Category Archives: fluffy

New Cinderella Trailer- I am surprised by the cast

Note: If this is your first time to TotalFluff, please visit this brief explanation. Thanks!

Greetings, readers!

As some of you are probably aware, Disney has started to make live-action versions of fairy-tales they previously released in animated form. (For example, Maleficent was a retelling of Sleeping Beauty.)

Disney is going to release a live-action version of Cinderella in March. Yesterday they released a trailer for the movie, and it reveals some of the plot, character, and setting.

Ooh, I love her shoes! And her dress!

Of course those would be the parts that stand out to you.

What? They’re pretty!

I wonder how long it’ll be until a pattern for that ballgown is available…

For me, I found the casting to be quite interesting. Cate Blanchett, the same actress who played Galadriel, is playing the evil stepmother. Even more interesting: Helena Bonham Carter, who frequently plays creepy and twisted roles, is playing the Fairy Godmother. You read that correctly. The trailer further demonstrates that no, in fact, the IMDB listings are not mixed up. The actresses do play those characters, respectively.

What do you think, readers? Are you at all surprised by the casting? What do you think will happen with this movie?

One of the weirdest glasses frames I have ever seen

Note: If this is your first time to TotalFluff, please visit this brief explanation. Thanks!

Readers, I am disturbed. And amused. But also disturbed.

Apparently, at least six years ago, somebody thought it would be worthwhile to make a set of glasses frames that has chopstick holders built into the frame.

Omigosh, that’s hilarious.

And disturbing.

I hope you have a good Thursday!

Stardust: I am Surprised I Enjoyed it so Much

Note: If this is your first time to TotalFluff, please visit this brief explanation. Thanks!

Greetings, readers!

Much to my surprise, I find myself recommending a movie that is classified as “romantic” by IMDB.

In my defense, if also qualifies as fantasy and adventure.

It is a charming movie, with Ian McKellan as the narrator. The overall story-arch was expected, but the specifics of the plot were not. There were also some distinctly unexpected twists and side-characters.

If you are looking for something to do this afternoon, I would recommend this film.

I hope you enjoy the rest of your Sunday.

At least it was a “clean” mess…?

Note: If this is your first time to TotalFluff, please visit this brief explanation. Thanks!

Greetings, readers!

Apparently, there was recently an incident at Brigham Young University involving a dorm-lab incident. The student involved claims it was a soap lab. The authorities claim it was for meth. If it was both, at least the person involved was (relatively) “clean”?

Have a great Thursday!

LOTS of Movie News

Note: If this is your first time to TotalFluff, please visit this brief explanation. Thanks!

Greetings, readers!

Yesterday, there was a remarkably high volume of exciting movie news released.

First, the official name of the new Star Wars episode was released: Star Wars: The Force Awakens.

I am not sure what to make of the title. It sounds potentially dark, potentially bizarre, potentially bad, and potentially really good, all at the same time.

Second, and far more surprising, there was an announcement of Toy Story 4 coming out.

That is really surprising to me. Toy Story 3 was a brilliant ending, I thought. I do not know how the creators think they are going to meet, much less surpass, its brilliance.

Third, and not unexpectedly, a final trailer for The Hobbit (part 3) was released.

I am not entirely sure about it. The previous movie was a bit disappointing, I thought. And the previous trailer concerns me with its use of music from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

On the bright side, this one at least used its own music. I think.

On the other hand, the music does not sound quite like traditional Middle Earth music.

I guess we will need to wait and see– for all of these movies.

I hope you have a great start to your weekend!

Random Digits- Revisited

Note: If this is your first time to TotalFluff, please visit this brief explanation. Thanks!

Greetings, readers!

I was once more exploring some of the archives of this site, and found the book review of “A Million Random Digits with 100,000 Normal Deviates” from RAND. I revisited that page, and thought I would share some of my favorite “helpful” reviews:

  • Pretty good, but why 1 million random digits and 100,000 normal deviates? Why not 967,273 random digits and 71,038 normal deviates? Or was the author going for irony? Sometimes I have a hard time picking that up.”
  • Titled Clearly Plagiarised though still an exciting read, “having read it very carefully, I do believe the author plagiarised most of the middle chapters and the climax ending from the 400 million digit calculation of pi by a university in Tokyo. Did they really think we would not notice?”
  • Titled  Not a good idea for a password, “I decided to use all 100,000 as my password only to discover everyone that owns this book now has my password to my bank. BTW, online banking now takes several days to complete a login.”
  • Titled I have to write a report…, “Is there a Cliff’s Notes? I don’t really have the time to finish reading it before my report is due…” 
  • Titled NOT RANDOM!!!, “I purchased 10 of these books because I am in need of 10 million random digits. However, I was extremely disappointed when I opened the books and each one was exactly the same. Random? No, sir. Not by a longshot.”
  • Titled Out of date, “While I’m sure this was a breakthrough in its time, I’d like to see an updated edition with new random digits. Who wants to use random digits from 2001 anymore?”
  • Titled I can’t say I loved it, but . . ., “. . . once you get used to the style, it’s far easier to get through than her prior work, “Atlas Shrugged.” The narrative voice is more humane, too, and ultimately I have found it makes more sense as a coherent philosophy.”
  • Titled Not random!!, “There are a million of them but they are not, alas, random.
    You sheeple need to learn to read between the lines when you purchase books of this type. What is it? Random Numbers. By whom? The RAND Corporation. What was that title again? RANDom Digits.
    This so called “book” is nothing more than a clever advertising ploy. If you plot the “random” numbers on a 600×600 grid, using a simple transformation on the numbers, the result will be a series of images of the CEO of RAND mouthing the words “buy this book. Read The Hidden Persuaders for info on this alarming trend.
    I know, I did it.
    Disappointing and beneath Amazon to carry it.”
  • Titled Beautifully inane and tedious, “After I got over my obsession with the Twilight saga, I didn’t think I would ever come across anything quite like it. Its breathtakingly insipid plot and the witlessness of the characters kept me hooked for the whole four books. Once I finished the series for the fifth time and seen all of the movies, I didn’t know what to do with my life. I slumped into a massive depression and I needed something to fill the gap that was left by Stephenie Meyer’s genius. Miley Cyrus’ autobiography held me over for a couple of weeks, as did the collective works of L. Ron Hubbard, but it just wasn’t the same. I needed something truly entropic! Then I found A Million Random Digits with 100,000 Normal Deviates, and it was like a breath of fresh air. Even it isn’t quite as jumbled and incomprehensible as the story of Edward and Bella, but it has a very unique charm to it. Highly recommended for anyone else who loves pulp romance, cheap science fiction novels, or anything else that is crass or half-baked. Overall, I’d have to give it a 4/5 because the title spoils the plot.”

I hope, readers, that you enjoyed that little foray into Amazon’s comment section.

Happy Halloween! (Hauntings of the Past…)

Note: If this is your first time to TotalFluff, please visit this brief explanation. Thanks!

Greetings, readers!

In honor of today being Halloween, I am going to let some of the past come back to haunt us.

To start with, this YouTube video I am sure you were hoping to never see again….

…And The Webmaster’s subsequent analysis of why it might offensive.

In addition to that, the Webmaster posted some, ah, remarkable explanations about September. This post included the trailer for the Great Pumpkin horror movie that, alas, did not actually come out.

Additionally, she had a rather bizarre concern about what happened to the Great Pumpkin a few months later.

For additional spooky levels, her conspiracy about rainbows is also rather terrifying.

Ha! You admit that rainbows are evil!

That is not what I said.

Thinking about it, most of The Webmaster’s explanations are a bit frightening.

As are many of her “food” choices.

I will definitely grant you the food one… The “fluff” at the end of that post was absolutely terrifying.

And since today is also a Friday…

New Music Video – Very Impressive

Note: If this is your first time to TotalFluff, please visit this brief explanation. Thanks!

Greetings, readers!

My apologies for posting yet another YouTube Video to this blog, now making it five times in a row that the post has been a video, but I found this to be very impressive.

It is a new music video that is making the rounds on the internet

Although I am not particularly taken with the music itself, the video performance aspect of it is incredible. There are many performers, and they all seem to be synchronized.

Furthermore, I appreciate the “digital” effect the designers were able to achieve with the umbrellas. That is quite cool.

I also admit to being intrigued by the devices the four main performers were moving on. What is that device? How does it work? Is it as much fun as it appears?

However, I do not understand how the music video itself ties to the choreography. When the four colors came in at the end, it looked almost like a Windows Logo, but the colors were out of order. (And besides, tying the Windows Logo to a song where the lyrics are “I won’t let you down” ad nauseum seems a little… wrong. Unless they were trying to be ironic.)

I suppose that at a meta-level, it is impressive that everybody got the choreography correct. Maybe they were singing to each other about not letting each other down on this take?

Outside the meta-analysis, though, I really do not understand the link. It seems to me that any song with a very strong beat would have “worked” (from a choreography mapping perspective), and some might have worked better. If there were lyrics about twisting through the elements of time, for example, that would have flowed nicely with the music video’s choreography. Or some sort of reference to time and rhythm. As it stands, however, I do not think the song did the technology and synchronization justice.

What are your thoughts, readers?