Directed by John Waters. With Kathleen Turner, Sam Waterston, Ricki Lake, Matthew Lillard. A sweet mother finds herself participating in homicidal activities when she sees the occasion call for it.I just finished watching, thanks to @'s post in the trailer thread.Just wow. I am amazed for many reasons.
First, that I'd never heard of this classic movie. Secondly, because I never thought of Kathleen Turner as an actress that could pull off such a crazy role. And also, because I thoroughly enjoyed this extremely entertaining film.Kathleen Turner is a natural beauty, and her classic, good looks creates a clearly defined pecking order when contrasted with the rest of the family. Her dominance is created with small details, allowing her character to actually be both a good person and a horrible person simultaneously.
The division between the two only ever breaks down once her own family suspects her, which creates one of the most subtle jibes of the movie when her husband realizes that she might be guilty and she also might be coming back home.The quality of this movie in every aspect is much better than I would have expected. For comparison, if John Hughes had directed this movie, I feel like there would have been a lot more parts where dialogue is used to explain the plot, where this movie really allows the viewer to relax and just watch the story unfold.Seriously glad I watched this one.
Also, renewed my Kathleen Turner crush. Directed by Gary Dauberman. With Vera Farmiga, Patrick Wilson, Mckenna Grace, Madison Iseman. While babysitting the daughter of Ed and Lorraine Warren, a teenager and her friend unknowingly awaken an evil spirit trapped in a doll.I saw Annabelle Comes Home.
This isn’t a film I’d choose for myself, but a friend wanted to see it. The whole Hollywood rattle-and-scream ghost movie thing is boring and annoying to me (although genuine ghost stories are among my favourite types of fiction), but this one was pleasant and amusing and just silly fun.It’s a “sweet” horror film, where it has a happy ending, none-too-deep themes (it touches on stuff like faith and guilt, but only at a surface level), and it won’t trouble you ten minutes after you’ve seen it. It’s structured like a Goodebumps book, with a little girl being babysat when a friend of the babysitter’s unleashes the evil doll from the basement. It’s more Night of the Living Dummy than Halloween, Carrie, or any number of genuinely scary horror films.
But it serves its purpose as a popcorn fright-fest. Directed by David Leitch. With Ryan Reynolds, Josh Brolin, Morena Baccarin, Julian Dennison. Foul-mouthed mutant mercenary Wade Wilson (a.k.a. Deadpool), brings together a team of fellow mutant rogues to protect a young boy with supernatural abilities from the brutal, time-traveling cyborg Cable.This movie does not disappoint. If you loved the first Deadpool movie, like I did, then you will surely love this one. Ryan Reynolds is as consistent as the tides when it comes to being hilarious in the most irreverent of ways.
The film is packed full of one-liners, with getting as many, if not more, of the great lines.The first movie is known for breaking the fourth wall, and the sequel follows suit. Some of the biggest laughs, for me, were these moments when Deadpool is commenting on the movie or the industry in general.The story was well done and although a little hokey, it is balanced by Reynolds' constantly shitting all over anything pure or sweet that happens. Will definitely review this later. Last night, I finally watched (2000), a fascinating movie about the dark side of people. It is clear from the opening scene that this movie isn't about drugs, but rather about the people that live that life — and the toll it takes on them.had just directed (1998) and because of the success of that film, was given a level of creative control that allowed this movie to become one of the most daring films of our time.The film is intoxicating from start to finish.
Ascii Table
I spent a lot of the time in a state of heightened awareness — almost as if I were taking those amphetamine pills during the viewing. There are certain scenes that may feel exaggerated, but once the film ends, and the credits roll, it all made a lot more sense.I was a little bit reticent to watch this film because it seemed like just another drug movie, but it is much more than that.
This film is a tortured vision of what I feel is four people crying out for someone to love and accept them. In this way, the movie touches a chord with everyone, whether you have ever been deeply addicted, or not. Directed by Don Coscarelli. Michael Baldwin, Bill Thornbury, Reggie Bannister, Kathy Lester. A teenage boy and his friends face off against a mysterious grave robber known only as the Tall Man, who keeps a lethal arsenal of terrible weapons with him.Finally watched 1976’s Phantasm, which I’ve been meaning to see for a long time. A genuinely scary movie even today, although it also has some corny 70s elements.
It’s scariest in its chase scenes between Angus Scrimm’s Tall Man, his dwarves, and the heroes.I’d rate it 3/4. I’d rate it higher if it wasn’t for the incoherent plot. This is definitely a movie that’s more about storytelling than story, as it works in the moment but not on reflection. Is the Tall Man a demon or a space alien? What exactly are his powers? What happens to the hero at the end of the film?These are all unanswered questions, and the last 5 minutes pull the rug out from underneath everything that came before.
As such it doesn’t really hang together as a plot, and yet is too traditionally structured to be full David Lynch surrealist. That keeps it a millimetre away from the heights of John Carpenter’s Halloween, but it’s still a fun, gruesome, chilling, and head-scratching ride through nightmare. Directed by David Leitch. With Dwayne Johnson, Jason Statham, Idris Elba, Vanessa Kirby. Lawman Luke Hobbs and outcast Deckard Shaw form an unlikely alliance when a cyber-genetically enhanced villain threatens the future of humanity.Just saw Fast & Furious: Hobbs & Shaw. It’d been ages since I’d seen an F&F movie, so I spent the first 30 minutes thinking “wait, what? Viruses, super-soldiers, world domination?
I thought this was about street punks drag-racing custom cars in inner city America? When did it turn into Mission: Impossible meets James Bond meets The fucking TERMINATOR? And why does Helen Mirren have a cameo?!” I looked up the original movie to make sure I wasn’t mistaken, and sure enough the big criminal conspiracy in that one was a heist of. Technology so dated in 2019 that charity shops struggle to give it away.Anyway, Jason Statham and The Rock were fun together, even if (or because) the movie doesn’t fully solve the problem that if you have two muscular dudes constantly yelling and flexing at each other, for no real dramatic reason beyond “they’re alpha males”, there’ll come a point where it starts looking homoerotic. Every time they argued back-and-forth it was like that scene in romantic comedies where he says “you’re an entitled princess!”, and she says “you’re a real jerk!”, and then they start fastly and furiously making out with/undressing each other.If you don’t give me a reason as to why the big handsome tough guys are getting all anxious around each other, I’m going to fill in the blanks with “repressed homosexuality”.
Partly because that’s both sexy and hilarious to me. Who wouldn’t want to see a sequel where The Rock and Jason Statham are brought out of retirement after leaving the spy game to run a tea shop in Brighton? Statham: “The CIA needs us, Hobbs.”“I’ve got just one question, Shaw.”.picks up chihuahua. “WHO’S going to take care of Trixie?!”2.5/4. Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)I thought that I had already watched this movie, for some reason, but I did find it fairly interesting. I saw that Spike Lee had this movie on his list of 'every director should see these' films. Why not?It is an odd movie, but also, very beautiful.
Maybe it isn't the best thing for a movie to make you notice the camera work so often, but maybe that is just me. It is impressive that a movie that is nearly forty-five years old holds up in terms of special effects. The visuals don't look dated like other movies made ten to twenty years later.is good in the movie, but he comes off a little goofier than I would have liked.
Hexadecimal To Binary
One thing I noticed about him is that he definitely got more handsome with age. He is downright hard to look at in this movie. The gap in his teeth is hard to look away from and his face is flat and lifeless.
Nothing like the handsome, middle-aged guy he turned into.Still, it was an interesting flick, and as beautiful as it is, I will give it a decent score in spite of what I would consider to be a fairly thin plot that leans on the gimmick of otherworldly creatures a little too heavily. The whole movie seems to be leading up to a point where you get filled in on the secret, but it never happens. Braveheart (1995)It isn't often that a movie comes along that defies criticism. In a world where the word 'epic' is tossed around rather lightly, Braveheart is a masterpiece that sets the standard for the definition of the word, to begin with.This movie was written by an absolute genius — tested and proven over and over again. After writing Braveheart, went on to huge successes in (2001) and (2002).Filled to the brim with every sensation that it is possible for a movie to bring you, as trite as it might sound, you will laugh, you will cry, you will be engaged in the deepest way because you love William Wallace.
The young actor that plays Wallace as in the beginning was perfectly chosen and I was enamored with his wild heart and wary eyes. Then we meet Mel Gibson's Wallace and somehow, nothing has changed. He is the child, grown into the man — the casting and execution is so perfect that my love did not need to be rewon by Gibson.But, he did it anyway.A classic type, I know, but the fiercely loyal, and wildly courageous hero gets me every time. Honest, brave, and true: it's all in the title.
Hi, I am currently working on a project where I am communicating with a variable frequency drive using Modbus RTU. I have successfully written to the coils.
I am now reading from the registers. I have send the command to read from the required register and successfully received a response which prints out to the serial monitor.
Hex Comparison 1 82 Serial Mom Movie
What i cant seem to figure out is how to store the HEX string that is read by the serial monitor so I can remove the extra information and convert the returned value I need.This is what I have so far, any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for the quick response, but i'm still kinda new at the programming language. Would you mind explaining a little bit please.The response from the VFD is in HEX or at least that is what the VFD manual says it will respond in.
Sniffing the lines this is what is actually sent from the VFD 02 03 02 05 DC FE 8D, which contains the slave address, function code, not sure what the 3rd one is, the 4th and 5th is my returned value in HEX. 05 DC = 1500, then the last 2 are the CRC's i believe.EDIT: Okay so I used the buffers to store each part and i checked what was in the 4th and 5th and it is a value in decimal so buffer 3 = 5 buffer 4 = 220 which comes out to 5 DC in HEX which is what i needed. So how do i go about converting that into 1500?