Uh oh! Jarrah's mad at SG Collins!

[Abaddon]

I should add, that since Jarrah is not a member here, I am allowed to say, Jarrah is an idiot. Sue me. Cos I can prove it to be true.

[Allan F]

I don't think he's an idiot, it would be more appropriate to label him as intellecturlly dishonest. He might be of average intelligence, but he's just uneducated, and unwilling to learn.

[Noldi400]

He's going to school primarily for Media/Filmmaking, I think, but IIRC he had said that he was going to be taking some astronautics-related courses.  I wonder if he just found out how wrong he is, and/or how unimpressed his instructors were with his brilliant insights.

[JayUtah]

And I lurked that thread. Jarrah became more and more shrill. It was informative to watch how he had no self control, and could not help ramping up to the nonsense.

I note a bit of improvement over his infamous Yahoo! days.   I think his tenure there was measured in just a few short days, punctuated with several calls from posters for him to retain civility and refrain from vulgarity -- all of which was met by the derisive justification that it was okay for him to be that mad since I was just so incomparably evil.

I differ with you there. He would be entirely happy to engage in any public debate over which he has full editorial control. What does that tell you?

I defer to your judgment.  What I think he wants to do is orchestrate a public cinematic or theatrical event from whose director's cut which he emerges as an intellectual giant, having vanquished all his foes.

Yeah, I'm not going to perform in that.

[gillianren]

I should add, that since Jarrah is not a member here, I am allowed to say, Jarrah is an idiot. Sue me. Cos I can prove it to be true.

Meh.  I just don't think it adds anything of quality to say it.

[Rob260259]

http://gizmodo.com/5977205/why-the-moon-landings-could-have-never-ever-been-faked-the-definitive-proof

"This video is so good, so incredibly brilliant, solid and simple, that you will want to paste it all over your Facebooks and Twitters just to piss off all the IMBECILES who still claim that the Moon landings were faked.* The reason is simple: the technology to fake it didn't exist. "

I guess it's more about the same...

[smartcooky]

http://gizmodo.com/5977205/why-the-moon-landings-could-have-never-ever-been-faked-the-definitive-proof

"This video is so good, so incredibly brilliant, solid and simple, that you will want to paste it all over your Facebooks and Twitters just to piss off all the IMBECILES who still claim that the Moon landings were faked.* The reason is simple: the technology to fake it didn't exist. "

I guess it's more about the same...

And if you didn't read the comments, you might have missed this....

[dwight]

I wonder if Jarrah has cottoned on to the fact that SG really doesn't give a stuff one way or another what he thinks of him. SG is making real video projects for real paying clients. Jarrah is making YT videos about Apollo. I know who I'll turn to for assistance in any pro TV work I intend to do.

[Tedward]

He tilts at windmills very easily.

[Glom]

Only Fools and Horses was also notable for very stark differences between set shots and location shots.  I remember be struck by this as a kid.  It was my earliest awareness of the intricacies of television production.

[Andromeda]

Fawlty Towers, too.

[gillianren]

I remember noticing it as a child, when my mother watched British things on Mystery! 

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

For me it was John Pertwee era Doctor Who. The first story of the 3rd Doctor was shot entirely on film, and then onwards it was a combination of film/VT.

[raven]

Fawlty Towers, too.

BBC Chronicles of Narnina,  All Creatures Great And Small, Monty Python's Flying Circus. When I think of this 'trope', I think of the BBC.

[Jason Thompson]

It was standard BBC practice to shoot interiors on VT and location (and some effect-heavy sequences) on film, right from the earliest days of television.