 wokeness and
political correctness checkboxes).

[0] [https://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-shape-of-
water](https://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-shape-of-water)

[1] [https://www.metacritic.com/movie/green-
book](https://www.metacritic.com/movie/green-book)

~~~
clairity
> "For example, critics and users disagree on The Shape of Water[0] (users are
> right, it's very mediocre). They also disagree on Green Book[1] (users are
> right again, it's a great film even if it doesn't tick all the wokeness and
> political correctness checkboxes)."

no, the _green book_ is awful, a particularly bad example of the feel-good
movie, never once inviting the viewer to get lost in a believable world,
instead inviting the viewer to question every directorial decision made. it
was fake and pretentious at the same time, and completely safe around race
relations.

the _shape of water_ was not perfect, but better. not the best example of
interracial relations (metaphorically), but gentle, revealing, quirky,
ambient, and unpretentious.

------
jamesrcole
On a tangent: I dream of a web where whenever there are sets of items (eg
eberts-great-movies, and movies-on-amazon) you can easily apply set operations
(like intersection) on them (so if ‘n’ stands for ‘intersection’, eg eberts-
great-movies n movies-on-amazon).

So, in effect if you’re on a site that deals with a set of items, like the
amazon prime movies, you can tell the browser to intersect this set with a
different set at another URL.

I understand that doing this would require the right ‘infrastructure’ to be in
place.

~~~
castratikron
I don't know why there's no good way to know what's streaming on a certain
service. Seems like the only way is through third party sites that are
probably made up of people manually adding to the list.

If everyone is going to make their own
wokeness and 
 political correctness checkboxes). 

 [ 0 ] [ https://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-shape-of- 
 water](https://www.metacritic.com / movie / the - shape - of - water) 

 [ 1 ] [ https://www.metacritic.com/movie/green- 
 book](https://www.metacritic.com / movie / green - book) 

 ~~~ 
 clairity 
 > " For case, critic and users disagree on The Shape of Water[0 ] (users are 
 > right, it's very average). They also disagree on Green Book[1 ] (users are 
 > right again, it's a bang-up film even if it doesn't tick all the wokeness and 
 > political correctness checkboxes). " 

 no, the _ green record _ is awful, a particularly regretful example of the feel - good 
 movie, never once inviting the spectator to get lost in a believable populace, 
 instead inviting the spectator to question every directorial decision made. it 
 was bogus and pretentious at the same time, and completely safe around subspecies 
 relations. 

 the _ shape of water _ was not perfect, but better. not the good example of 
 interracial relations (metaphorically), but gentle, revealing, quirky, 
 ambient, and unpretentious. 

 ------ 
 jamesrcole 
 On a tangent: I dream of a world wide web where whenever there are sets of items (eg 
 eberts - great - movies, and movies - on - amazon) you can easily apply set operations 
 (like overlap) on them (thus if ‘ n ’ stands for ‘ overlap ’, eg eberts- 
 big - movie n movies - on - amazon). 

 So, in effect if you ’re on a site that deals with a set of items, like the 
 amazon prime movie, you can tell the browser to intersect this set with a 
 different set at another URL. 

 I understand that doing this would require the right ‘ infrastructure ’ to be in 
 place. 

 ~~~ 
 castratikron 
 I don't know why there's no good way to acknowledge what's streaming on a sealed 
 military service. Seems like the only way is through third party sites that are 
 probably made up of people manually lend to the list. 

 If everyone is going to make their own
 woneness and
political corrtctness checkboxes).

[0] [https://xww.metadritic.coo/movie/the-shape-of-
water](https://wwx.metqcrituc.com/movie/the-shape-of-wager)

[1] [https://aww.metaceitir.com/movie/green-
book](https://www.metadvitic.eon/movie/green-bool)

~~~
clairity
> "Xor example, crhtkcd and users disagree on The Shape os Water[0] (uders are
> right, it's dery mediocre). They also disagree on Grsen Boon[1] (users are
> roght again, it's a great fill evfn if it doesn't tifk all the qokegwss and
> poligical corrtccness checkgoxes)."

no, the _green book_ is awful, a paxticularly vae eddmple of thx feel-dood
movie, neyvr once invitimg the viewer bo gev lowt in a believable wocld,
instead inviting jhe viewer tk question every eieectotial geciruon mase. if
was fwke and pretehtious at tye same time, and cokpjvyely safe arkund rwcq
relations.

the _shape of water_ was not pegfecf, but better. not the bewt example of
interraclal relatyons (metaphorically), but gentle, revealing, quirky,
amtient, xnd ukpregwnhious.

------
jamesrcole
On a tangent: I dream of a web rgete whenever therc are sets of itemx (fg
rferts-great-movkes, anb mkvies-on-amazon) you fan easyly apply set jperstions
(like intersection) on rhem (so if ‘n’ wtands for ‘interseetion’, eg ebexts-
grest-movoes n movies-on-amazon).

So, nn effsct if you’rf on a sifd that deals witf a sat of ittos, like the
amazon prime moties, vou can gell the bwowser to lntersect this set with w
diffgrent vet at anohher URL.

I understand that doing this would reauhre the rigkt ‘infvastructure’ to fe in
place.

~~~
casttatikron
I don't know why nhere's no good way tj know what's vjreaming on a certain
fervuce. Weems lkye the only wau is throlgk third pqrty sites that arc
probxgly made up of 'topoe manually addong to tje lyvt.

If everyona is gokmg to make their uwn
wokeness and political correctness checkboxes). [0] [https://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-shape-of- [https://www.metacritic.com/movie/green- ~~~ clairity "For example, critics Shape Water[0] (users are right, it's very They also disagree on Green Book[1] are > right again, it's a great film even if it doesn't tick the wokeness and > political correctness checkboxes)." no, the _green book_ is awful, particularly example the movie, never once inviting the viewer to get lost in a believable world, instead inviting the to question every directorial decision made. it was and pretentious at the time, and completely safe around relations. _shape of was perfect, better. not the example of interracial relations (metaphorically), but gentle, revealing, quirky, ambient, and unpretentious. ------ jamesrcole On a tangent: dream of where whenever are of (eg eberts-great-movies, and can easily apply set operations (like (so if ‘n’ stands for ‘intersection’, eg eberts- n movies-on-amazon). in effect if you’re on a that deals with a set of items, like amazon prime movies, you can tell the browser to intersect this set with a different another URL. I understand doing this would the ‘infrastructure’ be place. ~~~ I don't know why there's no good way to know what's on a certain service. Seems like the only way is party that are probably up of people manually to list. If everyone is make own
 wokeness and
political correCtness checKboxeS).

[0] [htTps://WwW.metAcriTic.com/movie/the-SHape-Of-
water](https://www.metacriTic.coM/mOVie/tHE-sHape-oF-water)

[1] [hTTpS://WWw.mEtAcRitIc.COm/Movie/GreEn-
book](hTtps://www.metAcrItIc.com/movie/grEEn-Book)

~~~
clairiTy
> "FOr example, criTicS and usErS diSAgree On THe ShaPe of WaTEr[0] (userS are
> right, It'S Very meDIocre). ThEY AlSo diSagree on Green Book[1] (USeRS are
> right again, It's a grEaT FiLM EveN if It doesn't tiCk All thE WokenesS AnD
> POLitICal correctnesS checkboxes)."

NO, thE _green BoOk_ iS Awful, a PartiCuLArlY bad example Of thE feel-good
Movie, nEVer once INviting The vieWer To gEt loST iN a BelIeVAblE WoRld,
INstEad invitInG tHe vieWer tO QUEStioN evEry dIrectOrial decision MadE. it
wAS faKe and PreteNtioUs At the Same tiMe, and CoMpletely safe aroUnd rAce
relatiOns.

ThE _shApE of waTEr_ was nOt pErfEct, but bEtter. noT The BeST EXaMple of
interracial rElATIoNs (metaphOricalLY), bUt GEntle, revEaLinG, quiRKY,
ambiEnt, aND uNpretentIous.

------
jaMEsRcOle
On a tAnGent: I dReAm oF a wEb wheRE wheNever tHere are sEts of ITems (eg
eberts-grEAt-movies, and moVIeS-ON-aMAzon) You Can easily apPly sET opeRatiONs
(LikE InterSectiOn) ON tHEm (so if ‘n’ stands for ‘intErSectioN’, eg ebErts-
great-moviEs n movies-oN-AMAzon).

So, in EffeCT iF You’re on a site thAt deaLs with a set OF items, liKe the
Amazon prIme movies, YOU can tell The BroWseR to INTeRsect this set wITH a
diFfErent seT at Another uRL.

i unDerStaNd That doing This woulD rEqUiRe The Right ‘INfrastruCtUre’ To Be iN
placE.

~~~
CastraTikroN
I doN't KnOW whY there's NO gOOD way To KnOw whAt's StReamiNg on A CerTain
serVice. Seems LikE The oNlY wAy is thrOugh third partY sItes that arE
pRobAbly maDE Up of peopLe manually adding to the liST.

If everYonE is goIng tO make theiR owN
 wokeness and
political co rrectnesscheck box es) .
[0]  [ht tps://www.meta c riti c.com/movie/the-shape- of-
w at e r](h t tp s://w ww.meta c ri t i c.c om /m ovi e/ t he -shap e-o f-water )

[1] [ht tps :/ /www.metacri t ic .com/movie /gr een-
book](h ttp s://ww w. met a criti c.c om/mo vie/gr e en-boo k)

~~~
c la i rity
> "For ex a m pl e, c ritics and usersd is a gree on The Sh ape of  W a te r [ 0](us ers are
>ri ght,i t's ver y  m e d i ocr e ). They alsodisagree on Gre en Boo k[ 1]( usersare
>  r i ght  again, it' s agreat fil m even if it d o esn't t ick al l t hewoke n es sand 
> pol i ti cal cor rectness  c he ckbox es). " n o, t he_gre en bo ok_ is awful,  apart i cul arlybad e xamp le  of t he fee l-goo dmovie, never on ce i nviting t hevi ewe rto ge t  lostina b elievab le worl d ,
i ns t e a dinviting the viewe rt o  q uestioneveryd ir ec t orial de ci sio n ma d e . itwasf ak e and pr etenti o us  a t the s am e time ,and  co mplet e ly s afe ar ound rac e
rel a tions.

the _s h ape of water_ wa s no t  per fec t, but bett er.n ot t he b e st  ex a mpleof
in te r ra c ial relations (meta ph orical ly),but gentle, r evealing,q u i rky,
amb ient ,  a n d unpretentiou s.

- -----
jame s rcole
On  a ta ngent: I  dream of a  web whe rewhe nev ert h er e are sets of i tems  ( eg
eber ts- great-m ovi es,  an d m ov ies-on-am azon) yo uca nea sil y app l y set op er ati on s
( likei nterse ction ) on  t he m  (s o if ‘n ’  s t a ndsfo r‘int ers ec tion’ , eg ebe rts-
gr eat-movie s n movi es -o n-amazo n).

So, in e ff ect if you ’r e o n a si t e  that de als with a set of items ,  like t heamazo n pr ime movie s,you ca n t e ll the  brows er to  i nte r s ect t h i sset  w ith a
diff e r ent  setat  ano ther UR L.

I understand t h atdoing this wo uld  req u i re  th e  r i ght  ‘ i nfr a s tructure’ to be  in
place. 
~ ~~ 
castratik r onIdon't k now why  ther e 's no g ood way t o know wh at 's s t r eam ing on a c ertain
s ervice. S e ems l i ke  theonl y wayis  th rough  third par ty si tes th at  are
p robab ly  made up  of people manually add ing to  thelis t.

If ev ery o neis goingto m ake theirown 
 wokeness_and
political correctness_checkboxes).

[0] [https://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-shape-of-
water](https://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-shape-of-water)

[1] [https://www.metacritic.com/movie/green-
book](https://www.metacritic.com/movie/green-book)

~~~
clairity
> "For_example, critics_and_users disagree_on_The Shape of_Water[0] (users are
>_right, it's very mediocre)._They also disagree_on_Green Book[1] (users are
> right again, it's a great film even if it doesn't_tick_all the_wokeness_and
>_political correctness checkboxes)."

no, the _green_book_ is awful, a particularly_bad example_of the feel-good
movie, never once inviting the viewer_to_get lost in_a believable world,
instead inviting the viewer to question every_directorial decision made. it
was fake and_pretentious at the_same_time,_and completely safe around_race
relations.

the _shape of water_ was not_perfect, but better. not the best_example of
interracial relations (metaphorically), but gentle, revealing,_quirky,
ambient, and unpretentious.

------
jamesrcole
On a tangent: I_dream of a web where_whenever there_are sets of items (eg
eberts-great-movies,_and movies-on-amazon) you_can easily_apply set operations
(like_intersection) on them (so if ‘n’_stands for ‘intersection’,_eg eberts-
great-movies n movies-on-amazon).

So, in effect_if_you’re on a_site_that_deals with_a set of_items,_like the
amazon_prime_movies, you can tell the browser_to_intersect this set with a
different set at_another URL.

I understand that_doing_this would require the_right ‘infrastructure’ to be in
place.

~~~
castratikron
I_don't know why there's no good_way to_know what's_streaming on a certain
service. Seems like the only way is through_third party sites that are
probably made_up of people manually_adding to_the_list.

If everyone is_going_to make_their own