true. I think the star representation is fine because eating it the slices are basically stars so its valid artistic license.

as for blobfish, u can argue its dead when u catch it but aquarium and ponds exist so that’s kinda sus

thanks for pointing out, i mistaked. ill edit the description

so… u are saying chickens are ‘fuel’…

fixed the alt text thanks. idk if fediverse counts as web2, maybe it does. my main point is that corporate web2 sucks

Thanks for the info :D

updated it @JudahBenHur@lemm.ee. will post to programmar humor later

huh thanks for clarifying

series of decentralized somewhat private* frontends for popular sites like twitter, reddit, etc. similar is like revanced or new pipe for youtube.

*idk if its actually private, i just heard it is and used it a long time ago

Its like how US expanded capitalism by creating police in the late 19th century

reverse flash fucking up reality slightly to fuck with barry allen:

took 3 tries tho

You are correct about which book the quote is from. Idk about Jackson’s books so can’t say anything.

I tried to include the explaination (tbh I dont get it fully still) in the title that technically its true bc ‘something else does the work’ (hence the title)

“cringe meme” has as much artistic value as anything. there is no “some point of view” here. source filmaker being used doesnt change anything. shrek is love, shrek is life is different, but i wouldnt say its not artistic either, and not artistic limited to just ‘some point of view’

your post does not communicate this in the slightest. the title is hard to interpret but seems to be implying the issue with the image is that there are skibidi cards at all. There is no other descripter anywhere. ‘companies taking ideas from less legally powerful creators, and selling them for a quick profit’ is a great point, but there is nothing alluding to that here

i agree. but i’d like to add that i don’t think skibidi toilet is just a meme (and i say that not to say memes are less valued). I was told it’s ‘cringe children meme’, went to actually watch it, and its a big series that is just amazing for what it is. its a passion filled action series with some really great direction, lighting, animation, etc at times. And Im so glad that something like this exists and is popular

what’s the joke/points here?

wtf? “hey dont let people escape the bad place, its everyone there’s fault that the system is bad”

omg i didnt even realize the connection

now idk how commonly discussed this is. but in my viewing, how to train your dragons 3 was one of hardest movies to watch in a long time. and thats all to be blamed on this

this dragon actually made me pause a dozen times just to check if im not going insane. it is like if someone made misogyny into a character design. from old timey ‘perfect women ideals’ to some current ones, they are all here:

• smooth white skin thats translucent
• all the features are smoothed out, horns, tails, wings, any texture of any kind
• body details are gone in order to make the body/skin and even the eyes appear smooth
• she talks with what i can only imagine is intentional ‘stereotypical smooth feminine’ voice
• the way she’s animated itself is that, more smooth and more delicate movements

I know describing it like this sounds stupid. but i had to take days long breaks in viewing the movie bc i thought i was being crazy, “it cant be that bad”. but it is, i cant unsee it, and i feel horrible that this movie has this. they could’ve changed the dragon and it would’ve not been this bigotry.mp4 movie for me. but it is

I think the point being missed a lot here is that the art style was thematically relevant to the Shrek franchise. Atleast to me. It was stylized realism, where the humans were clearly stylized but also detailed in a way to make them be allegoric to the real world. And with that the main cast was also textured and modelled in stylized realism manner.

The goal to me was clear, thematically it was to say the main cast looks out of place from the realistic world around them. The main cast’s stylization was also relevant to their unconvential looks (and other things too but we focusing on that), the exaggurated chin on shrek, the messy but slightly tied down hair on Fiona. You can argue that wasn’t to make them unconvential, just a choice fitting for that era of Shrek, and it doesn’t work now when Shrek cast is part of the world and accepted just fine. But I don’t see the point of these characters coming on the big screen together without the core theme of the original run, maybe it will surprise me and use the new character models in thematically relevant ways. Maybe the thick and perfect hair of Fiona will have a reason, maybe the button noses used instead of triangular ones will server a purpose. I dont know.

Oh wait art style. The previous rant was regarding the character models. The art style has a similar issue, the shading specifically makes things look not-realistic. In a way that thematically ruins (for me) the idea of Shrek, being a wildly different person in a realistic world. The art style is great in isolation (to me), but for something like Shrek it looks wrong. If they did this art style for a new set of characters I wouldn’t even mind, but this ruins the themes. And I don’t trust Dreamworks (especially after Kung Fu Panda 4) to build a new theme that uses this art style and character design changes for the themes.

Now to end, Fiona’s hair covering most of the face, her nose being buttoned up, her lips smoothed out, her neck being shrunk, all combine to make her look more conventially attractive. The cast isn’t thin, but their facial features have been beautified and hence made more convential. I dont have an answer on how to change them otherwise for the new art style, the issue is with Shrek, it’s hard to do the new dreamworks art styles. Maybe a better artist can think of a way to keep the realism while making the art style work, the hair shader at least shouldn’t be this clean and untextured.