moebius22

^ "Why Russia’s Facebook ad campaign wasn’t such a success" https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/why-russias-facebook-ad-campaign-wasnt-such-a-success/2017/11/03/b8efacca-bffa-11e7-8444-a0d4f04b89eb_story.html The Russian ad buy by Presidential election standards was measly. Now on the other hand how much effect did Hillary Clinton's comments about "deplorables" (people whose vote she lost in key states) or her stupid decision to set up her own private server, sfocus on the wrong states to campaign in the last days of the election, or her legendary ability to rub people the wrong way have in comparison?

Trump doesn't like the Press. If you go back in American history Trump isn't the only one. Now Obama on the other hand used the government apparatus to spy on reporters and even listed on as a "possible criminal 'co-conspirator". Of course that gets swept under the rug, because it fits the current narrative. Trust in media was pretty dismal before Trump if you look at Pew Polling over the decade or so. It's worse now, but it's not entirely unearned. I see some of these papers like NY Times and Washington Post churning out negative news on Trump that later turns out to be outright false or misleading. Russian interference had very little if any effect on how the election turned out. Hillary Clinton's own actions helped doom her 2nd poor presidential run.

^ Come on man. You can't condense that into one coherent statement?

Got to stop dividing each along political, social, racial, and gender lines, but good luck with that, because some people view political correctness, identity politics as their ticket to ultimate victory - and let's face it, it works if you ignore the side effects like social strife. The one good thing coming out of targeting of people like Gunn is it's getting some people who didn't take this stuff seriously to perhaps readjust their thinking.

I try not to comment to much on the politics or culture of other countries because, I understand that not living there I may not have an entirely clear picture of the inner goings of those countries, even though I do read foreign media. The drive in the U.S. to shut down, police, and label speech that one disagrees with as hate speech., or some ism-whether that be racism, sexism, homophobism, etcetera is a cancer on the country, but it wasn't started by the Right. It came out of the university systems that preached Marxism which eventually morphed into poltical corretcness. On university campuses speech is tightly controlled, and speech which isn't viewed as being helpful is punished. It would eventually flow from university campuses int the broader culture where it's now a blight on American discourse. For many decades those on the Right found themselves targeted by the Left using the same tactics that took down Gunn today. I don't support it, but when you create an environment where it's okay to use these tactics against people whose views you do not like, don't be surprsied if some of them adopt those tactics and use them against you. May the First Amendment forever reign.

Better film than the original (which is way overrated, despite being widely influential). We get an interesting protagonist, interesting supporting characters, and a story with a twist at the end.

"Well, Trump is in power for a reason." It's called eight years of Democrats.

The V-Log decision is pure nonsense. I'll stick with my Gh4 for the time being and wait to see what Sony comes out with.

Paying for V-Log left a bad taste in my mouth. I'll wait and see what they offer, but I think I'm going to drop Panasonic for Sony.

Like it or not, entertainment doesn't work like the real world. Millions ride on the creative talents of often deeply flawed individuals. Ultimately, it's the BBC 's call, but they likely knew what this guy was about and looked the other way because he was making them millions. This kind of reminds me of the whole "Duck Dynasty" dust up here in the States, that ended with Phil Robertson keeping his job after A&E pretended they had principles. Don't get me wrong, the BBC has no principles, or they wouldn't have let it get this far. They just wanted to stick their heads in the sand and make money. They just don't want to come clean that all they care about is money, like A&E eventually did.

Composition, lens choices, and sound creative decisions trump camera. Even the best of us need to be reminded of that, often.

I'll wait for a couple other filmmakers to make movies with it, to get a better idea of what the camera is capable of.

@jnorman34 This is a filmmaking website.

That live view problem (a design issue) plagues all their low end cameras.

The auto focus looks great, even if the video sucks. At the end of day, people are going to buy it because it's a Canon. Moreover, photography people could care less about video.