So on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the worst day ever...today was a solid 9. Maybe even a 9.5. Unfortunately, as healthy as it would be to talk about this, it happened at work, so I cannot disclose the details no matter how much I wish to.
On the bright side, it's giving me a chance to catch up on blogging other stuff. Starting with new things regarding the celestial alphabet. Still haven't written it yet, but I realized today that I needed three extra letters. Well, didn't need, so much as, thought would be convenient. We can get by with a lot less letters than you'd think, but sometimes we have so many words that work a certain way it's handy to have an extra letter that covers it.
It can also be helpful for obscure, but existing, rules. For instance, one of the new letters I realized I could use was 'ph'. I sounded it out to confirm. People would generally assume it's redundant with 'f', but it's actually not; it has a unique sound, between a p and an f. Now, many words using ph are in fact meant to be pronounced as if it were an f, but not all of them are; some of them do in fact have that unique sound, thus, the need for it.
On a similar subject of redundancy, people generally think that we could get rid of 'c'. Well, soft-c, sure, but hard-c? There's a small, virtually undetectable, but EXISTING, difference between two ways to say 'k'. (One more a 'kih' and one more a 'kuh'.) Now, mind you...there may be more ways than that for the k to actually end. It is also something that may exist with other letters. But it is very PROMINENT in k; I ran through many k-words (or words that could be k-words) and checked it out. Some work with both, but some have one fit much better than the other.
And while we're on the subject of k...well, X has many things it can be pronounced at, most of which are thought to be redundant with other letters. This is, technically, true, but I realized that the English language has SO many words that end in 'ks' that it'd be convenient just to use another single letter rather than two: x. (This is similar to how 'q' is technically 'kw', but is still very common.)
So instead of having a nice even 12/24 vowels and 24/48 consonants for a balanced 72, it's the same vowels with 27 consonants, meaning 78 total...plus punctuation, which I've developed three symbols for. Then, we get letters, ten of them, which I want both upper and lowercase of, so we jump from 81 to 101.
101 symbols to draw out, get consistent, and memorize. It might seem like a lot, but hey. On your average laptop keyboard, between shift-keys and normal-keys, there are 92 unique characters, not including 'enter', 'backspace', 'shift', 'control', 'alt' 'fn', or the windows symbol, also discarding all the F1-12 combos, insert, print screen, delete, home, page up, page down, end, and arrow keys, not to mention the escape key. We memorize these without even thinking about how, to a new person, this many things to learn all at once would be intimidating.
If you don't believe me, feel free to count it out yourself, keeping in mind each letter of the alphabet counts for two, and that we have a LOT more punctuation, symbols, and such, which all hold multiple meanings at that. (! can be 'bang', 'not', 'exclamation mark', and many more, to name just one.)
Anyway, I also owe you all a bit on Deadpool. I read that, after it was made, a wave of R-rated superhero movies are being considered to be made, and that made me heavily sigh. Because, frankly, I think that they're missing the point. It's not, "Deadpool was a superhero movie rated R that broke records, therefore, make more R-rated superhero films"; the point was Deadpool was made very, very cleverly, with much love, very true to the source material, captivating audiences around the world with its clever, relatable commentary...which just so happened to, coincidentally, be rated R.
I feel like it's going to be the superhero equivalent of Avatar. Hollywood has, apparently, figured out by now that, contrary to their assumption, Avatar's success was NOT because it was in 3D. In that case, Avatar was a visually-stunning movie which fully utilized the third dimension, but it was still a visual masterpiece, with the 3D aspect being well-incorporated with love and care. Basically every 3D movie since then just had the 3D tacked on as an afterthought, and lo and behold, nobody cared.
Same basic deal here. Deadpool was good because it was GOOD, not because it was the first to do something (R-rated superhero film). So trying to imitate Deadpool will...create something that is just that, an imitation, which will maybe make back the budget for the film but will just increase audience apathy towards superheroes.
I absolutely DARE Hollywood to prove me wrong. I absolutely dare them to sit back, carefully construct a good film with love and care, and if it happens to be R-rated superheroes, then it's R-rated superheroes. I dare them to make it so that films following in Deadpool's footsteps aren't more of the same, but rather, introduce new material that captivates audiences. I dare them to stay daring.
...But of course, I already know the answer there. Even if for some ungodly reason someone from Hollywood were to read a ridiculously obscure blog like mine, fat chance they'd actually listen.
I do think I speak for moviegoers everywhere though.
On the bright side, it's giving me a chance to catch up on blogging other stuff. Starting with new things regarding the celestial alphabet. Still haven't written it yet, but I realized today that I needed three extra letters. Well, didn't need, so much as, thought would be convenient. We can get by with a lot less letters than you'd think, but sometimes we have so many words that work a certain way it's handy to have an extra letter that covers it.
It can also be helpful for obscure, but existing, rules. For instance, one of the new letters I realized I could use was 'ph'. I sounded it out to confirm. People would generally assume it's redundant with 'f', but it's actually not; it has a unique sound, between a p and an f. Now, many words using ph are in fact meant to be pronounced as if it were an f, but not all of them are; some of them do in fact have that unique sound, thus, the need for it.
On a similar subject of redundancy, people generally think that we could get rid of 'c'. Well, soft-c, sure, but hard-c? There's a small, virtually undetectable, but EXISTING, difference between two ways to say 'k'. (One more a 'kih' and one more a 'kuh'.) Now, mind you...there may be more ways than that for the k to actually end. It is also something that may exist with other letters. But it is very PROMINENT in k; I ran through many k-words (or words that could be k-words) and checked it out. Some work with both, but some have one fit much better than the other.
And while we're on the subject of k...well, X has many things it can be pronounced at, most of which are thought to be redundant with other letters. This is, technically, true, but I realized that the English language has SO many words that end in 'ks' that it'd be convenient just to use another single letter rather than two: x. (This is similar to how 'q' is technically 'kw', but is still very common.)
So instead of having a nice even 12/24 vowels and 24/48 consonants for a balanced 72, it's the same vowels with 27 consonants, meaning 78 total...plus punctuation, which I've developed three symbols for. Then, we get letters, ten of them, which I want both upper and lowercase of, so we jump from 81 to 101.
101 symbols to draw out, get consistent, and memorize. It might seem like a lot, but hey. On your average laptop keyboard, between shift-keys and normal-keys, there are 92 unique characters, not including 'enter', 'backspace', 'shift', 'control', 'alt' 'fn', or the windows symbol, also discarding all the F1-12 combos, insert, print screen, delete, home, page up, page down, end, and arrow keys, not to mention the escape key. We memorize these without even thinking about how, to a new person, this many things to learn all at once would be intimidating.
If you don't believe me, feel free to count it out yourself, keeping in mind each letter of the alphabet counts for two, and that we have a LOT more punctuation, symbols, and such, which all hold multiple meanings at that. (! can be 'bang', 'not', 'exclamation mark', and many more, to name just one.)
Anyway, I also owe you all a bit on Deadpool. I read that, after it was made, a wave of R-rated superhero movies are being considered to be made, and that made me heavily sigh. Because, frankly, I think that they're missing the point. It's not, "Deadpool was a superhero movie rated R that broke records, therefore, make more R-rated superhero films"; the point was Deadpool was made very, very cleverly, with much love, very true to the source material, captivating audiences around the world with its clever, relatable commentary...which just so happened to, coincidentally, be rated R.
I feel like it's going to be the superhero equivalent of Avatar. Hollywood has, apparently, figured out by now that, contrary to their assumption, Avatar's success was NOT because it was in 3D. In that case, Avatar was a visually-stunning movie which fully utilized the third dimension, but it was still a visual masterpiece, with the 3D aspect being well-incorporated with love and care. Basically every 3D movie since then just had the 3D tacked on as an afterthought, and lo and behold, nobody cared.
Same basic deal here. Deadpool was good because it was GOOD, not because it was the first to do something (R-rated superhero film). So trying to imitate Deadpool will...create something that is just that, an imitation, which will maybe make back the budget for the film but will just increase audience apathy towards superheroes.
I absolutely DARE Hollywood to prove me wrong. I absolutely dare them to sit back, carefully construct a good film with love and care, and if it happens to be R-rated superheroes, then it's R-rated superheroes. I dare them to make it so that films following in Deadpool's footsteps aren't more of the same, but rather, introduce new material that captivates audiences. I dare them to stay daring.
...But of course, I already know the answer there. Even if for some ungodly reason someone from Hollywood were to read a ridiculously obscure blog like mine, fat chance they'd actually listen.
I do think I speak for moviegoers everywhere though.
RSS Feed
