digital currency is that it will give these private institutions total control of a new digital international monetary and financial system. That's CBDC is programmable money that slots into that system. That's why they want it. "That's not going to work in the US because even though Congress, you know, Congress is the, is the dog which is wagged by the tail in this of the Fed, the Fed, you know, the Fed tells Congress what to do, not the other way round. But theoretically it could be the other way round. And theoretically the people could assert their control over the Fed if they only knew about it, which, not many people do, but they could do it, right? It's in the US Constitution. "Now that's a problem if you're going to embark on a global transformation of the entire international monetary and financial system when your leading reserve currency is the US dollar. So that's, you know, that could all go wrong very badly. "So what are you going to do about it? You need some sort of work round. How are you, how are you going to do which for the, you know, I, for many years, well, since central bank digital currency has been something that I've been looking at, I couldn't figure out why the US wasn't more enthusiastic about central bank digital currency. "Because it's the type of thing that the US administrations are usually right up— You know, they're really gung ho about that kind of centralized control of everything. That's right up their alley. So why, why don't they like it? And then it was the work of John Titus who pointed out this problem that they've got in the US with the Constitution that made me look at that and think, right. And then I started investigating that further. And he's right about that. That is a problem. "But then they obviously need some sort of workaround. How are they going to have. Because the main point of central bank digital currency from the surveillance and control aspect is that we will all need digital identity in order to access our digital wallets, which will contain the currency and the currency and the wallets and our, digital identities will all be programmable so conditions can be set on everything that we do. "Every transaction we make will be subject to condition through some sort of smart contract probably, which will control it. Right. So you know, if you say the wrong thing or you know, you, you just write the wrong thing online, you could be punished by algorithm by controlling your access to money... "And so the key to that is central bank— the programmability of central bank digital currency. But obviously that's not going to, may not work. There's a good chance that won't work in the United States which has got the US dollar reserve is an important currency. "So what are you going to do? So stablecoins and things like deposit tokens or tokenized deposits are variations of programmable digital currency. But rather than being issued by a central bank, they're issued by a commercial bank. So or in the case of stablecoins, a non-bank, a non-bank institution like Tether. So it's not a bank. "But you can use stablecoins for exactly the same. They slot into the system of programmability just as easily, if not more so than a central bank digital currency. So you can attach smart contracts to any kind of digital transaction using digital currency. Programmable digital currency and stablecoins do exactly the same thing, serve the same purpose as central bank digital currency or the other version, the commercial bank version is deposit tokens. Any of those will do. "Now in the US they've gone down the stablecoin route so they can issue the stablecoins which will be backed by US Treasuries, just like the dollar or just like any kind of dollar instrument will be one to one convertible for the US dollar. So the stablecoins are effectively the US dollar in, in digital form. "But instead of calling it a central bank digital currency, they call it issued by, it wouldn't have to be issued by the Fed. They call it a stablecoin, which is issued by a company like Tether or you know, someone like that. So it's the same system but using a workaround. And that workaround came with the Genius Act which, which came from an executive order that Trump made when he first came to office. "Because the Americans, quite rightly when they were electing their president, were concerned about central bank digital currency. I mean anyone that understands what it is should be terrified of it. So they didn't want it, and Trump promised that they wouldn't have it. Probably. I don't know whether he knew, but certainly the gaggle of technocrats that were around him knew that they weren't going down that path. Anyway, no chance of the US introducing it because of these problems we've just outlined."

Sense Receptor

13,996 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Christopher Nolan says there are only six lightweight IMAX cameras in the world and he has destroyed more than one “There are two new ones for this film. So now there are six of the lightweight ones around the world. There’s enough for multiple productions” Tom Holland: “Do you think there are cameras that you used on The Dark Knight that we used on this movie? These hidden characters that have gone through your career” Nolan: “They’re all old friends. Every now and again, we would destroy an IMAX camera, and it would be very heartbreaking. But I’ve always managed to build it back together” “On The Dark Knight, we crushed one between a truck and a car. It was on a crane arm. There wasn’t a camera operator. We smashed it, but they actually managed to fix it and save the film” “Then on Dunkirk, we strapped one to the side of a crashing Spitfire, housed in an underwater housing. The Spitfire landed, but then the thing sank immediately, which no one was expecting” “It took a couple of hours to get the camera out. By then, it was completely waterlogged. We called the lab in LA and said, ‘Is there anything you could do with the film?’” “They said, ‘Fill the film cans with water, keep them sealed and send them to us in water.’ They put it through the bath, processed it, and the shot is in the film” “Try doing that with a digital camera”
1:27

Christopher Nolan says there are only six lightweight IMAX cameras in the world and he has destroyed more than one “There are two new ones for this film. So now there are six of the lightweight ones around the world. There’s enough for multiple productions” Tom Holland: “Do you think there are cameras that you used on The Dark Knight that we used on this movie? These hidden characters that have gone through your career” Nolan: “They’re all old friends. Every now and again, we would destroy an IMAX camera, and it would be very heartbreaking. But I’ve always managed to build it back together” “On The Dark Knight, we crushed one between a truck and a car. It was on a crane arm. There wasn’t a camera operator. We smashed it, but they actually managed to fix it and save the film” “Then on Dunkirk, we strapped one to the side of a crashing Spitfire, housed in an underwater housing. The Spitfire landed, but then the thing sank immediately, which no one was expecting” “It took a couple of hours to get the camera out. By then, it was completely waterlogged. We called the lab in LA and said, ‘Is there anything you could do with the film?’” “They said, ‘Fill the film cans with water, keep them sealed and send them to us in water.’ They put it through the bath, processed it, and the shot is in the film” “Try doing that with a digital camera”

Casper

3,285,092 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Jim Jarmusch on why editing is similar to sculpting & how he wanted "Dead Man" (1995) to feel like: "Interviewer: Are you the kind of director who finds the film in the cutting room or do you do the montage in your head as you shoot? Jarmusch: I’m in-between. When | go in the cutting room, I have a pretty good idea of how a scene was intended to be cut together. The editing is very important because you get to a Zen-like place where the film starts telling you how to cut it. A lot of scenes were shot for 'Dead Man' that are not in the film. Shooting is like cutting up big pieces of granite that are sort of in the right shape of the thing you want to sculpt out of them. And then you go back, and the shape is not exactly what you had in mind so you sculpt them some more. I like the process. That’s why I never use a storyboard, and on 'Dead Man' I didn’t even have shot lists in advance. I don’t want to know in advance what we’re going to do because then we are not thinking on our feet. Interviewer: How did you work out the conception of the film’s look with DP Robby Miiller? It’s a black-and-white film with lots of shades of gray. And the landscapes were quite ugly but beautifully so. Jarmusch: We worked hard to use black and white like it was used in the ’30s and ’40s when the gray scale was the color palette. We wanted to avoid the recent “hard” black-and-white look, although the blacks are very black and the whites are very white. We wanted a feeling like a film by Mizoguchi. And when we were scouting for locations, whenever we saw any magnificent view, like a postcard type, we would appreciate it, Robby and I, and then turn out backs and look for our location with that out of view." (Jim Jarmusch's interview with Scott Macaulay, 1996) P.S: On this day, 30 years ago, "Dead Man" (1995) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.
1:28

Jim Jarmusch on why editing is similar to sculpting & how he wanted "Dead Man" (1995) to feel like: "Interviewer: Are you the kind of director who finds the film in the cutting room or do you do the montage in your head as you shoot? Jarmusch: I’m in-between. When | go in the cutting room, I have a pretty good idea of how a scene was intended to be cut together. The editing is very important because you get to a Zen-like place where the film starts telling you how to cut it. A lot of scenes were shot for 'Dead Man' that are not in the film. Shooting is like cutting up big pieces of granite that are sort of in the right shape of the thing you want to sculpt out of them. And then you go back, and the shape is not exactly what you had in mind so you sculpt them some more. I like the process. That’s why I never use a storyboard, and on 'Dead Man' I didn’t even have shot lists in advance. I don’t want to know in advance what we’re going to do because then we are not thinking on our feet. Interviewer: How did you work out the conception of the film’s look with DP Robby Miiller? It’s a black-and-white film with lots of shades of gray. And the landscapes were quite ugly but beautifully so. Jarmusch: We worked hard to use black and white like it was used in the ’30s and ’40s when the gray scale was the color palette. We wanted to avoid the recent “hard” black-and-white look, although the blacks are very black and the whites are very white. We wanted a feeling like a film by Mizoguchi. And when we were scouting for locations, whenever we saw any magnificent view, like a postcard type, we would appreciate it, Robby and I, and then turn out backs and look for our location with that out of view." (Jim Jarmusch's interview with Scott Macaulay, 1996) P.S: On this day, 30 years ago, "Dead Man" (1995) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.

DepressedBergman

19,517 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Marc Andreessen reveals the ultimate danger for entrepreneurs trying to lead like the greats. Before you try to run your startup by inserting yourself into every detail, you need to hear this reality check: "The thing you don't get is as follows, which is that... assumes you have somebody like Elon who can hold the entirety of every engineering topic and every business topic in their head all at the same time." "And so when you're sitting there with the 23-year-old engineer and you're working with them to redesign the database architecture or whatever, you actually are like qualified to do that. And that you're qualified to do that not just that one time, but EVERY time." It forces us to ask a tough question about the actual talent pool in tech right now: "This goes right back to the last topic we just talked about, which is like, OK, how many of those people exist who can possibly do that? And, you know, we know the answer is one." But here is where his perspective completely shifts... "I believe the answer is ten or a hundred or a thousand. I don't know if it's a million. I tend to think we have more of those people than we think we do."
1:06

Marc Andreessen reveals the ultimate danger for entrepreneurs trying to lead like the greats. Before you try to run your startup by inserting yourself into every detail, you need to hear this reality check: "The thing you don't get is as follows, which is that... assumes you have somebody like Elon who can hold the entirety of every engineering topic and every business topic in their head all at the same time." "And so when you're sitting there with the 23-year-old engineer and you're working with them to redesign the database architecture or whatever, you actually are like qualified to do that. And that you're qualified to do that not just that one time, but EVERY time." It forces us to ask a tough question about the actual talent pool in tech right now: "This goes right back to the last topic we just talked about, which is like, OK, how many of those people exist who can possibly do that? And, you know, we know the answer is one." But here is where his perspective completely shifts... "I believe the answer is ten or a hundred or a thousand. I don't know if it's a million. I tend to think we have more of those people than we think we do."

Ian Miles Cheong

37,516 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

I’ve made a short film. Look at the things around you: doors, bins, staircases, furniture, railings, doorhandles, windows. Do you like how they look, or not? Modern design has become boring, but it doesn’t have to be this way. The word “beautiful” is overused. We don’t need “beautiful” lamps, bus stops, and water fountains – we just need lamps, bus stops, and water fountains that are interesting, that actually mean something. Or, at the very least, not boring. Because the aesthetics of architecture and urban design aren’t just a bonus; they totally change how we think, feel, and behave. Boring environments make us more stressed and less productive; they erode our sense of community; they make us sadder, less trusting, and lonelier. A boring world is one where we spend even more time online and where our addictions are even harder to battle. The Problem There is global, widespread dissatisfaction with how the world looks. In this film, and the series it will lead to, we want to investigate that feeling and give it a voice. The point isn’t that we should return to the past or get rid of modernism. It’s about learning from the past in order to improve the present, and about giving the public what they very clearly want, which isn’t the eradication of modernism but the co-existence of modernism AND traditionalism. Just look where tourists go, where they take their photos, and that tells you everything you need to know about what most people find interesting or beautiful. And look at where people go on holiday. It’s always to cities filled with old architecture and design, with churches and mosques and palaces, with charming little alleyways and stone staircases and wrought-iron railings. Of the world’s fifty most visited buildings, only four were made in the 20th century, and they’re all museums or memorials. There’s a reason why posts about this go viral online all the time. Regardless of why the change happened, it is clearly the case that we no longer make things how we used to. People are rightly confused by the fact that old lamp posts (to take the example we focus on in the film) are usually so pretty, while modern ones are usually so boring. Some people say this is just an example of survivorship bias… and they’re mostly correct. But that’s the whole point! Saying old buildings are usually prettier than modern buildings is not to say that architecture used to be better, or that the past was better. It is simply to say that certain kinds of buildings, because they have been preserved, are good examples of what people like most. In which case... shouldn't we try to design at least some buildings in a way that we know people like? A Unifying Cause Everybody, from all sides of the political spectrum and all backgrounds, stands to benefit from a world that is designed more thoughtfully and imaginatively. The world could be such a colourful, meaningful, and thrilling place! So this isn’t about left versus right or conservatism versus progressivism; it’s about making our world a more interesting and meaningful place to live in. This should be a unifying cause, because everybody loses out when our homes and cities are badly designed. I want this film to unite people who think they’re on opposite sides, and to create a consensus that we need to change our approach to how we design our buildings and the objects – benches, bus stops, bins, lamp posts, aircon units – that fill our cities. The Importance of Details We are incredibly rich and have a sprawling choice of shows to stream, phones to buy, or shoes to wear… but everything feels more and more generic all the time. If you want to understand a society, don’t listen to what it says about itself – look at what it creates. You can learn everything about the Victorians – the good and the bad – just by looking at their lamp posts. And what do the ordinary details of the modern world say about us? That we are technologically advanced, very efficient… and care more about making money, about making things as quickly and cheaply as possible, than making our world an enjoyable place to actually live in. It’s important to learn about why and how things have changed, but that’s for another time. The first step is establishing that the public aren’t happy with modern architecture and design, and that something needs to be done. But what we need isn’t a total revival of so-called ‘traditionalism’; the truth is that traditionalism and modernism can (and should) co-exist. The trouble right now is that we only have one, and that people are tired of it. The Power of Noticing But this film (and the series it will, all being well, lead to) is about more than the specific argument it presents. Above all it’s about a way of seeing the world around us, a way of noticing and thinking. “How you do anything is how you do everything.” That is probably true, and it also applies to whole societies, not just individuals; a single doorbell implies everything else about the whole socio-economic and political system that gave rise to its creation. And, beyond being merely “useful”, the ability to notice details makes the world a richer place to live in, and life a richer thing to lead. This is what the film is about, more than anything: the power and joy of noticing. A Bigger Project This short film is just the beginning. We want to make a full series about the history of art and architecture, both for their own sake and also to see what we can learn about life in the twenty-first century and how to improve it. To keep updated you can join our email list over at our website, linked in the reply below. Final Words You can watch the film here on X, or over on YouTube, also linked in the reply below. So… this is where the dream begins, the dream of a new series and the dream of a more charming, more interesting, more meaningful modern world. Spread the word.
15:36

I’ve made a short film. Look at the things around you: doors, bins, staircases, furniture, railings, doorhandles, windows. Do you like how they look, or not? Modern design has become boring, but it doesn’t have to be this way. The word “beautiful” is overused. We don’t need “beautiful” lamps, bus stops, and water fountains – we just need lamps, bus stops, and water fountains that are interesting, that actually mean something. Or, at the very least, not boring. Because the aesthetics of architecture and urban design aren’t just a bonus; they totally change how we think, feel, and behave. Boring environments make us more stressed and less productive; they erode our sense of community; they make us sadder, less trusting, and lonelier. A boring world is one where we spend even more time online and where our addictions are even harder to battle. The Problem There is global, widespread dissatisfaction with how the world looks. In this film, and the series it will lead to, we want to investigate that feeling and give it a voice. The point isn’t that we should return to the past or get rid of modernism. It’s about learning from the past in order to improve the present, and about giving the public what they very clearly want, which isn’t the eradication of modernism but the co-existence of modernism AND traditionalism. Just look where tourists go, where they take their photos, and that tells you everything you need to know about what most people find interesting or beautiful. And look at where people go on holiday. It’s always to cities filled with old architecture and design, with churches and mosques and palaces, with charming little alleyways and stone staircases and wrought-iron railings. Of the world’s fifty most visited buildings, only four were made in the 20th century, and they’re all museums or memorials. There’s a reason why posts about this go viral online all the time. Regardless of why the change happened, it is clearly the case that we no longer make things how we used to. People are rightly confused by the fact that old lamp posts (to take the example we focus on in the film) are usually so pretty, while modern ones are usually so boring. Some people say this is just an example of survivorship bias… and they’re mostly correct. But that’s the whole point! Saying old buildings are usually prettier than modern buildings is not to say that architecture used to be better, or that the past was better. It is simply to say that certain kinds of buildings, because they have been preserved, are good examples of what people like most. In which case... shouldn't we try to design at least some buildings in a way that we know people like? A Unifying Cause Everybody, from all sides of the political spectrum and all backgrounds, stands to benefit from a world that is designed more thoughtfully and imaginatively. The world could be such a colourful, meaningful, and thrilling place! So this isn’t about left versus right or conservatism versus progressivism; it’s about making our world a more interesting and meaningful place to live in. This should be a unifying cause, because everybody loses out when our homes and cities are badly designed. I want this film to unite people who think they’re on opposite sides, and to create a consensus that we need to change our approach to how we design our buildings and the objects – benches, bus stops, bins, lamp posts, aircon units – that fill our cities. The Importance of Details We are incredibly rich and have a sprawling choice of shows to stream, phones to buy, or shoes to wear… but everything feels more and more generic all the time. If you want to understand a society, don’t listen to what it says about itself – look at what it creates. You can learn everything about the Victorians – the good and the bad – just by looking at their lamp posts. And what do the ordinary details of the modern world say about us? That we are technologically advanced, very efficient… and care more about making money, about making things as quickly and cheaply as possible, than making our world an enjoyable place to actually live in. It’s important to learn about why and how things have changed, but that’s for another time. The first step is establishing that the public aren’t happy with modern architecture and design, and that something needs to be done. But what we need isn’t a total revival of so-called ‘traditionalism’; the truth is that traditionalism and modernism can (and should) co-exist. The trouble right now is that we only have one, and that people are tired of it. The Power of Noticing But this film (and the series it will, all being well, lead to) is about more than the specific argument it presents. Above all it’s about a way of seeing the world around us, a way of noticing and thinking. “How you do anything is how you do everything.” That is probably true, and it also applies to whole societies, not just individuals; a single doorbell implies everything else about the whole socio-economic and political system that gave rise to its creation. And, beyond being merely “useful”, the ability to notice details makes the world a richer place to live in, and life a richer thing to lead. This is what the film is about, more than anything: the power and joy of noticing. A Bigger Project This short film is just the beginning. We want to make a full series about the history of art and architecture, both for their own sake and also to see what we can learn about life in the twenty-first century and how to improve it. To keep updated you can join our email list over at our website, linked in the reply below. Final Words You can watch the film here on X, or over on YouTube, also linked in the reply below. So… this is where the dream begins, the dream of a new series and the dream of a more charming, more interesting, more meaningful modern world. Spread the word.

The Cultural Tutor

2,748,754 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

Catherine Austin Fitts: "I've been... warning about the digital control grid going in, and most people didn't see it... But suddenly now with the drones and the cameras and the telecom, people are beginning to realize, wait a minute, we as taxpayers are funding the building of this prison, and we can see it with our own eyes. It's become physical." This clip of Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, investment banker, and founder of the Solari Report (The Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts), is taken from a discussion with combat correspondent Michael Yon (Michael Yon: Callsign BIG HONEY) and journalist Masako Ganaha (我那覇真子 Masako Ganaha) posted to Yon's eponymous YouTube channel on February 16, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "Finally, you have systems of cameras and drones to track license plates and to track other movements from the sky. And so what's interesting is for years I've been talking or warning about the digital control grid going in, and most people didn't see it. "But suddenly now with the drones and the cameras and the telecom, suddenly people locally are beginning to realize, wait a minute, you know, we as taxpayers are funding the building of this prison, and we can see it with our own eyes. It's become physical. "So you have enormous pushback. And, okay, so we have the digital ID, we have the surveillance. And part of that surveillance system allows you to do coercion. So if you need to do a false flag, if you need to do a school shooting, if you need to do an assassination, you know, it's that surveillance and tracking that really helps you engineer that. "Then, of course, the coup de grace is over here on the right programmable digital money. Europe, is much more focused on doing central bank digital currency. The United States just passed the Genius Act and is working on the Clarity Act to do asset tokenization. "But they have it set up where they've reserved the right. They just took legislative steps to to preserve the central bank's ability to do a central bank digital currency. "But they want to have a programmable money feature with private stable coins and crypto. And of course, the crypto comes with a distributive ledger, which is part of creating the database system you need to do programmable money. So a little bit different in Europe. Europe is much more focused on the ECB doing CBDC and the United States now sort of holding out the options to do both private currency that's programmable money or CBDC. "But either way, the fourth gate on the corral locks in when not only can I control your spatial movements with this kind of surveillance and tracking, but I can turn your money on and off, and I can turn your money on and off in very granular ways. "So if you're good, I can give you a little bit more money. If I'm bad, I can take out your money or implement your taxes. And if you look at the system in combination, what it essentially does is it takes control of fiscal policy out of the hands of the legislature and the executive branch, and gives it to the bankers."
2:41

Catherine Austin Fitts: "I've been... warning about the digital control grid going in, and most people didn't see it... But suddenly now with the drones and the cameras and the telecom, people are beginning to realize, wait a minute, we as taxpayers are funding the building of this prison, and we can see it with our own eyes. It's become physical." This clip of Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, investment banker, and founder of the Solari Report (The Solari Report | Catherine Austin Fitts), is taken from a discussion with combat correspondent Michael Yon (Michael Yon: Callsign BIG HONEY) and journalist Masako Ganaha (我那覇真子 Masako Ganaha) posted to Yon's eponymous YouTube channel on February 16, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "Finally, you have systems of cameras and drones to track license plates and to track other movements from the sky. And so what's interesting is for years I've been talking or warning about the digital control grid going in, and most people didn't see it. "But suddenly now with the drones and the cameras and the telecom, suddenly people locally are beginning to realize, wait a minute, you know, we as taxpayers are funding the building of this prison, and we can see it with our own eyes. It's become physical. "So you have enormous pushback. And, okay, so we have the digital ID, we have the surveillance. And part of that surveillance system allows you to do coercion. So if you need to do a false flag, if you need to do a school shooting, if you need to do an assassination, you know, it's that surveillance and tracking that really helps you engineer that. "Then, of course, the coup de grace is over here on the right programmable digital money. Europe, is much more focused on doing central bank digital currency. The United States just passed the Genius Act and is working on the Clarity Act to do asset tokenization. "But they have it set up where they've reserved the right. They just took legislative steps to to preserve the central bank's ability to do a central bank digital currency. "But they want to have a programmable money feature with private stable coins and crypto. And of course, the crypto comes with a distributive ledger, which is part of creating the database system you need to do programmable money. So a little bit different in Europe. Europe is much more focused on the ECB doing CBDC and the United States now sort of holding out the options to do both private currency that's programmable money or CBDC. "But either way, the fourth gate on the corral locks in when not only can I control your spatial movements with this kind of surveillance and tracking, but I can turn your money on and off, and I can turn your money on and off in very granular ways. "So if you're good, I can give you a little bit more money. If I'm bad, I can take out your money or implement your taxes. And if you look at the system in combination, what it essentially does is it takes control of fiscal policy out of the hands of the legislature and the executive branch, and gives it to the bankers."

Sense Receptor

32,487 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Tobe Hooper asked Kit Carson to write the screenplay for the "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2" (1986) with an emphasis on dark comedy, an element Hooper felt was present in the first film but went unacknowledged by audiences and critics. Hooper said, "I’ll be honest: I feel that "TCM 2" came out of my frustration at the comedy in the first film not being appreciated or understood. And so I amplified the comedic aspects of it, but at the same time [effects master] Tom Savini made everything so anatomically correct and cost so much, that, you know, the film ended up not even getting a rating. I like the film as this wacky, crazy, bizarre, over-the-top dark comedy, but it missed its mark in doing what the audience expected it to do, which was to scare the hell out of them and give them a little more of what they had experienced in the first film." "It was a comedy that couldn’t get an MPAA rating, so they went out with it anyway, unrated. They couldn’t advertise. And the audience at the time didn’t want that kind of film. The core audience of the film was pissed off, because what they wanted to see was more of the same. But as with a lot of my pictures I made something that was actually appreciated 10 or 15 years later. It has a lot of fans now. Looking back, it’s one of those strange films, where you wonder how it ever got made. You don’t know why it exists, like 'Showgirls' (1995) , which I liked a lot. Taking chances is cool, but it may not be smart. Those were cool times. Life was cool. What can I say?" (Tobe Hooper Interview, Flashback Files, "The Buzz Heard ‘Round the World", Marc Savlov, Austin Chronicle, 1998) P.S: On this day, 40 years ago, "Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2" (1986) was released in the USA and Canada.
2:08

Tobe Hooper asked Kit Carson to write the screenplay for the "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2" (1986) with an emphasis on dark comedy, an element Hooper felt was present in the first film but went unacknowledged by audiences and critics. Hooper said, "I’ll be honest: I feel that "TCM 2" came out of my frustration at the comedy in the first film not being appreciated or understood. And so I amplified the comedic aspects of it, but at the same time [effects master] Tom Savini made everything so anatomically correct and cost so much, that, you know, the film ended up not even getting a rating. I like the film as this wacky, crazy, bizarre, over-the-top dark comedy, but it missed its mark in doing what the audience expected it to do, which was to scare the hell out of them and give them a little more of what they had experienced in the first film." "It was a comedy that couldn’t get an MPAA rating, so they went out with it anyway, unrated. They couldn’t advertise. And the audience at the time didn’t want that kind of film. The core audience of the film was pissed off, because what they wanted to see was more of the same. But as with a lot of my pictures I made something that was actually appreciated 10 or 15 years later. It has a lot of fans now. Looking back, it’s one of those strange films, where you wonder how it ever got made. You don’t know why it exists, like 'Showgirls' (1995) , which I liked a lot. Taking chances is cool, but it may not be smart. Those were cool times. Life was cool. What can I say?" (Tobe Hooper Interview, Flashback Files, "The Buzz Heard ‘Round the World", Marc Savlov, Austin Chronicle, 1998) P.S: On this day, 40 years ago, "Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2" (1986) was released in the USA and Canada.

DepressedBergman

27,382 Aufrufe • vor 6 Tagen

Céline Sciamma on why she made "Portrait of a Lady on Fire" (2019) & on Leonardo Di Caprio being a Lesbian icon: "Sciamma: What I had in mind above all was to make a film about love, with a totally invented story. And when I thought about it, I found that there were few films totally devoted to love, even though they are often the greatest in the history of cinema. It's rare, even though it's the beating heart of our cinephiles. Interviewer: What movies were you thinking of? Sciamma: 'Titanic' (1997), for example. It's a real influence, which I recently revisited. Both films are about the memories of a love affair, almost behind closed doors. I spent a long time looking for a framework and then one day I looked at the script and I thought: "F**k, it's Titanic! It's simply Titanic." There's the prologue, of course, before the flashback, but also the drawing scene, which is very explicit in my film. With this dialogue: "Don't laugh, be serious…" Interviewer Is it an important film for you? Sciamma: Collectively, it's important. There are different film regimes that count in our cinephilia: those we love and those that are part of a collective phenomenon. It's rare to experience those moments, especially when it's about 'Titanic' and not 'Qu’est-ce qu’on a fait au bon Dieu?' (2014). Titanic was a cultural moment, and in my life as a cinephile, it's probably the most important one, even more so because of the shared love. And with a real queer dynamic! Leo DiCaprio is a lesbian icon. A very new masculinity at the time, in cinema - with time it deepens enormously, it's exciting to watch. At the time, in that youth and in that body, there was really something hyper queer. And then the love scene is a total inversion of the conventions: she's on top of him, she reassures him, he’s the one who’s breathless... All that in the back seat of a car, like in any good teen movie. There were great subversive effects in 'Titanic', and that's something James Cameron always did anyway. What it also has in common with my film is the idea that the greatest loves are emancipatory and that the loss of them is the price of our future fulfillment. At the end of 'Titanic', there are three photos of a girl in pants riding a horse! It’s one of the few films that asserts that love can bring positive things, even when it's over. In my opinion, this is one of the hidden reasons for the incredible success of the film." ("CÉLINE SCIAMMA : DiCaprio est une icône lesbienne.", Axel Cadieux, Sofilm, 2020) P.S: On this day, 7 years ago, "Portrait of a Lady on Fire" (2019) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.
1:01

Céline Sciamma on why she made "Portrait of a Lady on Fire" (2019) & on Leonardo Di Caprio being a Lesbian icon: "Sciamma: What I had in mind above all was to make a film about love, with a totally invented story. And when I thought about it, I found that there were few films totally devoted to love, even though they are often the greatest in the history of cinema. It's rare, even though it's the beating heart of our cinephiles. Interviewer: What movies were you thinking of? Sciamma: 'Titanic' (1997), for example. It's a real influence, which I recently revisited. Both films are about the memories of a love affair, almost behind closed doors. I spent a long time looking for a framework and then one day I looked at the script and I thought: "F**k, it's Titanic! It's simply Titanic." There's the prologue, of course, before the flashback, but also the drawing scene, which is very explicit in my film. With this dialogue: "Don't laugh, be serious…" Interviewer Is it an important film for you? Sciamma: Collectively, it's important. There are different film regimes that count in our cinephilia: those we love and those that are part of a collective phenomenon. It's rare to experience those moments, especially when it's about 'Titanic' and not 'Qu’est-ce qu’on a fait au bon Dieu?' (2014). Titanic was a cultural moment, and in my life as a cinephile, it's probably the most important one, even more so because of the shared love. And with a real queer dynamic! Leo DiCaprio is a lesbian icon. A very new masculinity at the time, in cinema - with time it deepens enormously, it's exciting to watch. At the time, in that youth and in that body, there was really something hyper queer. And then the love scene is a total inversion of the conventions: she's on top of him, she reassures him, he’s the one who’s breathless... All that in the back seat of a car, like in any good teen movie. There were great subversive effects in 'Titanic', and that's something James Cameron always did anyway. What it also has in common with my film is the idea that the greatest loves are emancipatory and that the loss of them is the price of our future fulfillment. At the end of 'Titanic', there are three photos of a girl in pants riding a horse! It’s one of the few films that asserts that love can bring positive things, even when it's over. In my opinion, this is one of the hidden reasons for the incredible success of the film." ("CÉLINE SCIAMMA : DiCaprio est une icône lesbienne.", Axel Cadieux, Sofilm, 2020) P.S: On this day, 7 years ago, "Portrait of a Lady on Fire" (2019) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.

DepressedBergman

26,533 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Bernard Herrmann on the importance of music in movies: "Interviewer: You once said that music is called upon to supplement what the technicians have done, and mostly what they have been unable to do. Herrmann: The real reason for music is that a piece of film, by its nature, lacks a certain ability to convey emotional overtones. Many times in many films, dialogue may not give a clue to the feelings of a character. It’s the music or the lighting or camera movement. When a film is well made, the music’s function is to fuse a piece of film so that it has an inevitable beginning and end. When you cut a piece of film you can do it perhaps a dozen ways, but once you put music to it, that becomes the absolutely final way. Until recently, it was never considered a virtue for an audience to be aware of the cunning of the camera and the art of making seamless cuts. It was like a wonderful piece of tailoring; you didn’t see the stitches. But today all that has changed, and any mechanical or technical failure or ineptitude is considered ‘with it’. Music essentially provides an unconscious series of anchors for the viewer. It isn’t always apparent and you don’t have to know, but it serves its function. I think Cocteau said that a good film score should create the feeling that one is not aware whether the music is making the film go forward or whether the film is pushing the music forward. Interviewer: Is the composer, in a sense, an actor with a greater range of ‘voices off’? Herrmann: I always think that film music expresses what the actor can’t show or tell. For example, when Janet Leigh is driving her car in 'Psycho' (1960), all we see is a pleasant young girl driving in the rain with the windscreen wipers going back and forth. From what you see, she might have been going to the supermarket or visiting a friend, but it’s the music that tells you that she has embarked on a very dangerous, horrifying experience. In the very opening of 'Citizen Kane' (1941), the music really tells you what ‘Rosebud’ is. When Kane is dying, all the musical motifs and atmospheres of his childhood are presented and the search for ‘Rosebud’ has really been told to the audience right away. At the end of the film, before the camera discovers the sled, the theme is given out again. And of course it also recurs at key moments of conversation between Kane and all the leading characters." (Bernard Herrmann's interview with Ted Gilling, Sight and Sound, 1971) P.S: Remembering the legendary American composer Bernard Herrmann on his 115th birthday!
3:01

Bernard Herrmann on the importance of music in movies: "Interviewer: You once said that music is called upon to supplement what the technicians have done, and mostly what they have been unable to do. Herrmann: The real reason for music is that a piece of film, by its nature, lacks a certain ability to convey emotional overtones. Many times in many films, dialogue may not give a clue to the feelings of a character. It’s the music or the lighting or camera movement. When a film is well made, the music’s function is to fuse a piece of film so that it has an inevitable beginning and end. When you cut a piece of film you can do it perhaps a dozen ways, but once you put music to it, that becomes the absolutely final way. Until recently, it was never considered a virtue for an audience to be aware of the cunning of the camera and the art of making seamless cuts. It was like a wonderful piece of tailoring; you didn’t see the stitches. But today all that has changed, and any mechanical or technical failure or ineptitude is considered ‘with it’. Music essentially provides an unconscious series of anchors for the viewer. It isn’t always apparent and you don’t have to know, but it serves its function. I think Cocteau said that a good film score should create the feeling that one is not aware whether the music is making the film go forward or whether the film is pushing the music forward. Interviewer: Is the composer, in a sense, an actor with a greater range of ‘voices off’? Herrmann: I always think that film music expresses what the actor can’t show or tell. For example, when Janet Leigh is driving her car in 'Psycho' (1960), all we see is a pleasant young girl driving in the rain with the windscreen wipers going back and forth. From what you see, she might have been going to the supermarket or visiting a friend, but it’s the music that tells you that she has embarked on a very dangerous, horrifying experience. In the very opening of 'Citizen Kane' (1941), the music really tells you what ‘Rosebud’ is. When Kane is dying, all the musical motifs and atmospheres of his childhood are presented and the search for ‘Rosebud’ has really been told to the audience right away. At the end of the film, before the camera discovers the sled, the theme is given out again. And of course it also recurs at key moments of conversation between Kane and all the leading characters." (Bernard Herrmann's interview with Ted Gilling, Sight and Sound, 1971) P.S: Remembering the legendary American composer Bernard Herrmann on his 115th birthday!

DepressedBergman

10,525 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🚨 Bob Lazar dropped this ultimatum: Holding back the truth about UFO's isn't just a secret—it’s a crime against humanity. 🛸👽 We aren't just talking about "lights in the sky." We are talking about physical artifacts and recovered technology that could fundamentally rewrite how we live, move, and power our world. The video is a heavy reminder of what’s at stake: "We are being visited by another civilization... It is a crime to keep this from the rest of humanity." If we have the tech to change the world—to end energy scarcity and move beyond current physics—why is it being treated like a classified secret instead of a human right? Key takeaways from the footage: • The confirmation of physical artifacts in human possession. • The moral weight of suppressing world-changing technology. • The reality that we are not alone, and never have been. Lazar is clear: The technology exists. The artifacts are real. The silence is the crime. The big question: If this technology was released tomorrow and made traditional energy obsolete, do you think society would thrive, or would the "old guard" collapse the system to keep control? Sound off below. 🛸👇
1:06

🚨 Bob Lazar dropped this ultimatum: Holding back the truth about UFO's isn't just a secret—it’s a crime against humanity. 🛸👽 We aren't just talking about "lights in the sky." We are talking about physical artifacts and recovered technology that could fundamentally rewrite how we live, move, and power our world. The video is a heavy reminder of what’s at stake: "We are being visited by another civilization... It is a crime to keep this from the rest of humanity." If we have the tech to change the world—to end energy scarcity and move beyond current physics—why is it being treated like a classified secret instead of a human right? Key takeaways from the footage: • The confirmation of physical artifacts in human possession. • The moral weight of suppressing world-changing technology. • The reality that we are not alone, and never have been. Lazar is clear: The technology exists. The artifacts are real. The silence is the crime. The big question: If this technology was released tomorrow and made traditional energy obsolete, do you think society would thrive, or would the "old guard" collapse the system to keep control? Sound off below. 🛸👇

Interstellar

15,679 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Zack Snyder expected fans to edit 300 and 300: Rise of an Empire into a single chronological edit. "Well, this film takes place on the same three days as the Battle of Thermopylae. We just get to see a different perspective. We're not from the Spartan perspective. We're from the Free Greek perspective. And we're following this leader, Thermistocles, who is a naval commander." "Yeah, and the other thing we get to see, I think, that's different in this film is it sort of, it also, it jumps forward and backward a little bit because it also goes and sort of paints the origins of Xerxes. So you get to see Xerxes' birth, what caused him to sort of become the character that you saw in the original film. "And you get to see him, you know, transform before your eyes. So it's a, and that's a mystery too. And it's kind of fun to watch that. And I think it, and then you also get to see sort of some elements of the original film kind of woven through to sort of let you see where you are in context of the timeline of the original film. "So you kind of, every now and then you're just checking in with that sort of, the, you know, the Spartans and their, what they're up to. So it's kind of fun that way too." "I love that there's moments where you go, 'Oh, that's the messenger.' And it's not just the characters you expect to see coming back." "Or like when Daxos rides up and tells Thermistocles, like, 'The hot gates have fallen.' You're like, 'Oh, that's awesome.'" "'That's where he went. I remember him leaving.'" "'That's where he went off on the horse. Remember, he rides in the, it's cool.'" "It's a fun way to see the characters that, you know, that connect us to the original film." "I thought it'd be cool, like, if some fan, you know, once this movie comes out on DVD, they can, some fans could cut the two movies together into a single, like, you could cut them into a single film."
1:49

Zack Snyder expected fans to edit 300 and 300: Rise of an Empire into a single chronological edit. "Well, this film takes place on the same three days as the Battle of Thermopylae. We just get to see a different perspective. We're not from the Spartan perspective. We're from the Free Greek perspective. And we're following this leader, Thermistocles, who is a naval commander." "Yeah, and the other thing we get to see, I think, that's different in this film is it sort of, it also, it jumps forward and backward a little bit because it also goes and sort of paints the origins of Xerxes. So you get to see Xerxes' birth, what caused him to sort of become the character that you saw in the original film. "And you get to see him, you know, transform before your eyes. So it's a, and that's a mystery too. And it's kind of fun to watch that. And I think it, and then you also get to see sort of some elements of the original film kind of woven through to sort of let you see where you are in context of the timeline of the original film. "So you kind of, every now and then you're just checking in with that sort of, the, you know, the Spartans and their, what they're up to. So it's kind of fun that way too." "I love that there's moments where you go, 'Oh, that's the messenger.' And it's not just the characters you expect to see coming back." "Or like when Daxos rides up and tells Thermistocles, like, 'The hot gates have fallen.' You're like, 'Oh, that's awesome.'" "'That's where he went. I remember him leaving.'" "'That's where he went off on the horse. Remember, he rides in the, it's cool.'" "It's a fun way to see the characters that, you know, that connect us to the original film." "I thought it'd be cool, like, if some fan, you know, once this movie comes out on DVD, they can, some fans could cut the two movies together into a single, like, you could cut them into a single film."

Zack Snyder Film

20,182 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten