Questões de Inglês

WHY I HATE 3D (AND YOU SHOULD TOO)

[1] 3-D is a waste of a perfectly good dimension.

Hollywood’s current crazy stampede toward it is suicidal.

It adds nothing essential to the moviegoing experience.

For some, it is an annoying distraction. For others, it

[5] creates nausea and headaches. It is driven largely to

sell expensive projection equipment and add a $5 to $7.50

surcharge on already expensive movie tickets. Its image

is noticeably darker than standard 2-D. It is unsuitable

for grown-up films of any seriousness. It limits the freedom

[10] of directors to make films as they choose.

That’s my position. I know it’s heresy to the biz

side of show business. After all, 3-D has not only given

Hollywood its biggest payday ($2.7 billion and counting

for Avatar), but a slew of other hits. The year’s top three

[15] films—Alice in Wonderland, How to Train Your Dragon,

and Clash of the Titans—were all projected in 3-D, and

they’re only the beginning. But many directors, editors,

and cinematographers agree with me about the

shortcomings of 3-D. So do many movie lovers—even

[20] executives who feel stampeded by another Hollywood

infatuation with a technology that was already pointless

when their grandfathers played with stereoscopes. The

heretics’ case, point by point:

IT’S THE WASTE OF A DIMENSION. When you

[25] look at a 2-D movie, it’s already in 3-D as far as your

mind is concerned. When you see Lawrence of Arabia

growing from a speck as he rides toward you across the

desert, are you thinking, “Look how slowly he grows

against the horizon”? Our minds use the principle of

[30] perspective to provide the third dimension. Adding one

artificially can make the illusion less convincing.

IT ADDS NOTHING TO THE EXPERIENCE. Recall

the greatest moviegoing experiences of your lifetime. Did

they “need” 3-D? A great film completely engages our

[35] imaginations. What would Fargo gain in 3-D? Precious?

Casablanca?

IT CAN CREATE NAUSEA AND HEADACHES. As

3-D TV sets were being introduced at the Consumer

Electronics Show in Las Vegas in January, Reuters

[40] interviewed two leading ophthalmologists. “There are a

lot of people walking around with very minor eye

problems—for example, a muscle imbalance—which

under normal circumstances the brain deals with

naturally,” said Dr. Michael Rosenberg, a professor at

[45] Northwestern University. 3-D provides an unfamiliar visual

experience, and “that translates into greater mental effort,

making it easier to get a headache.” Dr. Deborah

Friedman, a professor of ophthalmology and neurology

at the University of Rochester Medical Center, said that

[50] in normal vision, each eye sees things at a slightly

different angle. “When that gets processed in the brain,

that creates the perception of depth. The illusions that

you see in three dimensions in the movies are not

calibrated the same way that your eyes and your brain

[55] are.” In a just-published article, Consumer Reports says

about 15 percent of the moviegoing audience experiences

headache and eyestrain during 3-D movies.

WHENEVER HOLLYWOOD HAS FELT

THREATENED, IT HAS TURNED TO TECHNOLOGY:

[60] SOUND, COLOR, WIDESCREEN, CINERAMA, 3-D,

STEREOPHONIC SOUND, AND NOW 3-D AGAIN. In

marketing terms, this means offering an experience that

can’t be had at home. With the advent of Blu-ray discs,

HD cable, and home digital projectors, the gap between

[65] the theater and home experiences has been narrowed.

3-D widened it again. Now home 3-D TV sets may narrow

that gap as well.

By Roger Ebert Newsweek.com, May 10, 2010 Fonte: http://www.newsweek.com/2010/04/30/why-i-hate-3-d-andyou- should-too.html (with slight adaptations)

WHY I HATE 3D (AND YOU SHOULD TOO)

[1] 3-D is a waste of a perfectly good dimension.

Hollywood’s current crazy stampede toward it is suicidal.

It adds nothing essential to the moviegoing experience.

For some, it is an annoying distraction. For others, it

[5] creates nausea and headaches. It is driven largely to

sell expensive projection equipment and add a $5 to $7.50

surcharge on already expensive movie tickets. Its image

is noticeably darker than standard 2-D. It is unsuitable

for grown-up films of any seriousness. It limits the freedom

[10] of directors to make films as they choose.

That’s my position. I know it’s heresy to the biz

side of show business. After all, 3-D has not only given

Hollywood its biggest payday ($2.7 billion and counting

for Avatar), but a slew of other hits. The year’s top three

[15] films—Alice in Wonderland, How to Train Your Dragon,

and Clash of the Titans—were all projected in 3-D, and

they’re only the beginning. But many directors, editors,

and cinematographers agree with me about the

shortcomings of 3-D. So do many movie lovers—even

[20] executives who feel stampeded by another Hollywood

infatuation with a technology that was already pointless

when their grandfathers played with stereoscopes. The

heretics’ case, point by point:

IT’S THE WASTE OF A DIMENSION. When you

[25] look at a 2-D movie, it’s already in 3-D as far as your

mind is concerned. When you see Lawrence of Arabia

growing from a speck as he rides toward you across the

desert, are you thinking, “Look how slowly he grows

against the horizon”? Our minds use the principle of

[30] perspective to provide the third dimension. Adding one

artificially can make the illusion less convincing.

IT ADDS NOTHING TO THE EXPERIENCE. Recall

the greatest moviegoing experiences of your lifetime. Did

they “need” 3-D? A great film completely engages our

[35] imaginations. What would Fargo gain in 3-D? Precious?

Casablanca?

IT CAN CREATE NAUSEA AND HEADACHES. As

3-D TV sets were being introduced at the Consumer

Electronics Show in Las Vegas in January, Reuters

[40] interviewed two leading ophthalmologists. “There are a

lot of people walking around with very minor eye

problems—for example, a muscle imbalance—which

under normal circumstances the brain deals with

naturally,” said Dr. Michael Rosenberg, a professor at

[45] Northwestern University. 3-D provides an unfamiliar visual

experience, and “that translates into greater mental effort,

making it easier to get a headache.” Dr. Deborah

Friedman, a professor of ophthalmology and neurology

at the University of Rochester Medical Center, said that

[50] in normal vision, each eye sees things at a slightly

different angle. “When that gets processed in the brain,

that creates the perception of depth. The illusions that

you see in three dimensions in the movies are not

calibrated the same way that your eyes and your brain

[55] are.” In a just-published article, Consumer Reports says

about 15 percent of the moviegoing audience experiences

headache and eyestrain during 3-D movies.

WHENEVER HOLLYWOOD HAS FELT

THREATENED, IT HAS TURNED TO TECHNOLOGY:

[60] SOUND, COLOR, WIDESCREEN, CINERAMA, 3-D,

STEREOPHONIC SOUND, AND NOW 3-D AGAIN. In

marketing terms, this means offering an experience that

can’t be had at home. With the advent of Blu-ray discs,

HD cable, and home digital projectors, the gap between

[65] the theater and home experiences has been narrowed.

3-D widened it again. Now home 3-D TV sets may narrow

that gap as well.

By Roger Ebert Newsweek.com, May 10, 2010 Fonte: http://www.newsweek.com/2010/04/30/why-i-hate-3-d-andyou- should-too.html (with slight adaptations)

The Wristwatch Looks For a New Use

[1] Last year while writing about students entering their first year of college I made an interesting

observation: these newly commissioned freshmen don’t use wristwatches. In fact, the wristwatch is so

alien to this group of late teens that even the mere action of pointing to a wrist to ask someone the time

is akin to speaking an unfamiliar foreign language. (They use mobile phones and laptops to tell the time.)

[5] Equipped with this knowledge, 5 we could be led to believe that the wristwatch’s time is almost up and that

this piece of technology is destined for the same graveyard as vinyl records or the horse-drawn carriage.

Not so fast. A number of companies are hoping to offer a new product that can take over the real

estate of the wrist, and although these devices can tell the time, they can also go above and beyond the

old stem winder your grandfather likely owned.

[10] One watch that recently caused a lot of excitement online was the TikTok, a watch that uses an MP3

player as its internals. People seemed to flock to this device because of its slick design, and of course

because it had a little fashionable logo on the back.

Another watch that is currently being tested, called the Allerta inPulse, acts more like a computer than a

timepiece. This device is different because its creators hope programmers and developers will “hack” the

[15] watch, creating new applications or uses for it. The Allerta is expected to cost $150.

Eric Migicovsky, chief operating officer of Allerta, the maker of the new watch, said in an e-mail that he

hopes people will use the device as an extension to their mobile phones, where the watch can offer a

third screen of information without someone having to fumble for their phone in their pocket or purse.

Mr. Migicovsky said that installing apps on the new watch will be a simple process. “It’s possible to get up

[20] and run with inPulse within five minutes,” he said, noting that you don’t need to be a programmer or

developer to take advantage of the apps on the watch, but watch owners will have to rely on this

community to build new applications.

Some programmers are already using the new Allerta. One app offers the ability to control a music library

from this watch. Another becomes an extension of a smartphone and shows new e-mail messages

[25] and calendars on the phone through the watch’s display. And finally, a programmer recreated the popular

videogame Doom to be played on this new gadget.

Slightly adapted from http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/the-wristwatch-looks-for-a-new-use/

The Wristwatch Looks For a New Use

[1] Last year while writing about students entering their first year of college I made an interesting

observation: these newly commissioned freshmen don’t use wristwatches. In fact, the wristwatch is so

alien to this group of late teens that even the mere action of pointing to a wrist to ask someone the time

is akin to speaking an unfamiliar foreign language. (They use mobile phones and laptops to tell the time.)

[5] Equipped with this knowledge, 5 we could be led to believe that the wristwatch’s time is almost up and that

this piece of technology is destined for the same graveyard as vinyl records or the horse-drawn carriage.

Not so fast. A number of companies are hoping to offer a new product that can take over the real

estate of the wrist, and although these devices can tell the time, they can also go above and beyond the

old stem winder your grandfather likely owned.

[10] One watch that recently caused a lot of excitement online was the TikTok, a watch that uses an MP3

player as its internals. People seemed to flock to this device because of its slick design, and of course

because it had a little fashionable logo on the back.

Another watch that is currently being tested, called the Allerta inPulse, acts more like a computer than a

timepiece. This device is different because its creators hope programmers and developers will “hack” the

[15] watch, creating new applications or uses for it. The Allerta is expected to cost $150.

Eric Migicovsky, chief operating officer of Allerta, the maker of the new watch, said in an e-mail that he

hopes people will use the device as an extension to their mobile phones, where the watch can offer a

third screen of information without someone having to fumble for their phone in their pocket or purse.

Mr. Migicovsky said that installing apps on the new watch will be a simple process. “It’s possible to get up

[20] and run with inPulse within five minutes,” he said, noting that you don’t need to be a programmer or

developer to take advantage of the apps on the watch, but watch owners will have to rely on this

community to build new applications.

Some programmers are already using the new Allerta. One app offers the ability to control a music library

from this watch. Another becomes an extension of a smartphone and shows new e-mail messages

[25] and calendars on the phone through the watch’s display. And finally, a programmer recreated the popular

videogame Doom to be played on this new gadget.

Slightly adapted from http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/the-wristwatch-looks-for-a-new-use/

The Wristwatch Looks For a New Use

[1] Last year while writing about students entering their first year of college I made an interesting

observation: these newly commissioned freshmen don’t use wristwatches. In fact, the wristwatch is so

alien to this group of late teens that even the mere action of pointing to a wrist to ask someone the time

is akin to speaking an unfamiliar foreign language. (They use mobile phones and laptops to tell the time.)

[5] Equipped with this knowledge, 5 we could be led to believe that the wristwatch’s time is almost up and that

this piece of technology is destined for the same graveyard as vinyl records or the horse-drawn carriage.

Not so fast. A number of companies are hoping to offer a new product that can take over the real

estate of the wrist, and although these devices can tell the time, they can also go above and beyond the

old stem winder your grandfather likely owned.

[10] One watch that recently caused a lot of excitement online was the TikTok, a watch that uses an MP3

player as its internals. People seemed to flock to this device because of its slick design, and of course

because it had a little fashionable logo on the back.

Another watch that is currently being tested, called the Allerta inPulse, acts more like a computer than a

timepiece. This device is different because its creators hope programmers and developers will “hack” the

[15] watch, creating new applications or uses for it. The Allerta is expected to cost $150.

Eric Migicovsky, chief operating officer of Allerta, the maker of the new watch, said in an e-mail that he

hopes people will use the device as an extension to their mobile phones, where the watch can offer a

third screen of information without someone having to fumble for their phone in their pocket or purse.

Mr. Migicovsky said that installing apps on the new watch will be a simple process. “It’s possible to get up

[20] and run with inPulse within five minutes,” he said, noting that you don’t need to be a programmer or

developer to take advantage of the apps on the watch, but watch owners will have to rely on this

community to build new applications.

Some programmers are already using the new Allerta. One app offers the ability to control a music library

from this watch. Another becomes an extension of a smartphone and shows new e-mail messages

[25] and calendars on the phone through the watch’s display. And finally, a programmer recreated the popular

videogame Doom to be played on this new gadget.

Slightly adapted from http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/the-wristwatch-looks-for-a-new-use/

Around 1938, the genial, suburban cartoonist Charles

Addams invented in these pages a ghoulish tribe of sadists

and malcontents, intended to tease the notion of American

prosperity and the cult of the perfect nuclear family. Into

[5]  innocent lives dedicated to the pursuit of happiness,

Addams´s creepy crew injected a dose of gleeful dread. His

  game was to turn values upside down: bad was good; ugly

was beautiful; freaky was normal; the deadly gave life. They

poured boiling oil on Christmas carollers, they asked their

[10]  neighbors for a cup of cyanide. By making darkness

delightful, Addams struck a lasting cultural chord; his

  macabre creation has been the basis of a television series, a

TV movie, two feature films, and two animated cartoons.

Now, not seven decades too soon, the musical theatre

[15]  has decided to exploit the brand as well - to pit the

aggressive power of Addams´s mischief against the bromidic

power of Broadway. In Addams´s cartoons, mordancy was

an authentic expression of aggression. In "The Addams

[20]    Family" musical, it´s merely a mannerism. Addams´s family

members believed that they were normal. That was the joke.

From the first beats of the musical, however, the characters

we see onstage know that they are not. Most of the evening is

spent on endless illustration of the family´s evident

pathological characteristics. This is vamping, not storytelling.

 [25]   Descriptive but not dramatic, the songs take neither the plot

nor the characters anywhere.

Luckily the excellent, sweet-faced Kevin Chamberlin, a

chubby Uncle Fester, adds his charm to the show. "Promises

broken. Marriages threatened. Delicious anarchy," Fester says

 [30]   to the audience at the beginning of of Act II, summing up the

story so far. " Can this be repaired? Or do we all leave in an

hour vaguely depressed? You know my answer. If "The

Addams Family" bears witness to anything , it´s to a peculiar

habit of most Broadway producers: give them a mile and

 [35]  they´ll take an inch.

(from FESTERING, by J. Lahr, in The new yorker, April 19,2010)