Vous n'avez pas pu louper la sortie de I am a Legend, c'est facile, tu fais un pas dans le métro tu tombes sur la belle gueule d'amour de Will Smith et tu es presque d'accord
pour le choix du titre. Comme votre sémillante serviteur est un peu une naze ces derniers temps, elle l'a loupé quand même. Qu'à cela ne tienne, après avoir squatté les
commentaires depuis quelques mois, ce soir c'est Sébi qui passe de l'autre côté du miroir et met son fil à la patte. Du (j'ai pas osé mettre
fin) fond du un trois, voici une critique de cinéma par un monsieur qui d'habitude se vante de ne pas en faire! Mais en ce moment c'est Noël tous les jours :
"On lit ça et là que I Am Legend serait la version sous stéroïdes de 28 Days Later. Bon.
Bref I Am Legend c'est un divertissement sympa, mais qui traumatise beaucoup moins (et beaucoup moins longtemps) que 28 Days/Weeks Later. Les stéroïdes on les gardera pour le
marketing. Moi je préfère la terreur british."
Merci copain! J'ai la réponse à aucune de tes questions mais tu as gagné une superbe photo de Kitty suppliciée (ben oui, tu es père de famille quand même).
Commentaires
pas simplement les idees americaines
egalement, tu n'aimes pas aucun grand film
Ensuite de 2) pour jormundgard : c'est pas qu'une question de solutions, c'est une question de comment on appréhende le problème. Et l'idée américaine visiblement c'est de ne pas l'appréhender.
Enfin de 3) pour jormungard : pas trop compris ta dernière phrase. En tout cas si, bien sûr, j'aime bien les aucun grand film, et même j'aime bien I Am Legend. Je trouve simplement que le côté "28 jours plus tard sous stéroïdes", c'est un slogan usurpé.
Jormundgard> you're scary!!! you should not discuss geopolitics in French, you just sould not. and I have NOT written this article (Sebi did) and i DO love big movies like heuh... like...Pulp Fiction?
Sebi> ok, il fallait que je te dise qu'il y a un americain qui lit ce blog et qui même s'il ne se débrouille pas encore très très bien, apprend le francais à une vitesse hallucinante en jouant à the World of Warcraft en français. si si. soupirs. Donc comme ils ont the big gun, il faut la jouer cool. AMERICA IS GREAT!!!!! AMERICA LAND OF FREEDOM (and come to France for public welfare)
mais
j'ai pense que melimelody a ecrit l'article. desole :)
aussi
i must say in english because i am dumb:
the Kyoto plan was terrible, and possibly even worse given the wasted economic potential
i cant understand why goverments supported this plan. The total benefit to climate was so small that it would actually be impossible to measure
the proposals at bali were no better, and the american plan was equally terrible
global climate change efforts are an international embarassment, and are purely for political show
this is my opinion as a phd in earth science
but it is still only my opinion
i think that i am right, but really, its difficult to know anything
it is just painful to see bad science turned into public policy
@ jormungard : yes indeed Kyoto is unefficient, especially when its (small) objectives aren't accomplished at all... :(
As a phd in earth science, what do you think governments should do to slow climate change ? Is it still possible to do something ?
(I sometimes dream of how many "green" projects could have been funded with the Iraq war budget - rather nightmarish)
@ Melo : mais si ! (ah pardon, j'ai cru que tu me parlais)
i think the climate situation is sad, and impossible to stop. Fifty years of civilization caused a 10-20% increase in CO2. If the world reduced hydrocarbon usage by 10%, it still couldn't stop things.
And no one is crazy enough to do this. Going back to pre-1950 production levels would be worse to civilization than the damage to the climate.
well, maybe
if it triggers a special shift in the ocean like the Younger Dryas then europe will freeze (oops) (well britain and iceland mostly haha). maybe that would be worse
but no one knows how these things work, so its all very scary
i think if goverments want to make a difference, they should try to eliminate oil dependence. i dont know if its possible. but i think this is the only way.
@meli: joyeux noel :D
je ne peux pas employer un clavier francais a chez maman :'(
"If the world reduced hydrocarbon usage by 10%, it still couldn't stop things."
That's why we need precise objectives. That's what Europe fighted for in Bali. Europe plans on a 50-80% CO2 decrease in 2050. Very hard task, especially for the US which already produces twice as much CO2 as Europe (which is already far too high).
Europe alone can't do it. We need the US (+ China). Hey, you guys save the world in almost every movie you release. It's now time to do the same for real. You have so much talent to raise money and encouragements for big challenges (Moon, soon Mars journeys), why not use it for the biggest of all, humanity survivance ?
"Going back to pre-1950 production levels would be worse to civilization than the damage to the climate." / "they should try to eliminate oil dependence. i dont know if its possible."
The point is, it's not just a choice of ours to make. If we don't slow oil consumption by ourselves, we'll be *forced* to do so, and it will be very, very painful. Oil stock is not infinite (peak oil happened in 2006, according to some sources). Neither uranium. Big energy crisis ahead, whether we want it or not. We'll have both climate change + lack of resources to face it. So what do we do ?
We've been thinking for years that "humanity will find a solution in the future". But we need solutions NOW, cos inbetween, the future is now.
(excuse my french)
se déploient
sans le poids
de leur zèle...
Joyeux Noël et heureuses festivités.
Biz Melo