taysteewonderbunny

^Very cool.

^Weightlifting, Bavarian style.

Oh, I know. Decima told me.

Coolness. What topic?

Want to come over for some cocoa and bad movies? I know I live pretty far away, but you are welcome if you just need company for a bit.

My husband is so wonderful! It'll take me the rest of my life to pay him back for all the good he has done me.

Okay, now I've actually read the whole article. When I was reading it before, I got to the first segment of advertising and thought the article was finished. I didn't realize the author constructed HIS four factors and explained them below. (Reading the TITLE would have helped me there. Just goes to show what happens when I'm reading with a hangover and no coffee.) Above are justifications I ventured that are NOT covered in the article.

Well, I think it would be unfortunate for them to eliminate 3D releases. Here are the factors that I think are temporarily pushing the money-making potential of 3D down and driving consumer non-interest: It doesn't seem unlikely to me that a 3D release of a film that is a sequel to exclusively 2D counterparts would fail because people like consistency. Why should the final installment of a series be so visually distinct from the rest? The economy sucks right now and the marketing plans for 3D, requiring an additional $2 to $4 per viewer for the glasses for films generally viewed by families of movie-goers (groups of about 3 to 4 people), refusal on the part of some theater companies to reduce the cost of matinee showings for these films, and the non-applicability of discounts or freebie tickets has discouraged people from attending. This new technology is quite disorienting to older movie goers who might get headaches or nausea from it. It's biggest appeal is to younger crowds who currently don't have the funds to buy the tickets. Teenage employment is at a current low right now since so many older people are taking low-level, low-paying jobs and not fully retiring, so there are actually fewer teens going to the movies. Even though originally just the technology was enough to get people in the door, after the first wave of curiosity stemmed, they never upped the quality of non-sequel films to actually pique interest in the picture versus the format. By now, we all feel that we have seen that poorly plotted, high level of action, but bubblegum for dialogue movie they've been re-releasing. If the films were as engaging as "Inception," the result might be different. Lastly, since the advent of 3D televisions, there might just be some people who are putting everything on the back burner until they can pick up a 3D unit cheaply and get those movies from the discount bin at the supermarket.

Hey, Tits, we can't offer you a permanent place to stay, but if you need a crash pad while you are apartment hunting, you are welcome to spend a few nights at our place.

Dog day afternoon.

First, I'm highly relieved that it is anonymous. Yet, I'm concerned that physicians are asked to do this without first obtaining parental consent. I understand where that may be necessary in the case of immunizations, but obesity is not contagious. Lastly, I'm worried that BMI might not be the best index for measuring a child's health/weight. I know I've met some kids whose physical structure would completely buck traditional measurements. At four years old, this one child I babysat was sixty pounds--of pure muscle! He was a highly active and very muscularly developed kid who would have likely been reported as "fat." I mean, BMI can be a misleading measure of ADULTS' fat percentages and ideal weights. If our concern is, also, preventing unhealthy preoccupations with body image, this approach might backfire. I'm thinking it might be helpful in the more extreme cases, but that in most, a concentration in increasing education and awareness in whole families in regards to activity levels and diet choices is probably still best.

Very disturbing news.

I've never seen it. I hope to correct that soon, though.

What's wrong? Is winter coming?

I think that there is a significant reason why 9/11 is distinct from the unexpected death of a loved one taken by natural causes. It's this: these people died because of hatred. It was a purposeful act of violence perpetrated against innocents who could have been anyone. It wasn't vengeance, even. Just hate. Your dad's passing was sad. The murder of thousands of people is tragic. The first may have been inevitable, but the second was not. Lastly, though you may have made your peace with your dad's passing, I somehow don't think you're really over it. You might not break down and cry, but I imagine you sometimes feel a twinge of loss, even if you push it away because you have to go on with your living. I'm not saying that all the ways of dealing with the losses of 9/11 are healthy, but they're all, insofar as they do not serve the cause of hatred, legitimate. Everyone deals with grief their own way. For me, I think especially because 9/11 happened on my daughter's fourth birthday and I was four when a totally crazy lady broke into my house and stabbed me in the face and abdomen with scissors (true story), it has served as a reminder to me of the fact that the world is sometimes a very hostile place full of injustice, but love is the only thing that makes it tolerable and worthwhile, and that this life can be ended at any moment, so I had better live and love for today. So, hugs to you all!

I'm interested. That sounds like a topic I'd enjoy. Any chance you will write an abstract in layman's terms for my sake? Because I'm guessing the whole paper will be beyond my ken.

Um, assuming that the brain would NOT be an organic part, but an inorganic intelligence, how could, say viral zombie-ism infect it? Same regarding radiation-based causes, and, though perhaps with increased likelihood, the weird mind-controlling radio waves? It just seems far less likely. I mean, it's a flaw of the zombies in the first place: how can a non-functioning brain generate such directed activity as zombies possess? And the answer is usually that it's not non-functioning--just minimally functioning. So, unless the cyborgs you are proposing actually have brain matter that COULD be affected by the same biological agents as possess the human monster zombie of movie lore, I just can't run with that one. They would just reboot and maybe be very pissed that their flesh is rotting and go about growing themselves new bodies. Now, if you want to propose cyborgs whose non-organic brains need to find new host bodies because the old ones rot away, I'm behind you, brother. That's creepy as fuck.

Oh yeah? Well................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................word.

Not just your elbows...your wrists! I'm completely beholden to your wrists, oh master.

Blueberry brandy it is then. *pours* Joking! I hope you feel better soon. Not joking.

My visual migraines are back. They scare me. It doesn't hurt. It's just really creepy when there is a big flashy crescent in the center of my vision. I have to read and type everything using only my peripheral vision because I can't see head on.

Any way, devils are welcome here. Hello!

I suggest you start looking for women who are proximately intelligent.

Awe. Phear not. I couldn't even think of a normal movie.