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

Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes

journal-doi.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 155 posts

Re: Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes

#61

Post by criddell »

technobabbler wrote: post #39
bitcharmer wrote: post #3

Like most films directed by Dennis Villeneuve I found Dune to be a work of art and visual masterpiece. His recount of how they prepared the set and the scene for the Gom Jabar ritual just shows how commited he is and how much passion he puts into his work. Absolute delight to watch. https://youtu.be/GoAA0sYkLI0

It was really beautiful but the pacing was horrible for modern attention spams. I loved the movie, but only because I read way too many of the books and played all the games and watched every Dune before it. My partner had no idea what was going on and fell asleep 1/3 of the way through... even though she is normally a movie completionist. That dude had a certain style, cinematic intellectualism with beautiful cinema…

If somebody is going in expecting a space western like Star Wars or Star Trek, then I agree with you about the pacing. I think the movie moved along beautifully.

I didn't expect to like it because I didn't really like the book. For me, this is one of the few times where I think the movie is better than the book.

Re: Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes

#62

Post by [deleted] »

bitcharmer wrote: post #3

Like most films directed by Dennis Villeneuve I found Dune to be a work of art and visual masterpiece. His recount of how they prepared the set and the scene for the Gom Jabar ritual just shows how commited he is and how much passion he puts into his work. Absolute delight to watch. https://youtu.be/GoAA0sYkLI0

[deleted]

Re: Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes

#63

Post by JoBrad »

omarhaneef wrote: post #52

Before anyone takes this too seriously -- and it is surely too late for that -- I should point out that they did nothing to disambiguate the length of the movie. It may not be the coughgeist but the ... er ... timegeist (they should have a german word for it). Anyway, the point is, coughs per hour would help us know if audiences simply favor longer or shorter movies at different points in time.

That still requires some calculating before comparing movies, since it's much harder to compare a short film to a bladder buster. Using an average runtime as standard length F, then calculating coughs (C) per F would yield a value that can be more easily compared between films, regardless of length.

Re: Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes

#64

Post by hiccuphippo »

0xfeba wrote: post #44
V__ wrote: post #16

> Editor’s Note: The claims in this paper have not been verified because the researchers have refused to yield their full dataset and methodology, citing “intellectual property rights,” “the sanctity of the First Amendment,” and “the Wright brothers never had to show their work.” We are publishing their paper here because they won’t stop mailing hard copies in triplicate to our homes and offices. Love it.

Also: > We prefer subtitles over machine-learning-based detection because the presence of a cough in subtitles means it was prominent enough for a person to write it down. Also our postdoctoral fellow was the only one who completed the Tensorflow tutorial. lol

In my experience Closed Captions almost always describe sounds, specially if they happen offscreen or things like the type of background music; Subtitles don't, I assume they expect you can hear the sounds.

Re: Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes

#65

Post by hhmc »

waffl wrote: post #56
omarhaneef wrote: post #52

Before anyone takes this too seriously -- and it is surely too late for that -- I should point out that they did nothing to disambiguate the length of the movie. It may not be the coughgeist but the ... er ... timegeist (they should have a german word for it). Anyway, the point is, coughs per hour would help us know if audiences simply favor longer or shorter movies at different points in time.

The German word for 'time' is 'Zeit', so that would be 'Zeitgeist' :)

Wouldn't want to leave the joke unexplained now, would we

Re: Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes

#66

Post by Tycho »

tokai wrote: post #42
eganist wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a hot take. What didn't you like about it, specifically? Aside from the best score ever made by Hans Zimmer?

It has always weirded me out that Zimmer keeps getting jobs. His overly pathetic drone has always been like a parody soundtrack. But people plays it straight as if he is actually making something that adds to the movies. Dune was peak Zimmer so if you like him I guess it makes sense to call it his best. But to me it was him making fun of himself with a straightface and nobody calls him out on it.

The score was actually quite thoughtful, attempting to use rhythm and harmony and vocal style that was fitting for the universe, ie. very far removed from our current styles.

Re: Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes

#67

Post by usrusr »

saiya-jin wrote: post #17
mhh__ wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lynch-dune is mostly good, but Villeneuve's is so much better in a beautifully indescribable way that only cinema can really do. Villeneuve has been dreaming of making his Dune since he was a boy and it shows. ignoring the visuals, the tone is just so much more ominous and alien than Lynch's. One thing that really dates old movies versus their modern counterparts (of sorts) is the sound design. Dune's sounds are abso…

Old Dune is kind of trippy view that happened once and I can't imagine it happening ever again, not with that budget and quality actors. Its still most approachable of all of Lynch's work. I like it a lot for sort of nostalgic feeling for the 80s vision of the future like from some pulp comics. New Dune is completely different beast, can't wait till second part comes. That universe is rich for other stories, tv serie…

There are very different kinds of trippyness though. The Lynch version seems quite determined about avoiding that cheesy "bunch of swirling colors" brand of trippyness. Sequences like that exist, but they aren't the trippy bits. The trippy qualities are more between the lines. The TV serial... not so much, that one was more "oh, he's having a vision, switch on the mood light vfx!". Haven't seen the Villeneuve yet, which one would it be?

Re: Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes

#68

Post by a_shovel »

When their initial theory of cough count produced a trend line that didn't really work well, with some major outliers, they introduced the implausible, ad-hoc mechanisms like the Thriller Tripler effect and the Batman effect to make it fit. This is the part that isn't just parodical silliness, but has actual applicability. This is something you might see in a bad research paper.

Re: Predicting Best Picture winners using coughs and sneezes

#69

Post by drnonsense42 »

V__ wrote: post #16

> Editor’s Note: The claims in this paper have not been verified because the researchers have refused to yield their full dataset and methodology, citing “intellectual property rights,” “the sanctity of the First Amendment,” and “the Wright brothers never had to show their work.” We are publishing their paper here because they won’t stop mailing hard copies in triplicate to our homes and offices. Love it.

Would love to see these folks hijack certain conferences :). Might be good for “science” in the long run
Post reply on HN