![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Delicious LiveJournal Links for 7-28-2008
Jul. 28th, 2008 09:31 am-
Some deliberate, some just caught at precisely the right moment.
-
Fantastic example of DeepZoom technology.
Jul. 28th, 2008
Over here Lilian, in her legal capacity, talks about the Mosley case, where a court decided that printing details of what Max Mosley got up to with bondage prostitutes was his own affair, and that the newspaper had no right to print pictures of it.
Which is interesting, and I have no particular argument with it. Except, as she points out, it doesn't half make you wonder where this particular slippery slope ends. If one of the prostitutes involved writes their autobiography, should that be banned? How about if they were updating their blog? How much expectation of privacy do we have when people are constantly updating the world about the state of their lives?
Certainly, spreading lies about people is wrong, but does that mean we shouldn't be allowed to say things that are true? If I were to write a blog post about having sex with Gordon Brown this morning, thus outing him to the world, would that be actionable? How about if I updated my facebook status? If I wrote a friend a letter? If I told someone down the pub? If I wrote it in my diary? At what point do we draw the line?
I'm not advocating any particular solution (although, as ever, I fall on the side of The Transparent Society), it's just one of the tensions in society that fascinates me.
[Poll #1231162]
Which is interesting, and I have no particular argument with it. Except, as she points out, it doesn't half make you wonder where this particular slippery slope ends. If one of the prostitutes involved writes their autobiography, should that be banned? How about if they were updating their blog? How much expectation of privacy do we have when people are constantly updating the world about the state of their lives?
Certainly, spreading lies about people is wrong, but does that mean we shouldn't be allowed to say things that are true? If I were to write a blog post about having sex with Gordon Brown this morning, thus outing him to the world, would that be actionable? How about if I updated my facebook status? If I wrote a friend a letter? If I told someone down the pub? If I wrote it in my diary? At what point do we draw the line?
I'm not advocating any particular solution (although, as ever, I fall on the side of The Transparent Society), it's just one of the tensions in society that fascinates me.
[Poll #1231162]
About six months ago I went to see Dan In Real Life, an altogether unsatisfying film that should have been much better than it was.( minor plot spoilers )
The problem with it was the tone was entirely uneven. Two thirds of the film was exceptionally well written and acted, touching, simple and very human, with shades of grey everywhere. The other third was funny, cute and rom-com, where everything was tied up neatly. The problem being that these two things clashed _terribly_.
When I see an action movie I either want a tense thriller that grips me with its realism, or a daft over-the-top explosion-filled nonsensity - straddling both areas at once is incredibly hard, because I can't believe in a character as real _and_ as a cartoon.
Which isn't to say that cartoons can't be emotionally effective - I cried at the end of WALL-E - but I need a world that's tonally consistent, selling me a world that's gritty and real, and then throwing in a cartoon moment will tend to destroy my emotional attachment unless it's done very well.
All of which is largely to agree with the article here on The Aliens of London, which goes to great lengths to explain _why_ it doesn't just fail to work, but it acts to destroy everything around it.
The problem with it was the tone was entirely uneven. Two thirds of the film was exceptionally well written and acted, touching, simple and very human, with shades of grey everywhere. The other third was funny, cute and rom-com, where everything was tied up neatly. The problem being that these two things clashed _terribly_.
When I see an action movie I either want a tense thriller that grips me with its realism, or a daft over-the-top explosion-filled nonsensity - straddling both areas at once is incredibly hard, because I can't believe in a character as real _and_ as a cartoon.
Which isn't to say that cartoons can't be emotionally effective - I cried at the end of WALL-E - but I need a world that's tonally consistent, selling me a world that's gritty and real, and then throwing in a cartoon moment will tend to destroy my emotional attachment unless it's done very well.
All of which is largely to agree with the article here on The Aliens of London, which goes to great lengths to explain _why_ it doesn't just fail to work, but it acts to destroy everything around it.