ZNAK SAGITE — više od fantastike — edicija, časopis, knjižara...

Pogledao sam RED FOX, mini-seriju po prozi Geralda Seymoura i scenariju koji su napisali sam književnik i James MacManus. U pogledu TV adaptacija iz osamdesetih, Gerald Seymour je znatno bolje prošao od Fredericka Forsytha, pisca koji ga je inspirisao da pređe iz novinarstva u literaturu i žanr trilera. Nisam čitao Seymoura i ne znam kakav je pisac u odnosu na Forsytha ali Ian Toynton, doajen britanske televizije sa serijom WIDOWS u svom CVu je odlično izrežirai. fatalistički, vrlo strpljivi i minuciozni triler koji glumački predvode John Hurt, Brian Cox i Jane Birkin.

Sa odličnom glumačkom podelom, solidnim predloškom i francuskim lokacijama, Toynton je imao obavezujuće kvalitetan materijal za ras i RED FOX nimalo ne zaostaje za britanskim špijunskim filmovima te epohe. Otud me čudi da je danas dostupna na prilično opskuran način, na DVDu koji je prodaban uz Daily Mail.

Pogledao sam četvrtu sezonu SMALLVILLEa. Stvari se lepo razvijaju. Sve veći je akcenat na meta-arcu a i freak-of-the-week junaci su dobro integrisani u metaserijal. Sve više DC junaka ulazi u opticaj što me takođe raduje. Recimo način kako je uveden Flash je sjajan.

Uvođenje Chloe, lika van kanona, koja shvata Clarkovu tajnu a naročito briljantno kastovana Lois Lane obećavaju dobar razvoj pred petu sezonu. Ona bi po kanonu morala doneti neke bitne događaje u porodici Kent i pripremiti teren za selidbu u Metropolis.

Quote from: crippled_avenger on 21-07-2014, 12:43:59
a naročito briljantno kastovana Lois Lane

Da, da... savrsen kasting.

 I ja da dodam da me pojava Lois Lejn u Smalvilu vrrrlo obradovala, hehe....

Polimac se oprašta od Garnera...

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.it/2014/07/polimac-o-garneru.html

Stari pokušava da interveniše iz inostranstva.

http://t.co/of4uaPuJ7n


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Prvi prikaz Guardians of the galaxy je pozitivan, (mada ne i ekstatičan):

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/film-review-guardians-of-the-galaxy-92764648922.html

QuoteBy Scott Foundas
If the wayward denizens of "Star Wars'" Mos Eisley Cantina rose up and demanded their own starring vehicle, it would probably look something like "Guardians of the Galaxy," an alt-"Avengers" in which a ragtag band of misfits and mercenaries make the world a safer place almost by accident. An unusually prankish and playful Marvel Studios vehicle, director James Gunn's presumptive franchise-starter is overlong, overstuffed and sometimes too eager to please, but the cheeky comic tone keeps things buoyant — as does Chris Pratt's winning performance as the most blissfully spaced-out space crusader this side of Buckaroo Banzai. While these "Guardians" seem unlikely to challenge the box office benchmarks set by their Marvel brethren, this inaugural outing should nevertheless inject some much-needed life into Hollywood's sagging summer fortunes.
Introduced in the January 1969 issue of "Marvel Super-Heroes," the Guardians have been spun off, recast and rebooted several times over the decades, though largely in keeping with creators Arnold Drake and Gene Colan's vision of an intergalactic (and interspecies) Dirty Dozen traveling through time and space to protect the universe from various unfriendlies. For the film, Gunn and co-writer Nicole Perlman have taken most of their inspiration from the 2008 incarnation of the series created by Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning, which offered a new Guardians team consisting of various supporting players from the Marvel annals, all under the questionable leadership of one Peter Quill (aka Star-Lord), a half-human, half-alien space jockey with a comically square jaw and an air of preening self-regard.


But perhaps because the "Guardians" source material isn't as sacrosanct as the likes of "Captain America" or "Thor," the filmmakers seem to have been given more than the usual license to play and reinvent. They've tossed out a few regular characters (including the messianic "cosmic being" Adam Warlock), reduced others to insider cameos (look fast for Cosmo the telepathic Russian space dog), and made haste with the comic's pesky space-time fissures in favor of a more streamlined, accessible storyline. Above all, they've turned Quill (Pratt) into an amiable, good-vibing doofus who seems congenitally incapable of taking anything seriously but can, when the occasion demands, kick serious butt.
When we first see Quill, he seems more garbage man than guardian, a galactic scavenger working in the employ of blue-skinned Yondu (Michael Rooker), his adoptive father (and, in Marvel lore, one of the original, '60s-era Guardians). In a scene lovingly modeled on the opening sequence from "Raiders of the Lost Ark," Quill enters a cave on an abandoned planet to retrieve a mysteriously powerful silver orb and, instead of a rousing John Williams fanfare, the soundtrack erupts with Native American rockers Redbone singing "Come and Get Your Love." It's the first of many '70s FM classics (Blue Swede, Elvin Bishop, Ashford and Simpson) that emanate from the mix tape inside Quill's trusty Walkman, and which give "Guardians" a funky, off-kilter energy even when the plotting turns toward the conventional. (Where else have you ever seen a prison break scored to "The Pina Colada Song"?)
If the Avengers are Marvel's top-of-the-class all-stars, the Guardians are its underachieving freaks and geeks, and Gunn and Perlman have essentially crafted a new origin story about how these riff-raffers come together to keep said orb (a variant on "The Avengers'" hot-potato Tesseract) out of the hands of Ronan the Accuser (Lee Pace), a warmongering baddie hellbent on destroying the Earth-like planet Xandar. Fighting the good fight alongside Quill are Gamora (sci-fi "it" girl Zoe Saldana), rebellious daughter of an even bigger baddie called Thanos; the hulking, elaborately tattooed Drax (ex-WWE wrestling champ Dave Bautista), who holds Ronan responsible for the death of his family; a genetically modified humanoid raccoon named Rocket (voiced by Bradley Cooper); and his resident muscle, an anthropomorphic tree called Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel).


It's difficult to imagine Gunn being asked to do anything like a straight comicbook movie on the basis of his previous "Super" (2010), a darkly funny, brutally violent portrait of superheroism as a kind of psychopathy. With its large budget and crowd-pleasing ambitions, "Guardians of the Galaxy" can't venture nearly as far out on a limb, but to Gunn's credit, he's delivered a movie that's idiosyncratic enough to stand out from the crowd without ever crossing over into the full-tilt dadaism of a "Buckaroo Banzai." The adventures here comprise a fairly standard set of Saturday-serial cliffhangers and hairsbreadth escapes, and Gunn puts them across with a B-movie savoir faire that keeps "Guardians" from ever getting too high on the hog or too bogged down in its own mythmaking. Even when we arrive at the requisite CG-enhanced scenes of competing entities zipping and zapping each other with waves of electromagnetic energy, the movie retains a welcome lightness of touch, as if to say, "Yes, the fate of the universe hangs in the balance, but what else is new?"
For all that Gunn and Perlman have pared away, "Guardians" still has more characters and incidents than it quite knows what to do with, some of which seem planted here as seeds for the inevitable sequel. Benicio Del Toro pops up briefly as an exotic "collector" who looks like Liberace after a bleaching accident, while Glenn Close is around just long enough as a senior Xandar peacekeeper to make you wonder how many man-hours went into crafting her elaborate hair bun. "Doctor Who" co-star Karen Gillan is so hastily introduced as another daughter of Thanos that, when she eventually comes into possession of the orb, it takes a moment to remember who she even is.
But the core characters are lovingly fleshed out by the performers, especially Pratt, who seems to be grooving to his own private soundtrack even when he doesn't have his headphones in his ears, and Cooper and Diesel, who nearly walk off with the movie as a couple of fractious yet inseparable platonic soulmates firmly in the R2D2/C3PO mold. (It helps that their computer-animated avatars are both marvelously detailed and seamlessly integrated into the live-action scenes.) Cooper is so good at finding the pathos in his existentially conflicted critter that you half expect the little guy to plead "I am not an animal!" Except, of course, he is.
Elsewhere, the movie sports a rich, varied look courtesy of cinematographer Ben Davis ("Kick-Ass") and production designer Charles Wood, from the rusty, tiered interior of the floating prison known as the Kyln to the anodyne pastels of Xandar, which suggests a cross between Oz and Century City. Special effects makeup designer David White does a superb job of creating distinctive looks for the movie's expansive gallery of humanoid and alien species.

IGN je postavio veoma pozitivan prikaz danas.

Kad pomislim da treba da čekamo još dve nedelje, krenu mi suze. 

Dok čekate GUARDIANSe, evo kako sam se oprostio od Garnera. Ne želim da preterujem ali ozbiljnije sam mu prišao od mnogih u ovom oproštajnom tekstu.

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.it/2014/07/dimitrije-o-garneru.html?m=1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Prva slika Gal Gadot u ulozi Wonder Woman:



Dobro je videti da se Zakk Snyder i dalje drži ekstremne kolor korekcije, pa tako i njen kostim inače u bojama američke zastave izgleda kao nešto ispalo iz 300 

Druge novosti sa Komik kona vele da je Zack Snyder prikazao mali tizer za Batman vs. Superman i da je publika izgubila pamet od sreće, zatim da je novi materijal iz Avengers 2 takođe primljen izuzetno pozitivno, kao i da Džejms Gan piše i režira nastavak Guardians of the Galaxy slotovan da uđe u bioskope 28 jula 2017. godine. Ja ću tad imati 46 godina i pitam se da li će superherojski filmovi biti uporedivo popularni sa ovim što imamo danas ili će zakon umanjenih prinosa neumoljivo uzeti svoj danak. Mislim, samo Marvel, pored svega što je najavio (Ant -Man, Dr. Strange, nastavci Tora, Kapetana Amerike,Avendžers 3 itd.) ima još sedam rezervisainh datuma za premijere do 2019. godine a pretpostavka je da će Warner tu malo jače da zapne nego do sada, pa i da će Fox i Sony da doprinesu.. Sve u svemu, u narednih pet godina imamo pred sobom najmanje dvadeset visokobudžetnih superherojskih filmova, a tu će ona biti svakakvih mid tier i indi pokušaja... Može li naša kultura to da isprati?

Quote from: Meho Krljic on 27-07-2014, 08:52:47
Druge novosti sa Komik kona vele da je Zack Snyder prikazao mali tizer za Batman vs. Superman i da je publika izgubila pamet od sreće

Evo, dok dušmani ne uklone, neko je hrabro telefonom snimio tizer

Batman V Superman : Dawn of Justice - Official Teaser (Comic Con 2014)

Quote from: Meho Krljic on 27-07-2014, 08:52:47
Može li naša kultura to da isprati?

Pitali smo se isto ovo i pre dve, tri godine kada su najavili visokobudzetni Guardians of the galaxy movie... Ja sam tada mislio da ce Guardiansi biti prvi Marvelov flop, ali sad vidim da sam pogresio. Mislim da dalju ekspanziju superherojskih filmova koji suvereno vladaju celim svetom sada moze da spreci samo novi svetski rat. 

Sreća da tako nešto već imamo u pripremi. Nego, drugi tu interesantan problem sad treba rešavati. Fakat je da je Marvelov uspeh krenuo sa Robertom Daunijem Džuniorom u ulozi Tonija Starka - nije samo RDJ zaslužan, daleko od toga, mnge su se tu produkcijske sreće podudarile, ali fakat je da u očima Holivuda njegov angažman predstavlja prekretnicu za Marvel. No, RDJ ih UBIJA sa cifrom. Za prvi Avegers je uzeo 50 milijuna, za drugi je ispregovarao još viši honorar, a videćemo koliki (mu) je kad za to dođe vreme i jasno je da Dizni i Marvel više to neće želeti da trpe - nema Iron Mana 4 u najavi a za uloge u drugim filmovma uzimaju se malopoznati glumci koji dobijaju ugovore na po svega tri filma. Dakle, ne bi me čudilo da Krisa Evansa u Kapetanu Americi 3 zameni Antoni Meki (mislim, već se unazad par nedelja priča o tome s obzirom da Remender u stripu Rodžersa zamenjuje Vilsonom) a da i ostali podobijaju šut karte. Možda to presudi uspehu ovih filmova - odsustvo glumaca koje smo zavoleli u datim ulogama. A možda ih to i održi vječno svežim...

Stari u Danasu okarakterisan kao "ultra desničar" http://www.danas.rs/danasrs/kultura/zeitgeist_bez_dogadjanja_.11.html?news_id=286087


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Što se DAWN OF JUSTICE tiče šta da kažem osim "Evo zore, evo zore...'p"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote from: crippled_avenger on 27-07-2014, 16:52:42
Stari u Danasu okarakterisan kao "ultra desničar" http://www.danas.rs/danasrs/kultura/zeitgeist_bez_dogadjanja_.11.html?news_id=286087


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ali samo po karakteru. Po delima si sigurno manje desan a više raspusan.

Taj karakterni aspekt je najzanimljiviji. Dakle meni je ideologija usađena u karakter. Čak i u slučaju da promenim ideologiju, prakticirao bih je ekstremno desničarski.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Simjanović je u stvari žižekovac

Trejler za Mad Max: Fury Road deluje ohrabrujuće. Miller očigledno pamti kako je Road Warrior izgledao i sa scenografske, kostimografske i režijsko-montažerske strane, ovo pritiska pravu dugmad. Jedino se sa zebnjom sećam da je Beyond the Thunderdome zagazio duboko u holivudsku dekadenciju trudeći se da odpravda svoj visoki budžet a da je trideset godina kasnije budžet značajno veći itd., pa mi one curice u trejleru šalju negativne vajbove. Ali videćemo.


Mad Max: Fury Road - Comic-Con First Look [HD]

Ja volim i treći deo. Zbog upliva tog Euro comic book vajba da ne kažem Kuste.

Ali ovaj trejler deluje moćno!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Одличан је био Безонд Тхундердоме.

We have long argued that the Arab-Israeli conflict is inherently insoluble. Now, for the third time in recent years, a war is being fought in Gaza. The Palestinians are firing rockets into Israel with minimal effect. The Israelis are carrying out a broader operation to seal tunnels along the Gaza-Israel boundary. Like the previous wars, the current one will settle nothing. The Israelis want to destroy Hamas' rockets. They can do so only if they occupy Gaza and remain there for an extended period while engineers search for tunnels and bunkers throughout the territory. This would generate Israeli casualties from Hamas guerrillas fighting on their own turf with no room for retreat. So Hamas will continue to launch rockets, but between the extreme inaccuracy of the rockets and Israel's Iron Dome defense system, the group will inflict little damage to the Israelis.

War Without a Military Outcome

The most interesting aspect of this war is that both sides apparently found it necessary, despite knowing it would have no definitive military outcome. The kidnapping and killing of three Israeli teenagers followed by the incineration of a Palestinian boy triggered this conflict. An argument of infinite regression always rages as to the original sin: Who committed the first crime?

For the Palestinians, the original crime was the migration into the Palestinian mandate by Jews, the creation of the State of Israel and the expulsion of Arabs from that state. For Israel, the original sin came after the 1967 war, during which Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem. At that moment, the Israelis were prepared to discuss a deal, but the Arabs announced their famous "three nos" at a meeting in Khartoum: no negotiation, no recognition, no peace. That locked the Israelis into an increasingly rigid stance. Attempts at negotiations have followed the Khartoum declaration, all of which failed, and the "no recognition" and "no peace" agreement is largely intact. Cease-fires are the best that anyone can hope for.

For Hamas, at least -- and I suspect for many Palestinians in the West Bank -- the only solution is Israel's elimination. For many Israelis, the only solution is to continue to occupy all captured territories until the Palestinians commit to peace and recognition. Since the same Israelis do not believe that day will ever come, the occupation would become permanent.

Under these circumstances, the Gaza war is in some sense a matter of housekeeping. For Hamas, the point of the operation is demonstrating it can fire rockets at Israel. These rockets are inaccurate, but the important thing is that they were smuggled into Gaza at all, since this suggests more dangerous weapons eventually will be smuggled in to the Palestinian territory. At the same time, Hamas is demonstrating that it remains able to incur casualties while continuing to fight.

For the Israelis, the point of the operation is that they are willing to carry it out at all. The Israelis undoubtedly intend to punish Gaza, but they do not believe they can impose their will on Gaza and compel the Palestinians to reach a political accommodation with Israel. War's purpose is to impose your political will on your enemy. But unless the Israelis surprise us immensely, nothing decisive will come out of this conflict. Even if Israel somehow destroyed Hamas, another organization would emerge to fill its space in the Palestinian ecosystem. Israel can't go far enough to break the Palestinian will to resist; it is dependent on a major third-party state to help meet Israeli security needs. This creates an inherent contradiction whereby Israel receives enough American support to guarantee its existence but because of humanitarian concerns is not allowed to take the kind of decisive action that might solve its security problem.

We thus see periodic violence of various types, none of which will be intended or expected to achieve any significant political outcome. Wars here have become a series of bloodstained gestures. There are some limited ends to achieve, such as closing Palestinian tunnels and demonstrating Palestinian capabilities that force Israel into an expensive defensive posture. But Hamas will not be defeated, and Israel will make no concessions.

Sovereignty and Viability Problems

The question therefore is not what the point of all this is -- although that is a fascinating subject -- but where all this ends. All things human end. Previous longstanding conflicts, such as those between France and England, ended or at least changed shape. Israel and Palestine accordingly will resolve their conflict in due course.

Many believe the creation of a Palestinian state will be the solution, and those who believe this often have trouble understanding why this self-evidently sensible solution has not been implemented. The reason is the proposed solution is not nearly as sensible as it might appear to some.

Issues of viability and sovereignty surround any discussion of a Palestinian state. Geography raises questions about the viability of any Palestinian polity. Palestine has two population centers, Gaza and the West Bank, which are detached from one another. One population center, Gaza, is an enormously crowded, narrow salient. Its ability to develop a sustainable economy is limited. The West Bank has more possibilities, but even it would be subordinate to a dynamic Israel. If the Palestinian workforce is drawn into the Israeli economy, both territories will become adjuncts to Israel. Within its current borders, a viable Palestine is impossible to imagine.

From the Israeli point of view, creating a Palestine along something resembling the 1967 lines (leaving aside the question of Jerusalem) would give the Palestinians superb targets, namely, Tel Aviv and Haifa. Given its history, Israel is unlikely to take that risk unless it had the right to oversee security in the West Bank in some way. That in turn would undermine Palestinian sovereignty.

As you play out the possibilities in any two-state solution, you run into the problem that any solution one side demanded would be unbearable to the other. Geography simply won't permit two sovereign states. In this sense, the extremists on both sides are more realistic than the moderates. But that reality encounters other problems.

Israel's High-Water Mark

Currently, Israel is as secure as it is ever likely to be unless Hamas disappears, never to be replaced, and the West Bank becomes even more accommodating to Israel. Neither of these prospects is likely. Israel's economy towers over its neighbors. The Palestinians are weak and divided. None of Israel's neighbors pose any threat of invasion, a situation in place since the 1977 neutralization of Egypt. Jordan is locked into a close relation with Israel, Egypt has its peace treaty and Hezbollah is bogged down in Syria. Apart from Gaza, which is a relatively minor threat, Israel's position is difficult to improve.

Israel can't radically shift its demography. But several evolutions in the region could move against Israel. Egypt could change governments, renounce its treaty, rearm and re-enter the Sinai Peninsula. Hezbollah could use its experience in Syria to open a front in Lebanon. Syria could get an Islamic State-led government and threaten the Golan Heights. Islamists could overthrow Jordan's Hashemite monarchy and pose a threat to the east. Turkey could evolve into a radical Islamic government and send forces to challenge Israel. A cultural revolution could take place in the Arab world that would challenge Israel's economic superiority, and therefore its ability to wage war. Iran could smuggle missiles into Gaza, and so on.

There is accordingly an asymmetry of possibilities. It is difficult to imagine any evolution, technical, political or economic, that would materially improve Israel's already dominant position, but there are many things that could weaken Israel -- some substantially. Each may appear far-fetched at the moment, but everything in the future seems far-fetched. None is inconceivable.

It is a rule of politics and business to bargain from strength. Israel is now as strong as it is going to be. But Israel does not think that it can reach an accommodation with the Palestinians that would guarantee Israeli national security, a view based on a realistic reading of geography. Therefore, Israel sees little purpose in making concessions to the Palestinians despite its relative position of strength.

In these circumstances, the Israeli strategy is to maintain its power at a maximum level and use what influence it has to prevent the emergence of new threats. From this perspective, the Israeli strategy on settlements makes sense. If there will be no talks, and Israel must maintain its overwhelming advantage, creating strategic depth in the West Bank is sensible; it would be less sensible if there were a possibility of a peace treaty. Israel must also inflict a temporary defeat on any actively hostile Palestinian force from time to time to set them back several years and to demonstrate Israeli capabilities for psychological purposes.

The Palestinian position meanwhile must be to maintain its political cohesion and wait, using its position to try to drive wedges between Israel and its foreign patrons, particularly the United States, but understanding that the only change in the status quo will come from changes outside the Israeli-Palestinian complex. The primary Palestinian problem will be to maintain itself as a distinct entity with sufficient power to resist an Israeli assault for some time. Any peace treaty would weaken the Palestinians by pulling them into the Israeli orbit and splitting them up. By refusing a peace treaty, they remain distinct, if divided. That guarantees they will be there when circumstances change.

Fifty Years Out

Israel's major problem is that circumstances always change. Predicting the military capabilities of the Arab and Islamic worlds in 50 years is difficult. Most likely, they will not be weaker than they are today, and a strong argument can be made that at least several of their constituents will be stronger. If in 50 years some or all assume a hostile posture against Israel, Israel will be in trouble.

Time is not on Israel's side. At some point, something will likely happen to weaken its position, while it is unlikely that anything will happen to strengthen its position. That normally would be an argument for entering negotiations, but the Palestinians will not negotiate a deal that would leave them weak and divided, and any deal that Israel could live with would do just that.

What we are seeing in Gaza is merely housekeeping, that is, each side trying to maintain its position. The Palestinians need to maintain solidarity for the long haul. The Israelis need to hold their strategic superiority as long as they can. But nothing lasts forever, and over time, the relative strength of Israel will decline. Meanwhile, the relative strength of the Palestinians may increase, though this isn't certain.

Looking at the relative risks, making a high-risk deal with the Palestinians would seem prudent in the long run. But nations do not make decisions on such abstract calculations. Israel will bet on its ability to stay strong. From a political standpoint, it has no choice. The Palestinians will bet on the long game. They have no choice. And in the meantime, blood will periodically flow.


George Friedman za Stratfor


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Završiš ETF, zaposliš se u silikonskoj dolini i... navučeš se na pajdo!!!!!!!!! 



Use of illicit drugs becomes part of Silicon Valley's work culture

QuoteFor Google executive Forrest Timothy Hayes, heroin was the killer app.      From the way the Santa Cruz cops talk about it, the security camera video that captured a reputed high-price call girl injecting the 51-year-old tech veteran with a fatal dose of the drug aboard his yacht in Santa Cruz was surely horrific. But it was particularly chilling for another reason:      While the seven-minute-long death scene drew a final curtain on the life of the father of five, it raised another on a dark and largely hidden side of Silicon Valley in 2014. With a booming startup culture cranked up by fiercely competitive VPs and adrenaline-driven coders, and a tendency for stressed-out managers to look the other way, illicit drugs and black-market painkillers have become part of the landscape here in the world's frothy fountain of tech.



"I've had them from Apple, from Twitter, from Facebook, from Google, from Yahoo, and it's bad out there," says Cali Estes, a Miami-based addictions coach who has helped 200 tech workers -- many of them high-level executives -- struggling with everything from cocaine and heroin to painkillers like oxycodone and stimulants like Adderall, a prescription drug used to treat attention-deficit disorders.      "And it's a lot worse than what people think because it's all covered up so well," says Estes. "If it gets out that a company's employees are doing drugs, it paints a horrible picture."      Hayes' overdose last November -- alleged call girl Alix Tichelman was arrested in connection with his death -- felt like an eerie tap on the shoulder. Most Bay Area residents tend to marvel at the innovation unfolding around them from the red-hot tech revival and do not fret about the shadowy behavior that might help propel it all.       While precise numbers of techie drug users are impossible to come by, most treatment and addiction experts see evidence of a growing problem borne of a potent cocktail: newly minted wealth, intense competition between companies and among their workers, the deadline pressure of one product launch after another and a robust regional black-market drug pipeline.      "There's this workaholism in the valley, where the ability to work on crash projects at tremendous rates of speed is almost a badge of honor," says Steve Albrecht, a San Diego consultant who teaches substance abuse awareness for Bay Area employers. "These workers stay up for days and days, and many of them gradually get into meth and coke to keep going. Red Bull and coffee only gets them so far."Furthering the problem, many tech companies do little or no drug testing because, as Albrecht put it, "they want the results, but they don't want to know how their employees got the results."
Drug abuse in the tech industry is growing against the backdrop of a national surge in heroin and prescription pain-pill abuse. Treatment specialists say the over-prescribing of painkillers, like the opioid hydrocodone, has spawned a new crop of addicts -- working professionals with college degrees, a description that fits many of the thousands of workers in corporate Silicon Valley.
Increasingly, experts see painkillers as the gateway drug for addicts, and they are in abundance. "There are 1.4 million prescriptions ... in the Bay Area for hydrocodone," says Alice Gleghorn with the San Francisco Department of Public Health. "That's a lot of pills out there."
Patients prescribed opioids for back pain or injuries can easily become addicted; others get opioids on a thriving black market, or easier yet, from the medicine cabinet of a family member or friend.
Dr. Norman Wall, a Calistoga detox specialist who works with employees from iconic companies such as Apple, says the progression up the addiction ladder is predictable: uppers like Adderall to keep up with production demands and 12-hour days, then downers like oxycodone, another powerful opioid, to take the edge off when you get home. "It's not a big leap to get hooked on oxycodone," he says.
Dave Marlon, president of Nevada-based treatment center Solutions Recovery Inc., which has treated tech workers from across the country, says, "Some people say they need to take opioids in the morning just to function and go to work. It's like drowning and you need air."
But when the pills are no longer enough, people turn to heroin -- first to smoke or snort, and then to inject, because they build a tolerance and need an ever-greater dose to get the same high.
"People graduate to doing things that they never thought they would have done," says Michael Johnson, executive director of The Camp Recovery Center, a rehab center in Scotts Valley.
Heroin is also an opioid, so the mind and body respond much in the same way they do to painkillers, but it's much cheaper -- about $20 for a half a gram, whereas some painkillers run $60 or more a pop, according to the Drug Enforcement Agency. And over the last five or six years, heroin has become more available throughout the Bay Area.
"Fifteen years ago, if you're shooting heroin, you had to had to go to some pretty dark places and deal with dark characters and engage in some dark deeds," Johnson says. "Not so much anymore."
Heroin use more than doubled nationally from 2002 to 2012, according to a study of people age 12 and older by the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and is now the second-most common drug, after alcohol, reported by patients at treatment facilities in San Francisco. The DEA has reported an increase in heroin seizures in Santa Clara and surrounding counties from 6.3 pounds in 2012 to 22 pounds for the first half of this year.
The current surge of illicit drug use is hardly the Bay Area's first. The Sixties, of course, were legendary. But it was the dot-com era when the unique marriage of illicit drugs and tech-work really started to click, with fast money fueling the frenzy.
Those days appear to be back now with a vengeance, says Eddy, a longtime Valley tech worker and recovering addict who attends Narcotics Anonymous meetings in Los Gatos and doesn't want his real name used because of the group's allegiance to anonymity.
"What I'm seeing at meetings is a lot of people getting hooked, courtesy of their doctors," he says. "You see very few of the old-school addicts; most of these are college-educated folks who either started abusing pain meds after an injury, or because of the stress of these tech jobs they start doing cocaine to stay up and oxycodone to relax. Working 80-hour weeks and making crazy money extracts a horrible toll on you."
As the executive director of Morningside Recovery in Newport Beach, Joel Edwards has seen what he calls "an influx in the last six or seven years of tech-related clients abusing Adderall." Another popular prescription upper is Provigil, normally used to treat narcolepsy and raved about in online chat rooms by tech workers who say the drug helps them stay up for 20 hours straight.
"They're using these drugs to work late into the night, under extreme deadlines, with tons of stuff on their plates," says Edwards. "Even the campuses are set up to keep you on site so you can always be working. You hear the same thing over and over from clients: 'There's always somebody else to take my place.'"
Drug problems are not confined to employees. Founders who once had a neat project with a few buddies find themselves with hundreds of employees to manage, IPOs to prepare for, media to answer to and investors to woo -- and sometimes turn to drugs to cope.
"If your life is spinning out of control and is highly charged with stress, you may believe you can take control by self-medicating, but that's a delusion," says Byron Kerr, who sits on the board of LifeRing, a sobriety program that recently began organizing meetings in Santa Clara County.
Experts say that while some tech companies make efforts to help employees with substance abuse problems, it's not nearly enough. Most of the large tech firms offer counseling, but employees often avoid these confidential services for fear they could lose their jobs if word got out about their drug habits, according to counselors and recovering addicts.
This newspaper contacted about a dozen large tech firms with questions about substance abuse among workers; only Cisco and Google responded. Both offer counseling through employee assistance programs, and a Google spokeswoman said employees "can discuss a wide range of issues with the on-site licensed clinical counselors."
Marina London, a licensed clinical social worker who ran employee assistance programs at several tech companies, said some firms pay for counseling as window dressing but fail to deal with the underlying problems.
Many employers, including Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey, advocate moderation for their workers, but some hard-charging techies are equally hard-partying.
Wall says his clients go to parties and see "coke in the room or some pretty girl is passing around a bowl of something that could be Ecstasy or oxycodone."
Part of the problem, experts say, is that our society often encourages young people to self-medicate, starting as early as grammar school. By the time software-savvy kids hit their teens, the valley's "hackathons" provide a stage for drug abuse 1.0. These nonstop coding sessions feature tables covered with Red Bull and Monster Energy drinks, which can contain huge quantities of sugar that is addictive and fires up the brain and body much like opioid drugs do.
"There is a reason addiction centers by and large do not allow Red Bull and Monster on site," said Joyce Marvel-Benoist, program coordinator for The Exclusive Hawaii, a luxury treatment center.
Therapists describe a well-trodden path from teen hackathons all the way up the corporate ladder. One client of Estes' said Friday morning board meetings included a plate of cocaine being passed around the table. "He told me, 'I don't want to offend them, but I can't do this -- I have a heart problem.'"
Estes advised him to decline, which he did. The following Friday, two others also declined.
"The next Friday," she says, "three more declined and eventually the practice stopped. It must have been a peer-pressure thing."
Contact Patrick May at 408-920-5689 or follow him at Twitter.com/patmaymercDrugs in Silicon Valley, by the numbers
      249: Percent increase in heroin seizures by the Drug Enforcement Agency's San Jose division, from 2012 to present
102: Percent increase nationally in heroin use among people age 12 and older from 2002-2012
2nd: California's ranking among all states for highest rate of illicit drug dependence and abuse among 18- to 25-year-olds
1.4 million: Current annual number of prescriptions for hydrocodone, a powerful pain reliever, to Bay Area residents.
5.6: Percent of people age 12 and older in Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo counties who take prescription pain relievers for nonmedical purposes.
638,000: Number of California residents age 26 and up who use illicit drugs, excluding marijuana; that's 2.7 percent of the population
159 per 100,000 population: Number of visits to hospital emergency rooms each year in San Francisco, Marin and San Mateo counties for stimulant abuse; the national average is 30 visits per 100,000 people.
      Sources: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Association, data from 2012; City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Health

Pajdo se vraća na velika vrata i rokaju se na USB


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ridli Skot će za Amazon producirati seriju po Dikovom The Man in the High Castle. Intrigantno!


Philip K Dick 'Nazi alternate reality' story to be made into TV series

Quote
Ridley Scott has signed on to make Philip K Dick's Nazis-in-America story The Man in the High Castle for Amazon Studios, according to industry mag Deadline.


Scott's production firm Scott Free and X-Files writer Frank Spotnitz will make the alternate reality tale in which the Nazis won an extended World War II and are occupying the US in the '60s. The project was originally supposed to be made by Syfy into a four-hour miniseries.
The sci-fi author is clearly a favourite for Scott, who previously directed Blade Runner, and for Hollywood fodder in general. Two versions of Total Recall movies have been made, along with Minority Report and The Adjustment Bureau.
The Man in the High Castle, a Hugo-Award-winning novel, is set in 1962 and tells the story of American life under Fascist rule while the Axis Powers – Japan, Italy and Germany – plot against each other.
The story is one of a number of new projects to be greenlit by Amazon Studios as video-on-demand firms ramp up original in-house productions. Netflix has enjoyed huge success with series House of Cards and Orange is the New Black - which have racked up Emmy Award nominations and wins - and Amazon has been racing to catch up with projects like Alpha House and Betas. ®

Ovo deluje zanimljivo. Inače, sin Vatroslava Mimice režira HALO za Netflix.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Inače, pogledah juče Jutro planete majmuna jer je moj kum insistirao da idemo u bioskop, valjda u nedostatku nekog pametnijeg načina da trošimo vreme. Sad, ne kažem da ja taj film ne bih pogledao, ali, kako je to već na ovom forumu drugim povodima rečeno, ne bih baš prešao ulicu zbog njega. Drugim rečima, pogledao bih ga na HBOu kad naletim na njega, ali ne bih se cimao oko torentovanja itd.

Ali eto, kum je kum. Opet, nije to sad da sam ja apriori mislio da je film smeće nego mi je cela POTA franšiza nezanimjiva jer je prvi film, sa Čarltonom Hestonom za moj groš odradio posao, imao celu sociopolitičku komponentnu down to a science, plus taj odlični reveal na kraju, tako da sam posle još malo gledao seriju snimljenu osamdesetih i odmahivao glavom uz komentar "razvodnjeno je ovo", nastavke filma iz sedamdesetih izbegao jer su bili lo-fi eksploatacija, a otkad je franšiza ributovana nastavio sam po starom, tako da je Jutro planete majmuna zapravo prva stvar koju sam u ovom milenijumu video iz ove franšize. Kako je ona i nastavak prethodnog filma, u teoriji sam bio hendikepiran sa narativne strane, ali...

...ali za mene je zapravo najveći nedostatak ovog filma u stvari to što se sve unapred zna. I tu nema bekstva, usud prikvela jeste taj da se ishod već zna, no dok su se neki serijali sa tim dali izboriti (Star Wars je, makar u teoriji imao interesantnu prikvel priču - kako jedan pussy koga je trenirao Juan Mekgregor postane na kraju badass sith lord koga se svi plašimo i tajno ga želimo već decenijama), POTA je za mene baš onaj primer da se ono stvarno zanimljivo događa u prvom filmu a da prikveli naprosto onda muku muče da nađu interesantne priče u prethodnim događajima koji su morali zapravo biti ili banalni ili jednostavno razvučeni na veliki vremenski period što šteti ideji dramske tenzije.

Jutro planete majmuna u tom smislu obavlja jedan veoma korektan posao - prikazuje nam momenat u istoriji koji, kao, predstavlja tačku u kojoj se ravnoteža moći na planeti nepovratno promenila u korist majmuna i to uspeva da uradi kroz jasnu dramaturgiju koja uspeva da kompleksan odnos dve rase i njihovog postapokaliptičnog razvoja posreduje kroz priču oslonjenu na šačicu likova i uslužno urlajuće mase u njihovij pozadini. No, ponovo, problem je u tome što mi znamo kako se sve završava pa je i dramska tenzija zapravo time osetno oslabljena - nemamo nikakve sumnje u to ko na kraju pobeđuje niti kako se sociopolitička metafora završava i to je problematično - originalni POTA iz 1968. godine upravo je poentirao poslednjom scenom koja je rekontekstualizovala sociopolitički ambijent na koji smo se u tom filmu navikli i to je prepreka koju Jutro planete majmuna naprosto ne može da pređe. Sad, nije Matt Reeves idiot, svestan je i on toga pa zato i insistira na likovima i razvoju spona među njima, ne bi li ta dramska tenzija i naš strah šta će se do kraja desiti bili vezani za same likove - umesto za samu planetu.

To je s jedne strane okej, jer zaobilazi najveći problem filma ali s druge strane je i problem jer i ne koristi najveću prednost filma - tu ideju da imamo sukob dve civilizacije, jedne stare, koja je uništena u apokalipsi i pokušava da preživi i druge koja je mlada, pomolila se iz pepela te apokalipse i žudi da se razvija. U širem kontekstu, ovde dolazimo do toga da sociopolitička alegorija koju film priča na kraju uopšte ne mora da se oslanja na čovekolike majmune kao nosioce lakanovsko-levinasovske drugosti i da je na posletku i ne koristi na bilo koji značajan način. Naprotiv, film bi u potpunosti funkcionisao i kao nefantastičan (ili manje fantastičan) prikaz sukoba dva naselja preživelih nakon apokalipse gde drugost ne bi ni morala da ima rasne ili klasne elemente.

Opet, s druge strane, rasni i klasni elementi koje simbolišu čovekoliki majmuni su tu, ali su, opet za moj ukus, odigrani suviše strejt. Majmuni su potpuno transparentna metafora za primitivne kulture eksploatisane od strane imperijalističkog konzorcijuma amoralnog biznisa (big pharma kao omiljeni supervillain našeg doba) i impotentnih vlasti (Obama se na trenutak pojavljuje da tu impotenciju potvrdi) i njihova kultura je udžbenički, da ne kažem generički primer arhetipa plemenitog divljaka i ni jednog trenutka ne uspeva da iskoči iz klišea. Ovde fali dosta maštovitosti da bi čovekoliki majmuni ikako prešli iz statusa označitelja u stvarnu galeriju likova i mislim da film propušta mnogo prilika da ih iz readymade drugog koji je samo ogledalo za nas i našu kulturu prevede u radikalnog drugog u skladu sa Bodrijarovim pokličem "I'll not be your mirror".

Ovde od toga nema ništa, majmuni veoma dosledno služe samo da hajlajtuju nedostatke naše kulture onako kako ih armija scenarista sažima za potrebe dvosatne akcione drame - nemaju ni religiju, ni mitologiju, ni sujeverja, potpuno su usvojili sva nijansiranja ljudskog govora i engleskog jezika, sa frazama i pojmovnim okvirom koji nikako ne sugeriše njihovu kulturnu posebnost. jedina instanca korišćenja (latiničnog) pisma koju vidimo odnosi se na parolu da Majmun ne Ubija Majmuna, lajtmotiv koji se jasno može trasirati unatrag do vremena pokreta za ljudska prava u SAD posle druge polovine dvadesetog veka, sa idejom da black on black violence mora da stane itd. Dalje, majmuni iako nemaju tehnologiju, nemaju ni nikakav problem ne samo da je koriste, već da je koriste efikasno i njihov relativno ludistički/ tehnofobni momenat koji se tiče uništenja ljudskog naoružanja u prvoj trećini filma, je, dakle, ideološki a ne kulturološki.

Drugim rečima, majmuni su premalo maštovito oblikovani ovde, nemaju svoje ja i umesto njih su tu mogli da budu jednostavno Afroamerikanci ili Romi, ali opet ni ne pravi Afroamerikanci ili Romi već neki stereotipni ogledalski narod koji ni sam nema svoju kulturnu posebnost već naprotiv, sve svoje kulturne karakteristike crpi iz emulacije većinske kulture bez obzira na simbolički napor da se od nje distancira. To je za mene em lenjo scenarističko rešenje (i uvek ističem Adamsov Brežuljak Voteršip kao ogledni primer kako se kultura drugog može napraviti da bude i dovoljno refleksivna u odnosu na našu kulturu pa da ima mesta za simboliku, a da bude i dovoljno posebna kako bismo bili svesni alternativa) em ideološki problematično jer "plemenitog divljaka" svodi samo na nezapranu, neobrazovanu verziju zapadnog liberala/ demokrate umesto na moguću alternativu. Ova logika je dovela do uništenja drugih ali donekle funkcionalnih sistema u Iraku i Libiji i zamenila ih nefunkcionalnim kvazidemokratijama. Nije Jutro planete majmuna za to krivo ali jeste deo problema radije nego deo rešenja. Naprosto, naučna fantastika može bolje.

No, ako ovo sve stavim na stranu, film funkcioniše na planu priče o nekoliko likova koji nastoje da se izdignu iznad tribalizma i da pronađu rešenje koje bi odgovaralo i jednom i drugom plemenu, a čiji su napori osuđeni na propast usudom prikvela, rasnim predrasudama (koje i nemaju mnogo prostora u filmu) i mangupima u sopstvenim redovima koji su jedino žedni moći u kratkoročnom periodu i nemaju istorijsku viziju. Žao mi je da to nije malo elegantnije odrađeno na sve one načine pomenute gore ali film je sasvim gledljiv i mada je Kriplova opaska da posle kratkog vremena imamo utisak da stalno gledamo drame u kojima majmuni govore za mene jednako i problem (jer se gubi ta posebnost koju bi POTA trebalo da ima), nema sumnje da je i okej da nemamo sve vreme nekoga da nas uz uzbuđeni krik podseća kako "maj gad, majmuni govore!"

John Reynolds pokušava sa spase što se spasiti može uprkos donbaskoj izdaji iz Kremlja

http://novikadrovi.blogspot.it/2014/07/ruski-avgust-na-rtsu.html?m=1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posebno mi je drago zbog Šerloka Holmsa jer su to prilično hvalili u svoje vreme.

pre nekoliko dana puštali su pisca iz senke, večeras ide samo pisac, nadam se da će uskoro da emituju i senku.

Pazi, Mehmete, ovo je novi Šerlok a taj iz sedamdesetih/ osamdesetih je sjajan mada jasno ti je da meni Jeremy Brett ostaje kanonski Holmes...

Aha, ovo je novi Šerlok? Hm, dobro, računam da ne može da bude slab.

I naravno da je Bret kanon, tu nema sumnje ni posle Kamberbeča ili Daunija mlađeg.

Ovo je prilično važan tekst. na liniji nekih mojih opservacija zabeleženih ranije- pirati ne mogu biti konkurencija bioskopu u zemlji čiji građani imaju solidnu kupovnu moć

http://www.theverge.com/2014/7/28/5942939/i-torrented-the-expendables-3

Quote from: Meho Krljic on 31-07-2014, 14:34:54
potpuno su usvojili sva nijansiranja ljudskog govora i engleskog jezika, sa frazama i pojmovnim okvirom koji nikako ne sugeriše njihovu kulturnu posebnost.

Ово је веома важна опсервација и ево једног податка коју ретко ко зна, осим оних који су на овај или онај начин учествовали у припреми филма. Ово је тренутак да се пувам, али нећу јер битно иде сад.

Не знам да ли сам потписан на крају, либо ме туки за то, али сам прву верзију превода овог филма послао док је свега 30% анимације било скоро готово, а остало је било у рудиментираној форми. Тако то сад функционише кад је "Дилакс" купио све, јбг, титлује се док филм није ни снимљен, али плате добро, јбг. Елем, у тој првој верзији мајмуни причају крајње упрошћеним "ја Тарзан, ти Џејн" језиком. Ту је чак стављена извесна диференцијација између Кобе који прича баш упрошћено, простачки скоро, и орангутана Мориса који као интелигентнији и "културнији" још у првом делу говори правилније. Али онда је дошао major revision где је на мој шок и хорор све претворено у исправан енглески; осим што сам највише времена потрошио смишљајући неправилне а јасне реченице (хвала Сину што ми увек несвесно даје смернице кад су такве писаније у питању), него бре упропастише један веома значајан детаљ филма. Ко је и кад одлучио да то исправи, то је наравно ван мојих домета, али чисто да се зна да је у обраду пуштена верзија у којој није било тако, дакле ово је била измена у последњем тренутку. И то баш-баш у последњем, јер је последња верзија коју сам добио на ревизију имала скоро све анимације готове.

Postoji izvestan nivo rudimentarnog govora, posebno u verbalnoj komunikaciji i tu se vidi i blaga (ali vrlo blaga) distinkcija između Kobe, Cezara i Morisa, no, u znakovnom jeziku koji preovladava u njihovoj komunikaciji, nema ni traga ovome i nije učinjen nikakav napor da se sugeriše da je ovo vrlo mlada kultura sa pripadnicima koji naprosto ne mogu da imaju iste suptilnosti u govoru (sarkazam, dvosmislenost, metafore) kao neke, jelte, starije.

Текст је био шокантно другачији у првој верзији која ми је послата, а онда је све исправљено и реално покварено.

To je, bojim se, taj usud CGI/ pretežno CGI filmova - toliko toga može da se jeftino promeni u postprodukciji da se na kraju i promeni i od neke originalne vizije malo toga ostane... Koliko sam shvatio, neke scene je Endi Serkis dosnimavao maltene preko skajpa, koristeći jeftinu mo-cap opremu...

Да ли је ди-си-пи који је дошао код нас имао енглеске титлове у себи?

Meni je kao neko nekome koga Danas karakteriše kao "ultradesničara po karakteru" ključno to da ljudi pokazuju "slabost" u formi prevelike tolerancije. da ne kažem nedovoljnog straha, odnosno, ako to gledamo u kontekstu žanra, hajde da kažemo da je ovo jedan od onih filmova u kome izgleda kao da su ljudi dobro utuvili sve poruke iz "liberalnog SFa" što ih na kraju čini više žrtvama no dželatima. Zanimljivo je da u ovom filmu sukob ne izazovu "jastrebovi" među ljudima, to jest ako ih ima oni su prepoznati i marginalizovani.

Inače, zanimljivo je da te intervencije kada se junaci izražavaju kroz titl na većini tržišta, imamo i sa "živim" jezicima.

Recimo, Kusturica je u DOMU ZA VEŠANJE titlovao ono što mu odgovara a ne obavezno ono što glumci izgovaraju na romskom.

Quote from: Джон Рейнольдс on 31-07-2014, 17:58:12
Да ли је ди-си-пи који је дошао код нас имао енглеске титлове у себи?

Ne.

Quote from: crippled_avenger on 31-07-2014, 18:04:20
hajde da kažemo da je ovo jedan od onih filmova u kome izgleda kao da su ljudi dobro utuvili sve poruke iz "liberalnog SFa" što ih na kraju čini više žrtvama no dželatima. Zanimljivo je da u ovom filmu sukob ne izazovu "jastrebovi" među ljudima, to jest ako ih ima oni su prepoznati i marginalizovani.

Da, čak i Gari Oldmen nema nikakvu nužno sinister agendu, i ako se u jednom momentu i zalaže za masovno ubistvo, to je u kontekstu jasne priteranosti uza zid i vere da čini najbolje za svoj tabor, bez nekakvog ispoljavanja suprematističkih stavova. Jedini likovi koji otvoreno izražavaju rasističke/ suprematističke stavove su očigledno uskogrudi provincijalci koji i ginu u susretima sa plemenitim divljakom koji je i sam zaražen idejom suprematizma, tako da tu glavnim likovima na svim stranama ostaju čiste ruke. To je pomalo mehaničko rešenje, ali hajde.

Istorija, to beše rat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Istorija je nastavak rata drugim sredstvima 

Majmuni nisu čitali Karla Šmita, a za ljude je on bio "tera inkognita". Kako majmuni nisu ljudi, napipali su šmitovske zaključke sami jer je njima to bilo mislivo...

Сценарио је толико осакатио таленат Гарија Олдмана, да је јасно како је тог лика могао одиграти било који осредњи глумац и било би сасвим свеједно. Иначе, Коба је најјачи лик, по мени и главни лик, док је Цезар њоњавац.

Koba je Hašim Tači za Cezarovog Rugovu, cenim. Ili Malkolm Eks u odnosu na, hm, Martina Lutera Kinga? Magneto u odnosu na Profesora Iksa, takođe...

Cezar je Jovan Rašković.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ali onda Koba ispada... Slobodan Milošević? Ne, ne, čekaj, Milan Martić?