Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The staff ate it later

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 313 posts

Re: The staff ate it later

#131

Post by 3eb7988a1663 »

crazygringo wrote: post #102
alpinisme wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That and nobody wants to eat a meal 40 times to get 40 takes.

This is the answer. The food is perfectly fine. It's fresh, there's catering on set, and it can be replaced as needed, unless it's something super unusual. BUT if you eat the food in one shot you need to eat it in all the shots for continuity, so you can edit it together. Get ready to start barfing after 40 big bites of the same damn thing. If you look closely, you'll also see the coffee/tea cups actors sip from are…

I assumed the drink cups were empty/opaque so there was no continuity problem. If you splice together different shots, but the liquid level bounces around, it could be distracting.

Re: The staff ate it later

#132

Post by schneehertz »

adriand wrote: post #87
kulahan wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't there some horrible story about the number of animals killed in the filming of Homeward Bound or some similar movie? I simply cannot comprehend the callousness of people towards animals back then. I guess our cultures are simply too different, but it genuinely seems like people saw all animals as "things" until, like, the 1950s or something like that. What the heck?

> I guess our cultures are simply too different, but it genuinely seems like people saw all animals as "things" until, like, the 1950s or something like that. There’s a weird disconnect where people ignore or are wilfully ignorant of cruelty to animals in industrial food production but are sensitive to it in virtually every other context. I saw a woman the other day who was tending to an injured pigeon and had called…

Mencius, a thinker from over 300 BC, once said: "A gentleman, in his attitude towards animals, having seen them alive, cannot bear to see them die; having heard their cries, cannot bear to eat their flesh. Therefore, a gentleman keeps his distance from the kitchen."

The background of this statement is as follows: King Xuan of Qi once saw a man leading an ox to be slaughtered. Moved by the ox's sorrowful appearance, he was deeply distressed and ordered the butcher to spare the ox. However, the butcher informed him that the ox was intended for sacrificial rites. It must be noted that in ancient times, the two most important affairs of the state were sacrifices and warfare. Sparing the ox would have violated the moral principles of the time. In desperation, King Xuan came up with the idea: "Why not replace this ox with a sheep?" Later, the more he reflected on it, the more absurd he found his own decision. He then sought advice from Mencius, who uttered this statement in response.

Mencius believed that what distinguishes humans from beasts is humanity, meaning that humans treat all things with kindness, but human goodness is limited. Therefore, a gentleman practices kindness by helping those in front of him, unable to extend it to all.

Re: The staff ate it later

#133

Post by Frieren »

ern wrote: post #67
kelseyfrog wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We also have "No one was harmed in the making of this video" and similar, which has become so prevalent that its absence is sometime used to infer that someone was indeed injured or killed in the clip.

I've seen clips on Reddit where animals are harmed for engagement. Usually "nature is brutal" type clips, where one animal kills another. I mean nature is brutal, but typing down an animal to be consumed by another isn't natural. Anyway, I don't think movies and TV are the main source of animal cruelty anymore.

> I've seen clips on Reddit where animals are harmed for engagement. Usually "nature is brutal" type clips, where one animal kills another.

Social media is like TV and cinema before regulations. It is full of cruelty, and all kinds of abuse to animals but also to other people. (Recently there was a death related to this).

Civilization does not happens without effort from citizens and lawmakers.

Re: The staff ate it later

#134

Post by ahofmann »

adriand wrote: post #87
kulahan wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't there some horrible story about the number of animals killed in the filming of Homeward Bound or some similar movie? I simply cannot comprehend the callousness of people towards animals back then. I guess our cultures are simply too different, but it genuinely seems like people saw all animals as "things" until, like, the 1950s or something like that. What the heck?

> I guess our cultures are simply too different, but it genuinely seems like people saw all animals as "things" until, like, the 1950s or something like that. There’s a weird disconnect where people ignore or are wilfully ignorant of cruelty to animals in industrial food production but are sensitive to it in virtually every other context. I saw a woman the other day who was tending to an injured pigeon and had called…

To make it worse: it's not millions of chickens, that live in appaling conditions and die horrible deaths. We kill around 50 billion chickens every year. That is 137 million chickens every day. Chickens that are used for eating are alive for around 28 to 42 days. That are 3.8 to 5.7 billion chicken on any day.

The numbers might be slightly off, because chicken raised for eggs are alive longer (around a year).

Re: The staff ate it later

#135

Post by evan_ »

Having spent my first couple years right out of college at a production company that shot a lot of ads for a grocery chain I can assure you that I took as much food home with me as possible

Re: The staff ate it later

#136

Post by vintermann »

stickfigure wrote: post #113
adriand wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I guess our cultures are simply too different, but it genuinely seems like people saw all animals as "things" until, like, the 1950s or something like that. There’s a weird disconnect where people ignore or are wilfully ignorant of cruelty to animals in industrial food production but are sensitive to it in virtually every other context. I saw a woman the other day who was tending to an injured pigeon and had called…

If the little bird was tasty it might have gone on the bbq too. We humans are capable of empathizing with different creatures differently. Some people have their empathy dial set up so high that they anthropomorphize plants. Some have it set so low they're psychopaths. Most functional people are in the middle. Personally, keeping chickens has almost completely put me off empathy with them. Roosters are assholes. Into…

Whether you feel empathy to someone/something or not, is really quite different from whether you have moral obligations to it. I do not think I have moral obligations to a chicken, but then again, I think everyone agrees the chicken has no moral obligations to me - jokes about asshole roosters aside, I don't think you really think the rooster has wronged you by being as it is.

Maybe moral obligations can be one-way, but then only temporarily as I see it. Someone who's sleepwalking, or a baby, don't really have moral obligations to me, but they will when they wake up / grow up.

Re: The staff ate it later

#137

Post by 4gotunameagain »

crazygringo wrote: post #102
alpinisme wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That and nobody wants to eat a meal 40 times to get 40 takes.

This is the answer. The food is perfectly fine. It's fresh, there's catering on set, and it can be replaced as needed, unless it's something super unusual. BUT if you eat the food in one shot you need to eat it in all the shots for continuity, so you can edit it together. Get ready to start barfing after 40 big bites of the same damn thing. If you look closely, you'll also see the coffee/tea cups actors sip from are…

> If you look closely, you'll also see the coffee/tea cups actors sip from are usually empty. Can't afford the risk of accidentally spilling liquid on the costume and delaying the shoot.

Sometimes they are colored water, so you cannot drink but it still looks like a cocktail. Or at least that's how it was on the few movie sets I've been at.

Re: The staff ate it later

#138

Post by vintermann »

zahlman wrote: post #35
MisterTea wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> didn't want to eat some pizza with some kind of fake cheese and unrecognizable veggies. What I want to know is what ghastly pizza establishment serves fake cheese and what are mystery veggies?

> what ghastly pizza establishment serves fake cheese Most of them, I imagine, in order to accommodate vegan customers. Some advertise it louder than others. > what are mystery veggies? There's quite a variety out there. I've seen broccoli, sundried tomato, artichoke, spinach....

I thought I liked vegan pizzas, having only tasted the restaurant varieties which either don't have cheese or have some sort of savoury dressing instead. Then I tried a vegan frozen pizza, and I found out what people hate about them. Some gray slimy substance which apparently someone, somewhere, thought was similar to melted cheese.

Re: The staff ate it later

#139

Post by SapporoChris »

ahofmann wrote: post #134
adriand wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I guess our cultures are simply too different, but it genuinely seems like people saw all animals as "things" until, like, the 1950s or something like that. There’s a weird disconnect where people ignore or are wilfully ignorant of cruelty to animals in industrial food production but are sensitive to it in virtually every other context. I saw a woman the other day who was tending to an injured pigeon and had called…

To make it worse: it's not millions of chickens, that live in appaling conditions and die horrible deaths. We kill around 50 billion chickens every year. That is 137 million chickens every day. Chickens that are used for eating are alive for around 28 to 42 days. That are 3.8 to 5.7 billion chicken on any day. The numbers might be slightly off, because chicken raised for eggs are alive longer (around a year).

This is why I support whaling. One whale can feed many people, one chicken not so many. All whales harvested are free range.
Post reply on HN