Yes, obvs keep that From what I've heard commissioned porn is usually pretty low $/hr

I'm pretty sure you can change the sensitivity of the flight controller if you're in a plane with fly-by-wire. I have no idea about pure hydraulics though.

I was able to channel out his annoyance because I thought Star Tours' commentary was worse, glad they replaced it with C3-PO.

You know, I actually can't remember if they have dynamic controls based on their phase of flight. I know smaller planes do not. GPS approaches do get more sensitive the closer you get to an airport, but that's more about navigation precision than controls.

If the controls aren't dynamic, it may just be that they are purposely less sensitive in bigger planes, just like how bus steering wheels are gigantic compared to a car. You don't want small movements resulting in big changes.

I'm pretty sure you can change the sensitivity of the flight controller if you're in a plane with fly-by-wire. I have no idea about pure hydraulics though.

I'd imagine they're trained to get used to it and make larger movements for small directional adjustments all the time. After all, a plane that size is hardly something you'd ever want to move in one swift motion anyway.

Russia

I think the issue is how they wanted her to look, not that they wanted her to change
I fully support method acting and realistic physical appearances of the characters
But "Skinnier and sexier" isn't method acting, it's just trying to cram in more sex appeal
Leia is fighting a war, realistically, she'd be depicted with some physical wear - and - tear, you can't just be the pretty princess all the damn time. Stress would wear on her. She'd have some muscle, some experience.

To answer the question you just posed, I believe the appearance of the character should be reflected by the setting.
Her accusation is that it was reflected by sex appeal, rather than realism

It seems to me her article wasn't about changing appearance for acting roles, but the consistent- "Lose more weight, be more beautiful"
It had nothing to do with physical fitness as you claim, it was focused on beauty, something someone fighting a fucking war gives no shits about. Your own argument invalidates itself.
If she was asked to get in shape (Meaning have visible muscle, strength, the calluses of physical labor), it would be entirely different.

And your original claim was Mark Hamill's phone "Wasn't blowing up with job offers either", that's what he's a poor comparison for.

My statement about Mark's jobs was admittedly poorly-worded, I meant on-screen job offers. We are talking about physical appearance, so obviously screen time is the focus there.

Regarding her comments, I really don't know how you or her want the industry to work. She literally says that the only thing that matters in Hollywood is looks, which is flat out wrong. Look at Melissa McCarthy, she's a very talented actress that doesn't fit Hollywood appearance standards at all. And if they had just cast some attractive talentless bimbo to play Leia that would have turned out horribly. I don't disagree that society places a disproportionate importance on looks vs other qualifications, but in a movie the looks absolutely need to match the settings. Do you really think she shouldn't have been expected to look a certain way for the part?

I think the issue is how they wanted her to look, not that they wanted her to change
I fully support method acting and realistic physical appearances of the characters
But "Skinnier and sexier" isn't method acting, it's just trying to cram in more sex appeal
Leia is fighting a war, realistically, she'd be depicted with some physical wear - and - tear, you can't just be the pretty princess all the damn time. Stress would wear on her. She'd have some muscle, some experience.

To answer the question you just posed, I believe the appearance of the character should be reflected by the setting.
Her accusation is that it was reflected by sex appeal, rather than realism

I think you have us confused friend, YOU Chose to compare Mark Hamill, not I. I already pointed out that comparing him was a completely shitty idea.

And if you read her article she linked in full, the points are entirely valid and she's entitled to her opinion that the status quo should not remain as such.

Mark is the perfect comparison. He, like Carrie, has been virtually off-camera since Star Wars. And he, like Carrie, was asked to lose weight for the role. And she bitched and moaned about how unfair it was to ask that of her, and how they don't want Carrie for her own sake, they want a thinner Carrie.

No, they want Leia. They're not casting for Carrie Fisher to be in the Star Wars universe, they're casting Leia Organa. General Organa has been kicking ass fighting for the Resistance, and it is perfectly reasonable to expect her to look fit and in shape. Carrie's points are not valid at all for that reason. We don't want to see whatever-Carrie-has-become in Star Wars, we want to see a Leia we can believe. Same with Mark. It just wouldn't make since for him to be fat and out of shape when he's been isolated on this deserted planet.

Carrie is right in that it is often expected of actors to change their appearance for a role, but she is wrong when she says it shouldn't be that way. Do we believe a fat shipwrecked Tom Hanks on an island in Castaway? Do we believe a scrawny (Machinist) Christian Bale playing Batman? Would it make sense to see a fit and ripped Kevin James in Mall Cop? Carrie wasn't asked to lose weight because "ew, gross, fat women are ugly," it was perfectly reasonable for her to look the part of the badass freedom fighter, and she's nuts if she thinks movies would work any other way.

It seems to me her article wasn't about changing appearance for acting roles, but the consistent- "Lose more weight, be more beautiful"
It had nothing to do with physical fitness as you claim, it was focused on beauty, something someone fighting a fucking war gives no shits about. Your own argument invalidates itself.
If she was asked to get in shape (Meaning have visible muscle, strength, the calluses of physical labor), it would be entirely different.

And your original claim was Mark Hamill's phone "Wasn't blowing up with job offers either", that's what he's a poor comparison for.

My statement about Mark's jobs was admittedly poorly-worded, I meant on-screen job offers. We are talking about physical appearance, so obviously screen time is the focus there.

Regarding her comments, I really don't know how you or her want the industry to work. She literally says that the only thing that matters in Hollywood is looks, which is flat out wrong. Look at Melissa McCarthy, she's a very talented actress that doesn't fit Hollywood appearance standards at all. And if they had just cast some attractive talentless bimbo to play Leia that would have turned out horribly. I don't disagree that society places a disproportionate importance on looks vs other qualifications, but in a movie the looks absolutely need to match the settings. Do you really think she shouldn't have been expected to look a certain way for the part?

I think the issue is how they wanted her to look, not that they wanted her to change
I fully support method acting and realistic physical appearances of the characters
But "Skinnier and sexier" isn't method acting, it's just trying to cram in more sex appeal
Leia is fighting a war, realistically, she'd be depicted with some physical wear - and - tear, you can't just be the pretty princess all the damn time. Stress would wear on her. She'd have some muscle, some experience.

To answer the question you just posed, I believe the appearance of the character should be reflected by the setting.
Her accusation is that it was reflected by sex appeal, rather than realism

Mark Hamill is one of the most famous VOICE actors of all time
Nobody gives a shit what he looks like, he will always have a job
You chose literally the worst example conceivable short of Morgan Freeman.
The older he gets the more offers he'll get at this point.

Yes he does have a voice acting career. One where NOBODY sees his body. You chose literally the worst example in the acting field to compare, of course he doesn't have to lose weight to voice act, and neither would Carrie.

This whole weight thing comes from a longer story about her. This post is relatively benign, I'll admit, but it has much more history to it. Here she is going into more detail, complaining at length that they wanted her to lose some weight for Star Wars: www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/dec/01/carrie-fisher-weight-loss-star-wars-the-force-awakens The point is, they asked Hamill to as well, and he basically said it was hard, but that's part of being an actor. And he's right.

I think you have us confused friend, YOU Chose to compare Mark Hamill, not I. I already pointed out that comparing him was a completely shitty idea.

And if you read her article she linked in full, the points are entirely valid and she's entitled to her opinion that the status quo should not remain as such.

Mark is the perfect comparison. He, like Carrie, has been virtually off-camera since Star Wars. And he, like Carrie, was asked to lose weight for the role. And she bitched and moaned about how unfair it was to ask that of her, and how they don't want Carrie for her own sake, they want a thinner Carrie.

No, they want Leia. They're not casting for Carrie Fisher to be in the Star Wars universe, they're casting Leia Organa. General Organa has been kicking ass fighting for the Resistance, and it is perfectly reasonable to expect her to look fit and in shape. Carrie's points are not valid at all for that reason. We don't want to see whatever-Carrie-has-become in Star Wars, we want to see a Leia we can believe. Same with Mark. It just wouldn't make since for him to be fat and out of shape when he's been isolated on this deserted planet.

Carrie is right in that it is often expected of actors to change their appearance for a role, but she is wrong when she says it shouldn't be that way. Do we believe a fat shipwrecked Tom Hanks on an island in Castaway? Do we believe a scrawny (Machinist) Christian Bale playing Batman? Would it make sense to see a fit and ripped Kevin James in Mall Cop? Carrie wasn't asked to lose weight because "ew, gross, fat women are ugly," it was perfectly reasonable for her to look the part of the badass freedom fighter, and she's nuts if she thinks movies would work any other way.

It seems to me her article wasn't about changing appearance for acting roles, but the consistent- "Lose more weight, be more beautiful"
It had nothing to do with physical fitness as you claim, it was focused on beauty, something someone fighting a fucking war gives no shits about. Your own argument invalidates itself.
If she was asked to get in shape (Meaning have visible muscle, strength, the calluses of physical labor), it would be entirely different.

And your original claim was Mark Hamill's phone "Wasn't blowing up with job offers either", that's what he's a poor comparison for.

My statement about Mark's jobs was admittedly poorly-worded, I meant on-screen job offers. We are talking about physical appearance, so obviously screen time is the focus there.

Regarding her comments, I really don't know how you or her want the industry to work. She literally says that the only thing that matters in Hollywood is looks, which is flat out wrong. Look at Melissa McCarthy, she's a very talented actress that doesn't fit Hollywood appearance standards at all. And if they had just cast some attractive talentless bimbo to play Leia that would have turned out horribly. I don't disagree that society places a disproportionate importance on looks vs other qualifications, but in a movie the looks absolutely need to match the settings. Do you really think she shouldn't have been expected to look a certain way for the part?

I think the issue is how they wanted her to look, not that they wanted her to change
I fully support method acting and realistic physical appearances of the characters
But "Skinnier and sexier" isn't method acting, it's just trying to cram in more sex appeal
Leia is fighting a war, realistically, she'd be depicted with some physical wear - and - tear, you can't just be the pretty princess all the damn time. Stress would wear on her. She'd have some muscle, some experience.

To answer the question you just posed, I believe the appearance of the character should be reflected by the setting.
Her accusation is that it was reflected by sex appeal, rather than realism

"And do you think his phone was blowing up with job offers either?"

Um, yes? Mark Hamill is probably #1 on DC comics/ Warner Bros entertainment's speed dial. Go check out what he's been up to since Star Wars.

I should have specified on-screen roles, because that's what matters when talking about weight loss. >>#195

growing up seems to introduce more improvements than anything else really