WHY CREATIONISM WILL NEVER WIN

Yep, that NetFlix streaming movie is remarkable -- you'll get addicted. I don't know what quality DVD is on the market of "The Bible" as it hasn't had the investment in any kind of restoration and is unlikely from the Todd AO hi res print, but the anamorphic Panavision -- it could even be 4:3 pan-and-scan instead of wide screen. The prints I've seen are really bad, probably from a 17 mm distributed to schools, the military and TV broadcasts like AMC. It doesn't deserve restoration and we'll all be six-feet-under if a Blu-Ray is ever released.

You'll feel like you're in a old theater with the gum under the seats.

Like I pointed out, it's all done P. T. Barnum style -- anyone who can't see how insanely ridiculous the whole extravaganza is presented is either stupid or ignorant or both. The huge, very badly painted Last Supper at the Disneyland of Death, Forest Lawn in LA, is of the same ilk.

Yes, Huston plays Noah -- curiously the same name as his character in "Chinatown." He was perfectly cast in that film.

I forgot his character in Chinatown. Didnt he have the m,ost pompous condescending voice of anyone in Hollywood ?

I'd have to agree with that . . . he even sounded pompous when he played Grizzly Adams in The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean.

Never saw that one. Thats the Paul Newman comedy right?.

I have to say that I did like Huston as the narrator (sitting in as Steinbeck) in Cannery Row.

This Netflix is hooked right up to my remote control. All I have to do is address it once with my Netflix numbers and I dont even have to go to the computer and(wonder of wonders) it gets sent to my TV NOT my computer.

Netflix is gonna have to get a bigger library, they only have 60000 titles. Ill be through that by Christmas.

NOW, can I burn a CD of a Netflix movie while its playing on my tv? Is that wrong? Im not going to be all angry about not having an HD version of a movie. I dont want to get all comfortable with Blue RAy because I want way better versions of the 3_D effects that they try do with the subtle shading in todays HD . I know that the next jump in resolution is nigh (especially when all the big sets are cheaper by the day)

One can purchase their own NetFlix ready branded box and hook it up to the cable and the TV input -- it's $ 99.00. LG is famous for building in this stuff, except it's made some really costly mistakes in the past, sticking in plug-and-play DVD players (like in a laptop) into the chassis of the flat screen, including a cable card slot when the cable companies weren't totally supporting them, and other venturesome flops.

But the NetFlix electronics built in is a successful brainstorm. I'm not sure if they don't copy guard like on the software DVD's, but the fact is you can't make a copy of what you see streaming as you can't store the actual movie. You can't burn streaming video. Whether they will ever loosen up and let one store on a DMR (a DVR which not only stores on a hard drive but will burn discs), I don't know, but right now it's as good as being copy guarded. You can watch NetFlix streaming movies on your computer, but same problem. Real Player has a download video feature but, again, that can be blocked (I've run into that where the Real Player "Download this video" pop-up will not appear).

Also, last time I looked NetFlix did not have any hi def streaming movies -- they were all 480p DVD quality, but with possibly better PCM sound.

From the NetFlix site:

High Definition Encodes

Today we have rights to deliver about 400 streams in HD (720p). More titles will be added over time. We experimented with first-generation WMV3 encodes at 4000kbps and 5500kbps, but settled on second-generation HD encodes with VC1AP at 2600kbps and 3800kbps, which extends their accessibility down to lower home broadband connections. As with SD, encodes of film material are at 24fps, and encodes of shot-to-video material are at 30fps (or 25fps for PAL), rather than the 60fps that would come from a Blu-ray disc - we judged the 60fps content as too expensive of bandwidth for now. In general, these encodes are definitively better than SD, but won't challenge well-executed Blu-ray encodes - that would require a bitrate out of reach for most domestic broadband today. We believe Moore's law will drive home broadband higher and higher enabling full 1080p60 encodes in a few years.

So the picture you are getting is technically not HD, but ED (Enhanced Definition) but you won't read any promotions really explaining that -- it's a commercial video standard (like companies use for displaying product) and some broadcasters like TBS, who are not upgrading to 1080i (1080i still offers more pixels than 720p and that's what you are mostly seeing from all the HD broadcasters). Wimbleton today is in 720p as I guess their satellite is having problems from England. It's a remarkable difference as they tend to stretch the picture and Roddick looks like he's been hitting MacDonalds a bit too often.

I meant that TBS and TNT, as well as other broadcasters in the cable and satellite HD offerings, are gradually making 1080i the standard while beginning to offer some 1080p on pay-per-view since the gained a lot of bandwidth possibilities with the dropping of analog signals. But beware -- if you start getting pixelization and sound drop-out, it means you have a basic hi-speed connection. I have Time Warner RoadRunner Turbo and there's two tiers above that for speed -- it will still falter with online streaming video like on Hulu if I go full screen.

Long story short, you're not getting Blu-Ray full 1080p over cable yet with the Internet connection, which is not the same as the network hook-ups coming directly out of the cable box -- they can offer 1080p as well as satellite services Dish and Direct. It's pay-per-view for now, however.

That's all very well LW but what about the content?

Are you an equipment fetishist? Are you so enamoured of your excellence of appreciation of the kit that you forget all about the artistic sublimities.

The medium is the message for you eh? And it's narcissistic. It exhibits your ability to pay. At a low level of course.

Don't pay any attention to that man behind the curtain -- he isn't the Wizard of Oz, he's the Wizard of Bras. Not that he has any unusual technique to get them off -- he's rather wear them all day.

Thats why I have that idiot on ignore. 99% of the time hes engaged in eye/hand diahhrea and can be passed over without even peeking.

These guys must win every argument they engage in with the method they employ. They deliver themselves, no doubt pompously, of their ridiculous statements, which could just as easily be applied to anybody who crosses them, and sit back in smug self-satisfaction and solipsistic triumph.

What they are short of is somebody to laugh at them.

Going off the evidence of effemm's recent posts he has this thread's topic on ignore as well.

Anyway--he blows hot and cold on the ignore function.

And if LW and effemm have not yet learned that their two posts above have no effect on me they must be very ******* slow on the uptake. They think they can bully me off the thread like they have George and Frank and Foxy and a few others. They are feather dusters. Paper tigers.

Ditto here but I just can't help peeking -- just to confirm he's still pounding on the same distant drum which has so many holes in it, it makes a pathetic sound of fury, signifying nothing.

What a pathetic sophistry to try to justify "can't help peeking".

Everybody knows the real reason why you can't help peeking. effemm can't either.

But I would address myself to why I couldn't help peeking at something signifying nothing. If anything signifies nothing then everything must do as well. The ego that sees things as signifying nothing cannot claim significance for itself without reaching the extremities of meglomania.

My thread is much cleaner without his baseless crapola.

Three baseless assertions in nine words is going some even for effemm.

And only half as long.

And fifty times as boring.