• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

random thoughts. rants. general nonsense.

Moe_Syzlak said:
I find it interesting that the author seems to have fallen into the same sort of confirmation bias that he originally set out to write about.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that, but does it really matter? Either Doerr was Z or he wasn't, so, unless we theorize that Kobek is misrepresenting his findings (due to confirmation bias or otherwise), and/or have the time to double-check said findings, Kobek's mindset is kinda irrelevant, IMO.

Now, consider the horrific story Doerr's daughter recounted in the LA Magazine article. I see only three possibilities:

1) Doerr's daughter made the story up (or told a partly true story) that she accidentally set on the night of Zodiac's first confirmed murders - this is so improbable we can summarily dismiss it, IMO.

2) Doerr's daughter invented a story (or deliberately altered a true story) set on that fateful night, but didn't point said detail out, trusting that Kobek would connect the dots on his own - this is more plausible, but to what end? It would seem out of character with everything else we know about her.

The only other possibility, then, is:

3) The story is true, and Doerr monstroustly assaulted his daughter for supposed promiscuity, causing her to flee their house, on the same night that Z went to a nearby young lover's lane spot and committed his first confirmed (double) murder.

If that is indeed the case, given all the other circumstantial evidence Kobek assembled about Doerr - that he loved ciphers, that he was a hunter who owned lots of weapons, that he wrote numerous letters to newspapers, was a prolific zine contributor who wrote extensively about local and notorious crimes (but never once mentioned Z), that he was in a frigid marriage to a woman who kept a very different schedule, etc., etc. - what are the odds that all this is accurate, but coincidental, and that Doerr and Z were two different men? I'm all for healthy skepticism, but this is too overwhelming, IMO, to not come to the conclusion, unless proven otherwise (and may we always keep open minds, of course, and evaluate every argument/new piece of evidence fairly), that Kobek indeed stumbled onto the truth.

My two cents. :)
 
Does anyone else have a hard time explaining fan edits to friends / colleagues outside of fan editing communities?
Before seeing Halloween Ends in theaters, I watched Bobson Dugnutt's Halloween: The TV Terror Cut and Ryantology's Halloween II: The Return of Michael Myers. Watching Ends afterward made it feel like the perfect trilogy capper and I totally loved it. So I told the friend I was seeing Ends with about how Ryantology had edited the 2018 film and Kills into a single movie that felt like a totally cohesive film... And their response was along the lines of "but couldn't you just watch both movies separately?"
Sure... I could. But how cool is the art of fan editing!?
"Do people make money for their edits?"
No... but the community is really cool and supportive, and it's fun getting to share your "art" with people who appreciate it...

Similarly, in the last year I've had several conversations where I've brought up fan edits that I feel are superior to the original versions. Wakeupkeo's Eternal's - Apostasy Cut and Bird's of Prey - Chronological Cut are the only versions of those two respective films that I ever want to watch. I recently had a friend gripe about how bad Eternal's was, to which I responded "I saw a fan edit that was pretty great. Restructuring some scenes really savesdit!" They brushed it off and didn't care at all.

Even when the recent Kenobi fan edit was going viral, I watched it and told a friend who had abandoned the series after 4 episodes that he should check out the fan edited feature version instead. He said he didn't care to because the show had already lost him and "a fan edit won't save it for me." Yet, I find that fan edits frequently save bad films! That is often times the entire point!

I guess it just takes a specific kind of film geek to really appreciate the art of fan editing?
 
Most of the people don't care and are not interested.
Only if I show them extended edition of the movie they like, they may be interested, but it feels like it's better to pretend this is an official version.

And I think this post should not be put into "off-topic" part of the forum.
 
The logo for this new Threads thing that all the kids are talking about kinda looks like the Ebola virus to me.
 
"Hijack" is great, but it's been four hours since the hijackers did the hijack, and I haven't seen a single passenger ask for a pee break. đźš˝ :unsure:
 
Everybody gets a bottle of water in episode three and I'm like, OK, now they'll start to negotiate for the controlled release of urine, but nope.
 
TM2YC said:
The logo for this new Threads thing that all the kids are talking about kinda looks like the Ebola virus to me.
Click to expand...

And yet, we can always trust Musk to come up with something even worse. :ROFLMAO:
 
It's about time someone needed a restroom break.
pee pee reaper GIF by MANGOTEETH
 
Okay so a memory just came to me all of a sudden. Some years ago, I was at some local convention. There were these guys who were giving out (or maybe selling) a dvd of their comedy skits based on video games. I remember getting this dvd and watching it, only to find that it was so painfully unfunny and boring. I can't for the life of me remember what it was called. The name "Epic Game Show" comes to mind, but I'm not finding any relevant results. This is going to kill me.
 
Jrzag42 said:
Okay so a memory just came to me all of a sudden. Some years ago, I was at some local convention. There were these guys who were giving out (or maybe selling) a dvd of their comedy skits based on video games. I remember getting this dvd and watching it, only to find that it was so painfully unfunny and boring. I can't for the life of me remember what it was called. The name "Epic Game Show" comes to mind, but I'm not finding any relevant results. This is going to kill me.
Click to expand...
I FOUND IT! IT's called Epic TV Saga and it's just as unfunny as I remember!
 

Result of some AI tinkering, guy in the hat based on my style & clothes (but 80s muscular version of it).
 
So, Nicholas Meyer, writer/director of The Wrath of Khan, wrote three Sherlock Holmes novels (1974's The Seven-Per-Cent Solution, 76's The West End Horror, and 93's The Canary Trainer) that I absolutely love. But it wasn't until this week that I learned he's recently written two more: 2019's The Adventure of the Peculiar Protocols, and 21's The Return of the Pharaoh.

"Quick, Watson - the game's afoot! To the nearest bookshop, at once!"
 
I keep thinking about the song 1985 by Bowling For Soup, part of the chorus always bugs me:
"...Springsteen, Madonna, way before Nirvana"
Way before Nirvana? How do you define "way before"? 1985 is only 4 years before Nirvana's first album, and they were founded even before that. Now, I suppose it's only taking into account when Nirvana got popular, I get that.
When I was a dumb kid, I always regarded Nirvana as an 80s band because they started in the 80s. I'm past that, I get that everyone knows them as a 90s band. I don't know why this random song makes me revert to that mindset.
 
Jrzag42 said:
I keep thinking about the song 1985 by Bowling For Soup, part of the chorus always bugs me:
"...Springsteen, Madonna, way before Nirvana"
Way before Nirvana? How do you define "way before"? 1985 is only 4 years before Nirvana's first album, and they were founded even before that. Now, I suppose it's only taking into account when Nirvana got popular, I get that.
When I was a dumb kid, I always regarded Nirvana as an 80s band because they started in the 80s. I'm past that, I get that everyone knows them as a 90s band. I don't know why this random song makes me revert to that mindset.
Click to expand...
This might be a hottake, but I always read 1985 as a loser projecting their own insecurities onto someone who's managed to move on with their life.
I mean, is a 40 year old woman with two kids really gonna he upset that she doesn't watch Pretty in Pink every month like she did when she was 17?

The Nirvana line could just be the same sort of juvenile gatekeeping as "don't call yourself a 90s kid if you we're born in 1998!' That people used to post of Facebook all the time.
 
Last edited:
I've decided to embark on an Evil Dead Trilogy rewrite. The plan right now is for it to be an Evil Dead supercut in screenplay format, and I'm going to consult the shooting scripts, early drafts, and comic adaptations for inspiration.

The biggest changes I'm going to make will be to Army of Darkness. Not only do I want to bring it tonally closer to Evil Dead II, but I want to change the date, place, and most of the characters. Azerbaijan/northern Persia, 730 AD, during the Second Arab-Khazar War. Arthur and Henry will be switched out for the historical figures al-Jarrah ibn Abdallah and Barjik, and the wiseman will be identified as Abd al-Azrad aka Abdul Alhazred, the Mad Arab from the Cthulhu Mythos. I'll also be writing a wholly new ending instead of using either the S-Mart or post-apocalyptic endings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom