Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Inside the throws of emotion

At 11/8/13 07:58 AM, CloudEater wrote: Other Animation Resource Threads and Sources around Newgrounds and the BBS!!

Those are fantastic, I'll make the time to work through the resources they recommend at some point.

I think there's definitely room on newgrounds for more than one, especially since some of the things you linked me to there were personal blogs / inactive topics. What I'm hoping to create here is something more interactive :) Where people can review and discuss resources they enjoy rather than just listing it.

At 11/8/13 08:13 AM, LazyDrunk wrote:

At 11/8/13 07:48 AM, Fim wrote: Yes let's all listen to the qualified genius Ted Cruz

Ok Nancy.

I love that video

A huge portion of the hate comes from the way America consistently behaves in international conflicts by its own set of rules, regardless of international law. People in this thread have said how there are hated countries like N Korea, Somalia and Russia, but for the most part they inflict their injustices on their own people, nobody even comes close to the scale of foreign killings committed by America.

For America I see a huge disconnect between their political rhetoric or their population (every single American I've met in person has been incredibly charitable and friendly), and the way their government behaves abroad. Chomsky's done a huge amount of publication about how America is run like a terrorist state, if you have the time check it out, it goes into a lot more detail than I can be bothered to do right now.

Yes let's all listen to the qualified genius Ted Cruz

The Animator's Survival Kit by Richard Williams ( download )
also available with video commentary ( here )

Animation fundamentals, 2D, everything to do with animation methods, principles and formulas

Enjoyability - 7/10
Technicality - 8/10

This is a brilliant book by one of the most qualified, experienced animators in the field. I was recently speaking to a friend who worked on the animation for the BFG movie and she was saying that this is still a fantastic animation bible for her in the studio 30 years on. If you're new to animation or a professional you will still pick up some valuable tips from this book. The section on walk cycles is probably one of the best you are likely to find anywhere and it definitely helped me a lot.

The only thing stopping me from giving this a perfect 20/20 is that it does drag on with some of the history of Disney and some of the Golden Age animators, which is fine if you're interested in that sor of thing, but I felt it dragged the book out a little. There are some sections dedicated to the old way they used processed animation when it was paper-drawn, which you can completely skip over in this day and age of almost exclusive computer animation.

Regardless, this is a brilliant resource and any animator would do themselves a huge favor by getting a copy.

The Animation Resources Index

Hello, and welcome to the Animation Resources Index, or ARI. A place where animation professionals and novices can come together and discuss, share and review resources related to all areas of animation. I've been mulling over this idea for a while, and to the best of my knowledge there is nothing on newgrounds like this already. So let's get started!

What is the Animation Resources Index?

What a brilliant and handsome question! Essentially the ARI is designed to function as an animation resource archive, users can post their reviews / feedback on anything that they found helpful towards their animation skills for all the other users to benefit from. It doesn't matter what level you are at with your animation, everybody can learn something.

These resources can be, although not limited to - books, how-to's, lectures, youtube or vimeo tutorials, even info-graphics. I'm going to be quite liberal as to what can be defined as a animation resource, I don't mind what people contribute so long as they can explain why they think it's useful and they label it properly. It can range from: storyboarding, lighting, gesture, backgrounds, anatomy, colouring, arcs, staging, flash, 2d, 3d, stop motion, walk cycles, timing, fundamentals or advanced techniques; anything!

So, next time someone makes a thread along the lines of 'I'm new a flash' or 'I need help working on this area of animation' then you can direct them here and hopefully we will have enough helpful material to point them in the right direction.

Can I join the Animation Resources Index?

Of course you can!

I'm not sure if this thread will snowball into something useful and more importantly, used. However in the short term I'll try and keep it updated with some content that I myself found useful, for at least a few weeks. The more people who make use of it then the more likely it will stay. This thread is for my own personal development first and foremost, but if other people don't get use of it then I'm not going to keep bumping it indefinitely.

How do I contribute to the AFI?

The system I am proposing we use is intended to make the thread easier for other people to use. You don't need to stick to this formula if you don't want to, but will make keywords easier to search for, and it's also a bit more helpful and personal than someone just posting a link and saying "this".

- Name of Resource (and the link to the resource if you have one)

- Genre and tags (like 2d, 3d, anatomy, arcs, timing etc.)

- Rating out of 20, 10 for enjoyability, and 10 for technicality.
(So there might be a fantastically helpful youtube video that tells you everything you need to know about walk cycles, but it's 40 minutes long and commentated on by a raspy 13 year old with an annoying voice.)

- Your bio of the resource and your evaluation of how good it is.

Well that's it! Feel free to add your own, and comment on other people's suggestions. I'll get started with the first one on the next post.

Leave this thread, the authorities are being contacted

At 11/5/13 05:58 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote:

Who are you talking to Tony?

At 5/3/13 10:48 PM, Jess-The-Dragoon wrote:

Neat little idea, it couldn't hurt to have a centralized place for people to come and look for animators they want to hire / collab with. Here's my schpeel -

Sam aka fim

I work in 2d, predominantly Flash, ToonBoom and learning 3D

I do full cartoons, intros for productions, animation/art for games. Always open to new ideas.

here's my animation
here's my art

PM me for more details :) I check my newgrounds usually every 1/2 days.

At 11/2/13 12:58 PM, lapis wrote:

and when you've marked the checkbox next to your favourite candidate's name

Assuming you haven't just drawn penises all over the voting ballot.

A hugely important point, I take it back.

Also, what does the side effects of acid have to do with politics :P

Things like this happen in the UK too, over here a GP can refuse a customer trying to buy birth control or the morning after pill if it conflicts with their religious beliefs.

It's still a very tricky subject even in a country like mine where we have the oldest public healthcare system in the world, so don't be so quick to dismiss Obamacare just based on the preliminary growing pains that it is going through right now. It's not going to be perfect.

At 11/1/13 12:13 PM, Fim wrote:

At 11/1/13 09:45 AM, AxTekk wrote:

Quit resurrecting this dinosaur of a thread.

Excuse me I'm on lsd

At 11/1/13 09:45 AM, AxTekk wrote:

Quit resurrecting this dinosaur of a thread.

At 10/26/13 12:23 AM, howlinwolf23349 wrote:

This all sounds very dodgy.

I think you've got to judge the validity of this list in context, NME is music magazine for 13 year old indie kids so it's obviously going to lean more towards the type of music they plug every issue. All lists like this are completely subjective.

It couldn't hurt to change the framerate / add more inbetween frames, at the moment it's a bit fast.

I like you're style though, and the music was cool.

I'd recommend getting your head around walk cycles.

At 10/28/13 09:55 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: then try refuting the fact that places like Chicago, LA, NYC regardless of there gun control policies ( which are the strictest in the country) or refute the fact that the FBI statistics provided refute your claim of "Rampant Gun Crime". or the fact that Democrat blue states that have enacted gun control measures have more gun crimes on average than red states with loosened gun laws.

I'm not bothering refuting anything because I'm talking to YOU

No, Chicago isn't proof that gun regulation does not work

Oh Tony, arguing with you is such a colossal waste of my time. I wish I could quit you

At 10/28/13 07:09 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: Chicago proves Gun Control doesnt work.

yawn

At 10/28/13 06:27 PM, lolomfgisuck wrote:

At 10/27/13 09:39 PM, Proteas wrote: There's a 2000 mile open border between the United States and Mexico, across which millions of illegal aliens/undocumented immigrants (or whatever pc term you prefer to use) have passed across without getting caught, and remains open and largely unprotected as we speak. So you'll have to excuse me if I don't put a lot of faith in the TSA "stopping terrorists" when we have a HUMONGOUS security gap they're not covering with the same intensity as they pat down 6 year olds and ailing grandmothers.

I feel like this is relevant to Background checks and private sales.... somebody help me out here. :)

It works with that analogy too, although what I meant was airport border security checks not mexican border police. But with each instance even having a woefully under effective set of preventative measures is still better than having none.

So much for having an intelligent conversation.

That chance went out the window the moment he started talking to you. He'd be better off talking to a wall. At least the wall would actually listen to what he says.

It's hard to change someone's view when they say they are not interested in facts or swayed by emotion lol

To be fair he liked 1 out of the 6 links I posted which is more than I'd expect from tony ;)

Another solid victory for all the cool people who stay indoors sat behind a computer all day \M/

At 10/25/13 09:50 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 10/25/13 12:30 AM, Fim wrote: In 2010 John Bedelle shot up the pentagon, originally he tried to buy a gun in California but was denied after a background check found he had mental health issues, so all he did was nip across the border to Nevada and buy a gun there through a private seller who didn't bother with a background check because he wasn't legally obliged to.

Yeah, the system did what it was supposed to do, and he side stepped the system. See what I mean about throwing a piece of paper at the issue and saying "no you can't?" Doesn't work, does it?

Can you read? He didn't side step the system whatsoever, he did everything completely legally. I'm just showing you a case of where background checks are useless unless they are applied universally across states.

Reductio ad Absurdem. You cited a case where the law did what it was supposed to do but failed anyway because (1) the criminal in question didn't care about the law and (2) neither did the person selling the weapon.

1. The criminal complied with the parameters of the law 2. So did the seller. What I'm saying is the system is broken when the very people you want to restrict from buying guns don't need to work very hard or even break the law to get them.

That is not me throwing up my hands and saying we should do away with the laws completey, that's me realizing that words on a piece of paper are not going to stop somebody. Especially in this country, where European influenced ideals on gun legislation don't stand a chance of working.

Words on a piece of paper is exactly what allows people in the US to own guns in the first place. It's that thing called the 2nd amendment that you all have wet dreams about.

Also don't use 'European influenced ideals' as a derogatory phrase, it's ignorant and insulting. You're country is founded on European settlers and ideals. What you meant to say was 'common sense, sensible gun legislation that 80-90% of the American people actually want has no chance of working', because of sad people like Tony and his NRA goonies who pump millions of dollars into lobbying politicians to stall ANY type of reasonable gun control. The NRA has brokered the majority of the gun lobby's $46 million in political election expenditures since 2010

When I go to an airport I know I've got to go through tedious lengthy body searchers and luggage checks even though I know I'm not a terrorist, but I am happy to do it because I know that it stops that 0.01% of people who are not to be trusted.

Security theater? Please.

Every single day border police stop criminals, illegal migrant workers and drug smugglers you doughnut. Are you seriously suggesting that we don't need checks at airports?

I'm not a lawmaker, and I'm speaking hypothetically so I don't really have an answer to that. I still think regardless of how safe you think your home is it couldn't hurt to have your gun securely stored.

So you have no solid ideas on the matter, but you want to pass legislation just the same because it makes you feel good.

That's bot what I said at all. I'm saying the worst consequence that comes your way through storing your gun safely is that is a little bit inconvenient for you, the best consequence is that we save a portion of those 500 children who are killed every year. Good deal.

Did I mention that I'm not a big fan of kids, and that your 500 kids dead thing doesn't really effect me emotionally the way you had hoped it would?

Yeah they aren't your kids so fuck em. Laws are only good if they directly affect you personally, right?

I'm going to assume you're skipping over the part where you take a driving test in order to get your license?

Oh, yeah, took that when I turned 18.

There you go then. You deliberately misinterpreted my point.

It is harder to drive a car than buy a gun in certain parts of america. Fuck, it's easier to buy a gun than to vote for president in a lot of places.

Really? How would you like it if I all of the sudden started offering up opinions that the Torries were right 100% of the time, Margaret Thatcher was God in human flesh, and that the liberal left was destroying your country? I don't know that much about English politics, but I know enough to know that such an opinion would make your blood boil.

Hahaha it's nice to see you've stereotyped me already honey. You can say whatever you like about Margaret Thatcher I don't give a shit, I don't subscribe to any political party in the UK, by American standards we're all on the left, even the conservative government in power at the moment. Like I said, you're welcome to have your own opinion on how things are run here. Ultimately what I think you're trying to say is that because I don't agree with your opinion I must be uniformed.

But hey, it doesn't matter where I'm from, my opinion is just as valid as yours. Doesn't matter how uninformed it is.

How is my opinion uniformed? If you don't want to listen to what I've got to say because you don't like it then don't just take it from me. This is some light reading for you that might just change your bulletproof opinion.

Harvard Injury Control Research Center Findings
1. The United States has a very high rate of firearm death
2. The risks of a gun in the home typically far outweigh the benefits
3. More guns, more violent death.
4. Better mental health treatment may help but effective legislation is crucial to reduce gun violence.

More guns = More gun homicides.

If you carry a gun you are more likely to get shot & killed

There is no clear evidence that conceal & carry result in less crime

83% of Americans want background checks for all gun sales

Pr Noam Chomsky's thoughts on American gun culture

AAAAND again I have been sucked into debating with tools. So I'm out. At the end of the day I know I'm right and I don't need to bang my head against a wall repeatedly with pro gun tools to justify that to myself.

At 10/27/13 01:32 AM, leanlifter1 wrote: Oh god Tony it's not good to be this obsessed.

Couldn't have said it any better myself.

At 10/27/13 12:24 PM, supergandhi64 wrote: perhaps the whole "the wise do not consider themselves wise" is the result of them recognizing how little they know & understand

--supergandhi64

I find it amusing that superghandi has essentially power phrased Socrates

At 10/24/13 10:10 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 10/24/13 11:36 AM, Fim wrote: Why can't person to person sales be touched?

Because it's a states issue, not a federal issue.

If background checks are going to be effective at all they need to be legislatively enforced across state boundaries. The private sales loophole is a massive blind spot, and essentially means that any criminal or mentally unwell person doesn't have to work very hard in order to bypass the law.

In 2010 John Bedelle shot up the pentagon, originally he tried to buy a gun in California but was denied after a background check found he had mental health issues, so all he did was nip across the border to Nevada and buy a gun there through a private seller who didn't bother with a background check because he wasn't legally obliged to.

You can't afford for there to be any blind spots or there'll be exploited, the whole point is to try and limit the access of criminals, or mentally unwell people to guns in the legal framework.

Criminals and the mentally unwell aren't going to abide by the laws to begin with, so just throwing a piece of paper at the issue and saying "no you can't!" isn't going to stop anything.

That is such a fundamentally flawed argument and makes no sense at all, by your reasoning why bother to have any laws against child pornography? Why have laws against drugs? Why have laws against murder? You can still find pedophiles, drug dealers and murderers in every state so clearly the laws don't stop people - so lets just make all that shit legal! You're logic completely falls down when you try and apply it to anything else. Of course you will always bad people in the world, but should a government make it easier for them to commit their crimes or harder?

And if by 'make it harder for law abiding citizens' you mean a 90 second background check than yeh I don't have any problem with making it harder whatsoever. Spare me the sob story about how people are trying to make it hard for you to buy something that is designed to kill people, because the US has some of the most lax gun laws in the world.

That's why gun control can't get anywhere in this country; gun control proponents have this idea in their heads that the gun owners are the ones who need to be regulated and prosecuted, when it's the criminals that they're after. The idea is completely FLIPPED from the way the law should work.

I think that's the paranoia kicking in, most people don't want to victimise honest gun owners at all, they just don't want the wrong guys to have easy access to them.

When I go to an airport I know I've got to go through tedious lengthy body searchers and luggage checks even though I know I'm not a terrorist, but I am happy to do it because I know that it stops that 0.01% of people who are not to be trusted.

I think the emphasise should always be on the gun owner to persuade me that they can store there gun safely. You owe it to your community to make sure nobody apart from you can get a hold of your firearm. The consequences of people feeling that they don't need to bother keeping their gun safe is 500 dead children.

You didn't respond to my question, you went right back to your appeal to emotion about 500 kids dead. I don't have kids, ergo, your example doesn't apply to me. I live out the sticks, my nearest neighbor is a good 300 yards away from me, well outside the range of a shotgun or handgun. There's nobody in this house except for adults, all of whom know how to properly handle firearms. So where do we fit into your equation about improperly storing firearms and ammunition?

I'm not a lawmaker, and I'm speaking hypothetically so I don't really have an answer to that. I still think regardless of how safe you think your home is it couldn't hurt to have your gun securely stored.

If there's a trade off between pissing off a few well intentioned gun owners by making sure they store their guns correctly, and at the same time you see a drop in the number of kids who accidentally get killed by sloppy storage then it's a good trade off in my opinion.

You know what all three of those countries have in common? The general population didn't have that many guns to begin with, then their governments enacted strict gun legislation, much like many other countries where gun control legislation is also strict. It's like someone who's never had a drink of liquor proclaiming proudly that they've been clean and sober for 10 years, it's just not an example that flies with me.

Actually Switzerland has the 4th highest gun owners per capita in the world, however, that coincides with some pretty sensible gun control laws, plus everyone has had a mandatory 2 years gun training. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

You do realize that buying a car is actually a pretty easy thing here, too, right? Just fill out some paperwork, give a down payment, and off you go. You know what I have to do to get my driver's license renewed? Show up, pay a fee, and get my picture taken. If I get there at the right time, I can be in there and out the door in under and hour.

I'm going to assume you're skipping over the part where you take a driving test in order to get your license?

Based on the info in your profile, I'm going to take a wild guess and say you're from North West England, right? If that's true, I'll forgive you for not knowing much about American law, or the way things actually work over here. Just keep in mind, I stay out of topics about English politics and English law for the same reason you probably shouldn't comment on gun control in America; I don't know dick about the situation, or what it's actually like over there, so I don't think it would be fair of me to offer my opinion on how you guys should run your country.

Wow.

I really don't think it matters where you're from in order for your opinion to be valid. American politics influences the whole world so I stay up to date with it, ask yourself if you being American stops you having an opinion on china, or the Middle East.

You're more than welcome to have a view on any English politics if you can be bothered reading up on it. Even if I disagree with you you're still entitled to you opinion.

At 10/23/13 09:36 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 10/23/13 07:55 PM, Fim wrote: I think mandatory background checks would a good start, including closing the gun show loopholes.

Here's the thing about the "gunshow loophole" as you call it; it's not just limited to gunshows. Sure, you can make a law that says that all vendors selling guns at a gunshow must have FFL's and do background checks, but person-to-person sales cannot be touched.

Why can't person to person sales be touched? I don't see why every single gun sale shouldn't go without a background check. I don't really buy the argument that it would be a waste of time &/or ineffective. You can't afford for there to be any blind spots or there'll be exploited, the whole point is to try and limit the access of criminals, or mentally unwell people to guns in the legal framework.

Not everyone has kids, I certainly don't. Are you going to penalize me just as severely for not having a gun lock on one of my firearms as you would parents who did the same? Because I'm pretty sure that's where you're going with this line of logic.

I think the emphasise should always be on the gun owner to persuade me that they can store there gun safely. You owe it to your community to make sure nobody apart from you can get a hold of your firearm. The consequences of people feeling that they don't need to bother keeping their gun safe is 500 dead children.

And also I'd like to see a mandatory license for people who want to buy guns, in the same way you wouldn't let a 16 year old behind the wheel of a car without some driving lessons, because in both cases your handling a dangerous piece of machinery that could kill someone.

You see, this one I'm going to have to disagree with, because you already have to go through a background check to buy a gun, which shows you to be a law abiding citizen. Adding a license to it doesn't actually do anything except provide another layer of bureaucracy and create an opportunity for the state to get more money from the licensing fees.

If it's a layer of bureaucracy that saves lives then I don't mind, there are numerous other countries that use licensing legislation before citizens are allowed guns, if you want research the practises in Japan, Switzerland, and New Zealand. They have what you might call 'strict' gun laws, where you must own a license to buy guns or ammo, and in order to obtain a license you have to attend a safety lecture, pass a written test, pass a police interview, and have your residence checked to make sure you have an appropriate storage place for your firearms and ammunition. Having a criminal record, a history of domestic violence, etc always leads to a license being declined. I'm not saying that there aren't more cultural factors at play here, but all 3 of those countries have gun crime a fraction of the size of what America has. You might think that these measures are a little extreme, but in my opinion buying a gun should be at least as well regulated as buying a car.

At 10/23/13 07:16 PM, Proteas wrote: "What's wrong with our children? Try this, what's wrong with the schools? Take a minute to think about this; the Viet Cong tried to brainwash American soldiers into attacking their own people, and they couldn't even do it! What the hell is going on in these schools, man?

I would argue that there is nothing unique about the school environment in America, there are probably twisted, frustrated kids in bad schools everywhere in the world. The difference in America is that the access to guns is much higher than anywhere else. I'm sure you'd find a kid in every school who feels the urge to shoot the teacher or pupil who bullys them, but if you live in a country where you don't have access to a gun it's not as easy to go on a rampage.

Background checks seem to be the mildest method to curb the US' problem with gun violence, and when you factor in the overwhelming public support, the clear humanitarian impact it would have, and how the pros far outweigh the cons, I just find it insane that people are stalling it whenever I gets put to congress. Do you disagree?

No, I agree with you, but what else can we add to these background checks that isn't already present in Form 4473? In the wake of Virgina Tech, a law was passed linking mental health findings to the background check system, but in the majority of the mass shootings since then, the shooters were never found to be clinically insane enough to warrant them not having weapons.

I think mandatory background checks would a good start, including closing the gun show loopholes. I don't think it would be difficult in this day and age for somebody to come up with a simple smartphone app to make doing a BC quick and easy.

Also I'd like to see tougher legislation and sanctions on people storing their guns and ammo correctly. Every year 500 children are killed in accidents with their parents firearms.

And also I'd like to see a mandatory license for people who want to buy guns, in the same way you wouldn't let a 16 year old behind the wheel of a car without some driving lessons, because in both cases your handling a dangerous piece of machinery that could kill someone. I'm not even totally against the NRA having a say in conducting / drawing up the testing criteria for this. However, in this political climate where they can't even pass simple background checks I don't see this happening anytime soon.

Doing nothing is not a strategy.

Gun Violence is on the way down. What you're having a knee-jerk reaction to a media story; it's horrible to you, ergo, we must do something.

Well crime as a whole is going down anyway, not just gun violence, and not just in the US. However per capita America's gun homicide rate is still massively above average compared to the rest of the world, and guns are still the number 1 cause of homicide, and as I just said 500 kids are dying every year which doesn't even get a mention in the media. It's still a very important issue. Even if a small measure like background checks could stop 1% of gun related homicides it's worth trying.

At 10/23/13 05:35 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote:

At 10/23/13 10:14 AM, Fim wrote: I'll make you a genuine offer Tony, I will stop posting here forever if you will.

I mean in the thread.

So did I. We can get a mod to enforce it if you want to do it. I'm 100% serious.

of course not because unlike you I exercise my rights and know the laws.

Yeah, you exercise your rights within the constraints of a fucked up, damaging, archaic law written over 200 years ago by a bunch of white men who owned slaves. It is no measure health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society, unquote.

the gallop study recently found that 83% of Americans want a universal background check. It was the most popular proposition on the whole fucking list.

the 80-90 figure was a lie and they have links in the source here to prove it.

For starters Tony you should really read the material I send you before you respond. This is why I don't waste me time on you because you don't listen. It's not a lie, you just don't like it. There's a difference.

Let's break this down for you. I linked you to a survey released on October 22nd, where it showed 83% of all Americans agreed with the statement 'require background checks for all gun purchases'. What you've done is send me a article which you say 'proves that figure was a lie' even though it was released 6 months previous on April 19th and has nothing to do with the survey I sent you, and instead rebutts something Obama said about the NRA in a speech. Read what I send you next tine,

And finally, you linked me to a website called 'ammoland.com' so I'm probably safe in assuming this is going to be completely unbiased and objective source that won't lean one way more than the other. </sarcasm>

nope its people like you who pander to people's EMOTIONS to curb other people's rights which are the problem the current laws are just fine as the way they are.

How does a BC infringe on your rights Tony? I just don't see it. I have no sympathy for people like you whining about a 90 second background check. If you've got nothing to hide why do you care? Isn't it worth trying to save people's lives?

no I give people real information shit like the ATF performing illegal operations or fucking up. or the latest state shooting down new laws because it infringes on their rights.

Yeah. Real information like where to sign up the the NRA, where to buy guns, where to buy high capacity ammo, biased data from websites like ammoland.com YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE. You misinform, derail, and toxify the debate. I'm out. x

At 10/23/13 01:29 PM, Viper50 wrote: 3. Did they ever get it back or is it stuck up there forever?

I hadn't thought of that, but I'm guessing they probably didn't have the technical sophistication to get it back. So it either dropped to earth and surprised an old granny out in her garden watering her flowers, or it is still up their orbiting the earth. Both are exceptional possibilities.

However good your day has been, it's about to get a whole lot better.

This has got to be the most beautiful, majestic video of all time.

Dildo in Space