Podcasts about her spike jonze

“Fiction has this unprecedented power in tech spaces. The more I started talking to engineers about their technical problems, the more I realized there’s so much more that humanities could offer.” –Nina Begus About Nina Begus Nina Begus is a researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, leading a research group on artificial humanities, and the founder of InterpretAI. She is author of Artificial Humanities: A Fictional Perspective on Language in AI, which received an Artificiality Institute Award, and First Encounters with AI. Webiste: ninabegus.com LinkedIn Profile: Nina Begus  Book: Artificial Humanities What you will learn How ancient myths and archetypes influence our understanding and design of AI Why the humanities—literature, philosophy, and the arts—are crucial for developing more thoughtful and innovative AI systems The dangers of limiting AI concepts to human-centered metaphors and the need for new, more expansive imaginaries How metaphors shape our interactions with AI products and the user experiences companies choose to enable The challenges and possibilities of imagining forms of machine intelligence and language beyond human templates Why collaboration between technical experts and humanists opens new frontiers for creativity and responsible technology What makes writing and artistic creation uniquely human, and how AI amplifies—not replaces—these impulses Practical ways artists, engineers, and thinkers can work together to explore new relationships and futures with AI Episode Resources Transcript Ross Dawson: Nina, it is wonderful to have you on the show. Nina Begus: Thank you for having me. Ross Dawson: You’ve written this very interesting book, Artificial Humanities, and I think there’s a lot to dig into. But what does that mean? What do you mean by artificial humanities? Nina Begus: Well, this was really a new framework that I’ve developed while I was working on the relationship between AI and fiction, and I started working on this about 15 years ago when I realized that fiction has this unprecedented power in tech spaces. So this is how it all started, but then the more I started talking to engineers about their technical problems, the more I realized there’s so much more that humanities could offer in this collaborative, generative approach that I’ve developed. I would say that now, as the field stands, it’s really a way to explore and demonstrate how humanities—as broad as science and technology studies, literary studies, film, philosophy, rhetoric, history of technology—how all of these fields can help us address the most pressing issues in AI development and use. And it’s been important to me that this approach uses traditional humanistic methods, theory, conceptual work, history, ethical approaches, but also that it’s collaborative and exploratory and experimental in this way that you can look back into the past and at the present to make a more informed choice about the future. You can speculate about different possibilities with it. Ross Dawson: Well, art is an expression of the human psyche, or even more, it is the fullest expression of humanity, and that’s what art tries to do. Also, I’m a deep believer in archetypes, human archetypes, and things which are intrinsic to who we are, and that’s something which you can only really uncover through the arts. Now we have arguably seen all these archetypes play out in real time, these modern myths being created right now in the stories being told of how AI is being created. So I think it’s extraordinarily relevant to look back at how we have depicted machines through our history and our relationship to them. Nina Begus: Yes, this is the reason why I started exploring this topic, actually, because there were so many ancient myths, these archetypal narratives that I’ve seen at the same time, both in technological products that were coming to the market and in the way technologists were thinking about it, and also in fictional products and films and novels in the way we imagined AI. I framed my book around the Pygmalion myth, but there are many, many other myths—Prometheus, Narcissus, the Big Brother narrative, and so on—that are very much doing work in the AI space. The reason why I chose the Pygmalion myth is because it’s so bizarre in many ways: you have this myth where a man creates an artificial woman, and then in the process of creation, falls in love with her. So there’s the creation of the human-like, and there’s also this relationality with the human-like. You would think this would not be a common myth, but quite the opposite—I found it everywhere I looked. It wasn’t called the Pygmalion myth, but the motif was there. I found it on the Silk Road, in ancient folk tales, in Native American folk tales, North Africa, and so on. So I think this kind of story is actually telling us a lot about how humans are not rational, how we have some very deeply embedded behaviors in us, and one of them is that we anthropomorphize everything, including machines.So I think this was a really important takeaway that we got already from the early days of AI with the first chatbot, Eliza. We’ve learned that that will be a feature of us relating to machines. Ross Dawson: So Joseph Campbell called the hero’s journey the monomyth, as in, there is a single myth. And I guess what you are doing here is—well, if you agree with that, which I’d be interested in—is that there are facets. The classic hero’s journey is quite simple, but there are facets of that monomyth, or something intrinsic to who we are, that is around this creation. And in this case, as you say, this relation we have with what we have created. Would you relate that at all to Joseph Campbell’s work? Nina Begus: I haven’t thought about it in this way, because I thought about myth and myths more and less of a storytelling issue, which here is definitely happening—the hero goes on a task, returns back changed, and maybe changes something in the community. The myths that I was looking into and the metaphors that I was exploring, primarily this huge metaphor of AI as a human mind, as an artificial reason—I think it works differently. It’s less of a narrative; it’s more of an imaginary of how or towards what we are building. I think this is a big problem, actually, because the imaginary around AI is very poor. What you get is mostly imagining machine intelligence on human terms, and a lot of people are bothered by that in the AI discourse—right, when you say the machine thinks, or the machine learns, or it has a mind, and some people go as far as to say it has consciousness. I think this kind of debate is actually not that productive. I think it’s more important to see how all these different AI products that we’ve created—and mostly when we talk about AI, people think of language models now—are very much designed as a sort of character, almost as an artificial human that, in literature, authors have been creating for a long time. So I think in that case, we can get back to a hero’s journey. But I think what I was looking at was actually more on the surface level of what kind of shortcuts we are using with these metaphors that we’re employing when building and using AI. I think the book makes a really good case showing that, yes, this is actually a very cultural technology. It’s very much informed by our imaginaries. One surprising part of it was really how hard it was to break out of this human mold. It was pretty much impossible to find examples of machines that are not exclusively human-like. I think Stanislaw Lem is one of the rare writers who can consistently deliver this kind of imaginary. Even looking at more recent works, like popular films such as Hollywood’s Ex Machina or Her, you can see how the technologists themselves would say, “Oh, we were influenced by this film,” in a way that it affirmed their product development trajectory. You can see it now, at this moment, with OpenAI launching companionship. So in many ways, not a lot has changed. Ross Dawson: Yeah, there’s a lot to dig into there. I just want to go back—in a sense, Pygmalion is a metaphor, but it’s also a myth. It is a story: creates a woman, and then falls in love with her, and then whatever happens from there. There is this, something happens, and then something else happens. That’s what a story is. I think that can impact the implicit metaphor, but coming back to the metaphor—so George Lakoff wrote the beautiful book Metaphors We Live By. I think the way the brain works is in metaphors and analogies to a very large degree. Some of those are enabling metaphors, and some of those are not very useful metaphors. I think part of your point is that some of the metaphors that we have for thinking about AI and machines are not useful. There may be, or we could create, some metaphors that are more useful. So, what are some of the most disabling metaphors, and what are some of the ones which could be more constructive? Nina Begus: Yes, So I think this main metaphor that I’ve mentioned—of AI as a human mind—is very limiting. I think it really limits the machinic potential to actually do something good with it. The fact that we’re still using the criteria that were made for humans, like different criteria developed on human language—the Turing test was one of them, right, a while ago. Now we have stricter ones. I think this tells you a lot about how we actually evaluate AI and how even these benchmarks that are supposed to be quantitative are actually often qualitative, often stories, like mini-narratives. But yeah, when we look at different metaphors in this space, there are other ones that also emerge from fiction. I mentioned the Big Brother, the AI as an Oracle, and we need to be aware that these ideas inform the very interaction we have with AI. If we think of it as a mirror, we’re going to use it differently—it’s almost as a bouncing board. If we think of it as a teacher, or as a coach, or as an assistant, it would again create a different use. So I think there are a lot of these metaphors that the companies themselves are trying to decide which one they will go with, because it completely changes the user and the interaction. I think they’re also very cultural, even though you might say, “Oh, it’s a categorical mistake to treat a machine as a human.” I think you can see this kind of treatment across, at least in part, and it doesn’t mean that we consider it human. It just means that we’re engaging with it on our own terms, as if it was human. Now, what could be productive? I do think metaphors, even if they’re not accurate, can be productive. My goal, really, with the book was to break out of this projection of what the machine could be, to find in this exploratory way other directions, other landscapes where we couldn’t go because we’re being limited by our imaginary, by our ideas. So in this way, I think humanistic approaches can be very helpful to designers, to technology builders, to artists, to explore the novelty that so many of these sectors are after. Ross Dawson: Yeah, and I guess people latch on to what they know. I think that’s part of the thing where with AI, “Oh, it’s like a human. Let’s treat it like a human, and let’s make it like a human.” It is, amongst other things, a lack of imagination. That’s where the humanities, the arts, can offer us—those who have the imagination to be able to envisage different possibilities or relationships. But I guess part of it is also that humans relate, and so we have learned to relate to other humans and also to other animals and hopefully to nature as well. But these are all established patterns of relating. So do we need to discover in ourselves new ways of relating to new categories—things which are not humans, not animals, and not nature? Nina Begus: Exactly, this is the exact problem we’re dealing with, and because we’re dealing with a yet unexplored, yet undefined relation, and we’re using old, outdated terms for that relation. This is why we don’t really have a good way of describing it and establishing it. It will take a while for this to develop, which is fine, but we need to realize that there are some concepts that we’re using that we better leave behind and go ahead by building new ones. This is why I think it’s really important to work in a more interdisciplinary collaboration, so that you can see what you can actually build from the technical perspective, so that you can see what these machines are actually capable of. Because you usually don’t know when you create them right?Machine learning is sort of exploratory by design. Ross Dawson: So, just to call it out more explicitly, what are the metaphors you think are the most destructive or most inappropriate, and what are some of the ones which you think are the most promising? Nina Begus: Well, I’m just writing on the Midas myth, which is sort of the opposite of the Pygmalion myth. With Pygmalion, you lean into that human imitation, but with Midas, you lean into the liminality that Midas presents as this sort of hybrid creature. I think leaning into the boundaries that we draw for ourselves—and now AI is not cooperating with them—this is where the productive part will be in actually creating something that has philosophical dignity, but also a kind of productive trajectory for the machines to go. I feel like we’re still in this first phase of developing AI, because when you look at it historically, we haven’t really moved from the conceptual and philosophical premises that were established in the 1940s, 50s, and 60s for this technology. We have now gotten the technology that caught up to the ideas from the 60s, but we’re still stuck in the same conceptual space. Ross Dawson: Yeah, very much so. And, you know, of course, what is AGI, which everyone talks about, is basically—the only way in which people seem to be able to frame it is as relative to humans, which is the only reference point we have. I mean, there’s, of course, animal intelligence, but that’s because of that. It is, again, that lack of imagination—saying, “Well, intelligence, oh, intelligence is what humans do, so let’s do something which is the same as that,” whereas there’s so much white space in what intelligence could be. I think this almost comes back to definition. When people say intelligence, the word, when they use the word intelligence, they are referring to what humans do. It’s not a general term, and so it all becomes a language problem as well, because we are so rooted to relating our language to human capabilities, as opposed to a more general potential. Nina Begus: Yes, I think you’re really on to something here, because I can see it also—because I work with animal communication researchers, and we’re finding things there that we didn’t find because we limited ourselves to thinking language is just a human production, that it needs a human subject. Now, as soon as we got rid of this presumption, we’re finding new things, things that are basically parallel to what we do in our language. So language is in a space of tension because it’s being attacked both from the animal side and from the machinic side, which is why I really focused on language in this book. It’s not a coincidence that we centered artificial intelligence in language as the interface, because this is how we relate to the world—this is our interface to talk to each other, to understand each other. I think the fact that language is coming under such pressure as an interface brings with it a lot of other concepts that are being challenged. Are only humans creative? Is there a natural creativity, machinic creativity? Is there a different kind of intelligence that’s maybe solely biological, embodied? How do we think about cognition? How do we think about culture? In AI and in the natural world, there’s so much that comes with it: agency, autonomy, freedom, community, which I think we will be grappling with for the next few decades, at least. Ross Dawson: I think you alluded before to the potential for AI to have its own languages.  Nina Begus: I’ts happening already. The reason why I like Stanislaw Lem so much is because he can actually think about a machine—back in the 1970s, he’s doing that—about a machine that’s not human-like, that’s not limited to human language. It is trained on human language, but then it goes its own way, where the human linguistic ceiling just cannot go anymore. We’re already seeing that in the models, in Berkeley’s Biological Artificial Intelligence Lab, in the models that are not large language models, but generative adversarial networks that are based on speech. We see that as they are learning the words, they are encoding some information into silences that we don’t know what it is. I think what’s really exciting to me are two things about language in machines. The first one is, what is this non-human production of language? We did not think that non-humans can produce language, even though we had parrots who had to crawl their way to us to speak in “humanese,” to show that they have some kind of intelligence—even if it’s just parroting, even if it’s just what we call imitation, which some people consider not to be intelligence. We’ve had these examples before, but now it’s gotten nuclear—on this scale that LLMs are performing, it’s really challenged a lot of our solely human attributes: creativity, storytelling. A lot of journalists come to me because there’s this existential fear of machines taking over their work and so on. So we’ve been thinking about those things, and now it’s actually happening. Ross Dawson: One of the other key points here, I think, is that humanity is—the arts—there’s so much, as you mentioned, in terms of fiction, in terms of films, in terms of visual arts, and many other artistic domains. We have reference points that we use, and the amount which people refer to the movie Her in the last years is pretty extraordinary, partly because it’s obviously coming very much true. I think the Ex Machina story is very interesting as well, as are many others in the past. But there is also this act of imagination. There are people who have written these books, who have crafted these films, who have created these things, and they are the ones who have been not just manifesting our human psyche, but also pushing that out and coming up with ideas which others haven’t had, to give us something. So one thing we can certainly do is mine and dig into what has been created. But is there a way to interface through this to this act of imagining, which can give us new artifacts and ways of thinking and ways of relating? Nina Begus: Yes, I think imagination and humanities in general are going to become more and more important, because AI will do a lot of technical work, but imaginaries—this is what we really excel at. It’s actually interesting to see how you think fiction is this unbounded landscape where you can imagine anything, and yet it’s really hard to find examples of machines that are beyond the human. Even these writers, like the screenwriters for Her and Ex Machina, create these completely Pygmalion-esque films, where you have an artificial woman leading a relationship with a human man, and so on. For the whole film, you have her act as a human-like entity. But then at the end of each of those films—well, particularly in Her—Spike Jonze really tried to break out of this and show her AI side. Basically, there was no language to describe it, so he resorted to a metaphor—the metaphor of a book, where Samantha, the operations assistant, explains that her world is falling apart, like the way words are floating further and further apart in a book. That’s how she’s able to describe it; that’s the closest she gets. And then in Ex Machina, Alex Garland really wanted to portray the world from the social robot Ava’s perspective in a visual way. He wrote down a scene, but he said, “I failed to execute it visually. I just couldn’t do it well.” So instead, he gave us a different scene that’s shot from afar, where Ava embarks onto a helicopter and she has to undergo her Turing test—the helicopter pilot cannot recognize her as a robot; he needs to think she’s a human woman. There have been attempts, I think even in Garland’s next film Annihilation, they’re trying to set the grounds for something that’s entirely new and hard to imagine. I think a big takeaway for us is this is very hard to do. Ross Dawson: Yes, well, given that context, I do want to—as in the human plus AI framing—given all of this, what is it that we can do or should be doing in order to amplify our humanity, our capabilities, the positive aspects of what it is to be human? How can we relate to or use AI in order to amplify the best of us? Nina Begus: Yeah, I actually had, while I was writing the book Artificial Humanities, this other dream project to work with writers—professional writers, creatives, people who live in a world of words—to see what they make of AI. I waited a little bit for the public’s polarized reactions to calm down a bit and gathered 16 writers, some of whom already made a space for themselves in the field, like Sheila Heti and Ken Liu and Ted Chiang, and then some of the more junior writers who I knew were thinking about that—a Netflix screenwriter, and so on. I gathered them to see—I think the creative people are really the answer here—I gathered them to see how they approach this very human part of the new human and AI collaboration zone. What was common across a lot of essays that are coming out in October under the title “First Encounters with AI” is this argument that, well, AI doesn’t have subjectivity, it doesn’t have emotions, it doesn’t have a body, it doesn’t have experience, it doesn’t have meaning—all of these things that really make us human, all of these parts that actually make art compelling and literature compelling. So Ken Liu’s argument, for example, was, let’s leave machines what they’re good at—they’re good at imitating and copying—and we’re good at interpreting, we’re good at creating and imagining. I think this is really a way to go with this. This catastrophizing that’s very present in the public discourse, I think, is a bit misleading. I wish we had a more nuanced approach to what’s actually happening, particularly in the space of writing. Obviously, AI is a groundbreaking technology that affects pretty much every one of us and all the sectors, but when it comes to writing, we just don’t think it’s killable. We think that there’s this perennial impulse that humans have to play with language, and that is not going to go away with AI. We’re just going to amplify it through AI, through this new possibility that has now opened in many ways. I like to think about AI as—you know, we’ve figured out how to fly. As soon as we figured out the physics of flight, we had planes and helicopters and drones and kites, and these are the new possibilities for human activities. In the same way, we figured out the machine learning principles, and now we have large language models and diffusion models, and we have GANs and so on, and there will be more. These are the new spaces of possibility that have opened for our activities, for our spirit to work on, but they do not replace the human in a meaningful way. It’s more about extension than it is about automation. Ross Dawson: Yeah, that’s a wonderful way of framing it. So where can people go to find out more about your work? Nina Begus: I have a pretty populated website with my name, ninabegus.com, where I write about my books, I write about my public work. I have videos on there, podcasts, links, and so on. I also have a pretty lively lab with a lot of collaborators and students, where a lot of what I imagined when writing Artificial Humanities—where a lot of collaborative projects happen. We have artists, we have engineers, we have philosophers that work on the same question, but come at it from very different backgrounds and with very different skills. I think this is becoming more and more important in the world of AI. Ross Dawson: Yes, yes, bringing all of those disciplines and frames and thinking together. That’s wonderful. I love what you’re doing—very important. I hope the messages ripple through, and obviously wonderful to be able to share this with the Humans Plus AI audience. Thank you so much. Nina Begus: Thank you, Ross, and thank you all for listening. The post Nina Begus on artificial humanities, AI archetypes, limiting and productive metaphors, and human extension (AC Ep38) appeared first on Humans + AI.

Felicia is joined by Josh Cooley to discuss why it's important to consider melodrama in a positive light through Douglas Sirk's Magnificent Obsession (1954). We chat about why Sirk was considered a ‘woman's picture' director, and why that work lead to some of the most beautiful imagery put on screen. This is the first installment in the Sirk series and an important one to listen to as we give a lot of background into his life in Germany, and how he ended up in Hollywood. Send us your thoughts on the episode by sending us a message on any of our social platforms or by email: seeingfacesinmovies@gmail.com Listen to our previous episode: Naked Lunch (David Cronenberg 1991) Sources: Sirk, D., & Halliday, J. (2018). Sirk on sirk: Conversations with Jon Halliday. Bloomsbury Publishing. https://calgarycinema.org/blog/2021/8/magnificent-obsession-1954-douglas-sirk https://inreviewonline.com/2024/08/19/magnificent-obsession/ https://scenebygreen.com/2022/04/20/magnificent-obsession-1954/ https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/1006-magnificent-obsessions https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/6549-sirk-in-the-sun https://criterionreflections.blogspot.com/2010/04/magnificent-obsession-1954-457.html https://www.sensesofcinema.com/2014/feature-articles/obsessions-imitations-subversions-on-magnificent-obsession-part-one/ https://thatshelf.com/guy-maddin-talks-magnificent-obsession-at-tiff/ Outro Song: Theme from Magnificent Obsession by Frank Skinner Films Mentioned: Naked Lunch (David Cronenberg 1991) Written on the Wind (Douglas Sirk 1956) Imitation of Life (Douglas Sirk 1959) All That  Heaven Allows (Douglas Sirk 1955) The Tarnished Angels (Douglas Sirk 1957) Far From Heaven (Todd Haynes 2002) Magnificent Obsession (John M. Stahl 1935) Dead Ringers (David Cronenberg 1988) Her (Spike Jonze 2013) The Wizard of Oz (Victor Fleming 1939) Lola Montès (Max Ophüls 1955) Meet Joe Black (Martin Brest 1998) Taza, Son of Cochise (Douglas Sirk 1954) Giant (George Stevens 1956) Sign of the Pagan (Douglas Sirk 1954) The Client (Joel Schumacher 1994) Flatliners (Joel Schumacher 1990) A Time to Kill (Joel Schumacher 1996) Falling Down (Joel Schumacher 1993) St. Elmo's Fire (Joel Schumacher 1985) The Incredible Shrinking Woman (Joel Schumacher 1981) Ocean's Eleven (Steven Soderbergh 2001) Amélie (Jean-Pierre Jeunet 2001) Pay It Forward (Mimi Leder 2000) Pollyanna (David Swift 1960) Citizen Kane (Orson Welles 1941) Peter Ibbetson (Henry Hathaway 1935) Eyes Wide Shut (Stanley Kubrick 1999)

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/systems-and-cybernetics

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

El debate alrededor de la inteligencia artificial se instala en las escuelas de diseño, animación y fotografía de París. De la productividad a la sensibilidad artística, la comunidad educativa busca respuestas y garantías en cuanto a las salidas profesionales. ChatGPT, Midjourney y Firefly son solo algunos de los muchos nombres comerciales de la inteligencia artificial generativa (IAG), una tecnología que se nutre de datos, textos e imágenes para entrenar sus algoritmos y, a su vez, producir nuevos contenidos escritos y audiovisuales. Aunque el origen de la IA generativa se remonta a varias décadas atrás, el desarrollo exponencial durante los últimos años explica el debate acerca de sus límites éticos, su impacto ecológico y la creciente preocupación por su falta de regulación. Y también sobre la banalización del arte y el trabajo creativo.“Es un insulto a la vía misma”, declaró Hayao Miyazaki, fundador del famoso estudio de animación Studio Ghibli, tras la ola de imágenes inspiradas en el estilo de sus películas creadas con inteligencia artificial. Una opinión compartida por un sector de los estudiantes que aspiran a trabajar en dicha industria.Foco en la propiedad intelectual“Es regurgitar un montón de imágenes hechas por artistas a los que no han pedido su consentimiento. No tiene sentido”, se queja Lianne, estudiante en cine de animación en la escuela de Gobelins París. "Es ilegal, no pagan por los derechos de autor, ¡es un robo!", añade su compañera Laura. Sin una delimitación clara, la cuestión de la autoría sigue siendo confusa.“Es algo cada vez más presente en nuestro día a día y creo que irá a más”, opina Louane, que también cursa cine de animación en Gobelins. Prefiere no pensar en la inteligencia artificial porque le produce cierto estrés, “pero es verdad que hay que tenerlo en cuenta”, admite. “Si hacemos una formación tan reconocida como ésta es para encontrar trabajo después. Si la IA nos lo quita, es estúpido hacerla”, concluye.El diseño gráfico, ¿en peligro?Difícil obviar la cuestión. Según el último Informe sobre el Futuro de los Empleos del Foro Económico Mundial, publicado en enero de 2025, la automatización que la IA trae consigo supondrá la destrucción de 92 millones de puestos de trabajo para 2030, mientras que creará otros 170 millones. Entre las profesiones con una rápida tendencia de declive, según este informe, está el diseño gráfico.“Una compañera de trabajo que no tenía estudios en este ámbito hizo un logo con ChatGPT y pensó que así ya podría ser grafista. Me lo dijo como si mi trabajo fuese un fraude", cuenta Axelle, estudiante de la escuela de diseño LISAA.Útil para ganar tiempoPero la IA no es perfecta. Como cualquier otra herramienta, para los que se sirven de ella como tal, es necesario utilizarla correctamente para obtener los resultados deseados. "Te hace ganar mucho tiempo, pero hay que saber hacer un prompt (la orden que se le da a la IA para que responda con un texto, imagen o vídeo, NDLR) y seleccionar las imágenes correctas. Siempre hará falta un director artístico que la supervise”, asegura Noémie, también de la escuela LISAA. “Tengo un bagaje suficiente como para poder encontrar un empleo. No puedes no usarla solo por tener miedo a que te quite el trabajo."Algunos la usan porque la ven como una herramienta, otros la rechazan por motivos éticos o ecológicos, pero el debate alrededor de la inteligencia artificial roza incluso lo filosófico. "Mientras no tengas demasiado apego a las herramientas y mantengas tu independencia y tus ideas, me parece bien", dice Tony, alumno de diseño gráfico y animación en la escuela ECV, aventurándose a hacer el paralelismo con la película “Her” (Spike Jonze, 2013), donde el personaje interpretado por Joaquín Phoenix se enamora de una inteligencia artificial.“En la escuela usamos la IA para generar storyboards que luego convertimos en secuencias de video.”. Para él, la utilidad está en la fase de preproducción de los proyectos, donde asegura que le permite avanzar mucho más rápido.Priorizar la creatividad y la sensibilidadEl grado de permisión e incorporación de la IAG en los programas educativos depende de cada escuela, de cada departamento y de cada docente. “Nosotros incorporamos la IA desde el primer año de la formación. Los alumnos aprenden técnicas de fotografía analógica y digital, pero también el tratamiento de sus fotos con inteligencia artificial”, explica Yann Philippe, enseñante de fotografía y vídeo en Gobelins."No sentimos que nuestro trabajo esté directamente amenazado por la IA y creemos que, con un buen uso e inteligencia, puede potenciar la creatividad de algunos alumnos”. Son sorprendentemente los que ingresan con amplios conocimientos de IA generativa los menos interesados en trabajar con ella y más con el formato analógico y los procesos tradicionales, a diferencia de quienes no la han utilizado aún. “De todas formas, las herramientas avanzan a tal velocidad que cuando terminamos de preparar los cursos, ya están obsoletas."“Hice el curso de Midjourney de Gobelins, pero me interesa más la autenticidad”, confiesa Axel, alumno de fotografía, con su cámara Leica analógica colgada del hombro. “Con IA o sin IA, lo importante es la motivación y la sensibilidad que cada artista pone en sus proyectos.” Este precisamente lo que Yann Philippe busca desarrollar porque considera que “es ahí donde está su valor añadido”.La inteligencia artificial generativa avanza más rápido que el ritmo al que se da respuesta a las dudas y preguntas que ésta plantea, y se exige un marco normativo a la altura de los retos que conlleva. La Ley de Inteligencia Artificial de la Unión Europea, en vigor desde el 1 de agosto de 2024, es un primer paso, pero no parece suficiente. En el ámbito educativo, la UNESCO ha realizado una llamada urgente a los gobiernos de todo el mundo para que la regulen de manera eficaz.

Grabado con público en la Antiga Fàbrica Estrella Damm, el nuevo episodio de Marea Nocturna parte del éxito de Pobres criaturas y, especialmente, del indiscutible atractivo de su protagonista, Bella Baxter, para trazar un recorrido por otras mujeres fantásticas de la historia del cine. La novia de Frankenstein (James Whale, 1935), Blade Runner (Ridley Scott, 1982), La mujer explosiva (John Hughes, 1985), Ghost in the Shell (Mamuro Oshii, 1995), Her (Spike Jonze, 2013), Alien: Resurrección (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 1997) o Ex Machina (Alex Garland, 2014) son algunas de las (muy variadas) películas comentadas a lo largo del capítulo. El episodio, en el que no falta una conversación sobre la película de Yorgos Lanthimos, se cierra con una divertida sesión de preguntas de los oyentes, tanto de los que vinieron al directo como de los que enviaron sus preguntas por redes.

El podcast de Cinoscar & Rarities estrena nueva sección: Sesión doble. Abrimos el espacio con un análisis de "LOST IN TRANSLATION" (Sofia Coppola, 2003) y "HER" (Spike Jonze, 2013). Con Xavier Vida y Mayra Meza. ¡Gracias por darle al play! Redes sociales: @CinoscaRarities Blog: https://cachecine.blogspot.com.es/ Correo: cinoscararities@gmail.com Escúchanos en Spotify, Ivoox y Apple Podcast ¡Buscamos colaboradores! ¡Contacta con nosotros!

Connecting… to Her (Spike Jonze, 2013). Hosted by Charles Phillips. Co-Hosted by Justin Morgan with Guest Alex Covill of the 3Deemers: A Remake Podcast. Mixing and QA by Scratchin' Menace with Music by Daniel Birch and Ben Pegley. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter for the latest updates. Available on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, and a dozen other popular platforms. Please subscribe, rate and review us. Every little bit helps, and more importantly, thank you for listening!

Il futuro, inquietante, visionario, miserabile, consolatorio... raccontato attraverso 20 film dai vostri affezionatissimi Houssy e Carfa.Elenco dei film citati:L’uomo venuto dall’impossibile (Nicholas Meyer, 1979)L’uomo che visse nel futuro (George Pal, 1960)Atto di forza (Paul Verhoeven, 1990)Brainstorm (Douglas Trumbull, 1984)Nirvana (Gabriele Salvatores, 1997)The road (John Hillcoat, 2009)Snowpiercer (Bong Joon-Ho, 2013)Equilibrium (Kurt Wimmer, 2002)Blade Runner (Ridley Scott, 1982)Robocop (Paul Verhoeven, 1987)Metropolis (Fritz Lang, 1927)Elysium (Neill Blomkamp, 2013)Upgrade (Leigh Whannell, 2018)Strange days (Katherine Bigelow, 1995)In time (Andrew Niccol, 2011)Il dormiglione (Woody Allen, 1973)Wall-e (Andrew Stanton, 2008)Her (Spike Jonze, 2013)Ready player one (Steven Spielberg, 2018)Gattaca (Andrew Niccol, 1997)

En mars 2018, timides mais passionnées nous avons enregistré notre premier épisode. Centré sur les personnages féminins dans la filmographie de Steven Spielberg, il était et est le premier d'une longue liste, celle qui semble ne jamais s'arrêter. Si le format podcast restera toujours, car c'est l'essence même de ce projet, nous travaillons depuis six mois sur un format papier. Amoureuses de l'écrit, passionnées par la critique cinéma et témoins d'un manque crucial dans les écrits traditionnels, nous nous lançons avec passion dans la création de cette revue papier qui, nous l'espérons trouvera un écho. Dans cette série documentaire uniquement consacrée à la création de cette revue nous souhaitons partager avec vous le processus de création mais aussi dévoiler quelques unes de nos histoires personnelles avec le cinéma. Participantes : Pauline - @paulinemallet_ / Amandine @MotherOfSighs_ / Laura @CookieTime_LE / Manon @MnFrankenstein Création, animation, réalisation, montage et mixage son : Pauline Mallet Générique : Audrey Goldberg Musique de fin d'épisode : Run the world - Beyoncé (2011) Time code  Intro (00:00 ; 4:52) - Capsule réunion (4:53 ; 10:03 ) - Dvdthèque présentée par Amandine ( 10:04 ; 33:27 ) - Conclusion Références mentionnées par Amandine dans sa dvdthèque (dans l'ordre annoncé) Films  Mulan - Tony Bancroft et Barry Cook (1998) Princesse Mononoké - Hayao Miyazaki (2000) Kiki la petite sorcière - Hayao Miyazaki (1989) Mommy - Xavier Dolan (2014) Les amours imaginaire - Xavier Dolan (2010) Under the skin - Jonathan Glazer (2013) Her - Spike Jonze (2013) Halloween - John Carpenter (1978) Massacre à la tronçonneuse - Tobe Hooper (1974) Scream - Wes Craven (1996) The Witch - Robert Eggers (2016) Scorpio Rising - Kenneth Anger (1964) Un couteau dans le coeur - Yann Gonzalez (2018) Portrait de la jeune fille en feu - Céline Sciamma (2019) Grave - Julia Ducournau (2016) Carol - Todd Haynes (2015) Les Funérailles des roses - Toshio Matsumoto (1969) Titanic - James Cameron (1997) Épisodes du podcast Le slasher et la final girl  → https://podcast.ausha.co/sorocine/episode-31-le-slasher-et-la-fin Les Studios Ghibli - partie 1 → https://podcast.ausha.co/sorocine/episode-27-les-studios-ghibli-partie-1 Les Studios Ghibli - partie 2  → https://podcast.ausha.co/sorocine/episode-27-les-studios-ghibli-partie-2 Interviews  Interview de Yann Gonzalez réalisée par Amandine sur Le Bleu du Miroir  → http://www.lebleudumiroir.fr/yann-gonzalez-interview/

Capítulo 218 - De la soledad en la multitud Conducción: Diego Cirulo. En esta oportunidad nos encontramos con tres películas que proponen historias de personajes que deben, en su soledad, moverse entre las multitudes e intentar afrontar su situación. Es así como visitamos "Her" (Spike Jonze, 2013), "Lazzaro felice" (Alice Rohrwacher, 2018) y "On the beach at night alone" (Hong Sang-soo, 2017). Acompañanos. Producción general: Diego Cirulo, Fabio Villalba. Locución: Daniela Jorquera Música: Bahía Blanca Webmaster: Andrés Cirulo

Capítulo 218 - De la soledad en la multitud Conducción: Diego Cirulo. En esta oportunidad nos encontramos con tres películas que proponen historias de personajes que deben, en su soledad, moverse entre las multitudes e intentar afrontar su situación. Es así como visitamos "Her" (Spike Jonze, 2013), "Lazzaro felice" (Alice Rohrwacher, 2018) y "On the beach at night alone" (Hong Sang-soo, 2017). Acompañanos. Producción general: Diego Cirulo, Fabio Villalba. Locución: Daniela Jorquera Música: Bahía Blanca Webmaster: Andrés Cirulo

20/09/2014Nueva ración de videojuegos, nueva ración de manga y nueva ración de cine; en otro episodio de "madafaka-ficción dura". SUMARIOCOMENTARIOS (hasta 49'50")MIERDAS ALEATORIAS SIN TON NI SON:Estos días se celebra el Tokyo Games Show, pero nosotros hablamos de la Gamescom 2014.CINE:Nacido para luchar (Panna Rittikrai, 2004)JUEGOS DE "LA QUINCENA":Olliolli [PS3, PS4, Vita, PC, Linux, Mac] (Roll7, 2014)MANGA:Los carruajes de Bradherley (Hiroaki Samura, 2005-2007 - Tomo único)Ghost in the Shell/Human-Error Processor/Man-Machine Interface (Masamune Shirow, 1989-1996)(MÁS) CINE:Her (Spike Jonze, 2013)Canciones que se pueden escuchar en alguna parte del episodio (y que forman el único contenido decente):"Society" de The Qemists (canción del tráiler de Olliolli)PD: Como dijimos que haríamos en el audio, aquí dejo el ID de XBOX One de Jaume: Jaumafaka.

Chay discusses watching a film with a dirty screen Films mentioned in order: Citizenfour (Laura Poitras, 2014) Her (Spike Jonze, 2013) The Great Beauty (Paolo Sorrentino, 2013) Napoleon (Abel Gance, 1927) 2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick, 1968)

In this very special Movie Date bonus podcast, listeners have a chance to re-listen to Rafer and Kristen's Oscar predictions from earlier in this year. Also, all three parts from The Takeaway series "Real People / Best Pictures" (produced by Kristen and hosted by John Hockenberry) are here, with some voices we don't normally hear on Oscar night (but maybe should). For more on the series "Real People / Best Pictures," visit the official site.    THE FULL LIST OF ACADEMY AWARD NOMINEES Best Picture "12 Years A Slave" "American Hustle" "Dallas Buyers Club" "Her" "Nebraska" "Captain Phillips" "The Wolf of Wall Street" "Gravity" "Philomena" Actor in a Leading Role Bruce Dern - "Nebraska" Chiwetel Ejiofor - "12 Years A Slave" Matthew McConaughey - "Dallas Buyers Club" Christian Bale - "American Hustle" Leonardo DiCaprio - "The Wolf of Wall Street" Actor in a Supporting Role Barkhad Abdi - "Captain Phillips" Michael Fassbender - "12 Years A Slave" Jared Leto - "Dallas Buyers Club" Bradley Cooper - "American Hustle" Jonah Hill - "The Wolf of Wall Street" Actress in a Leading Role Cate Blanchett - "Blue Jasmine" Sandra Bullock - "Gravity" Judi Dench - "Philomena" Meryl Streep - "August: Osage County" Amy Adams - "American Hustle" Actress in a Supporting Role Sally Hawkins - "Blue Jasmine" Jennifer Lawrence - "American Hustle" Lupita Nyong'o - "12 Years A Slave" Julia Roberts - "August: Osage County" June Squibb - "Nebraska" Animated Feature Film "The Croods" "Despicable Me 2" "Frozen" "The Wind Rises" "Ernest & Celestine" Cinematography "The Grandmaster" "Gravity" "Inside Llewyn Davis" "Nebraska" "Prisoners" Costume Design "American Hustle" "The Grandmaster" "The Great Gatsby" "The Invisible Woman" "12 Years a Slave" Directing Alfonso Cuaron - "Gravity" Steve McQueen - "12 Years A Slave" Alexander Payne - "Nebraska" David O. Russell - "American Hustle" Martin Scorsese - "The Wolf of Wall Street" Documentary (Feature) "The Act of Killing" "20 Feet from Stardom" "Cutie and the Boxer" "Dirty Wars" "The Square" Documentary (Short Subject) "CaveDigger" "Facing Fear" "Karama Has No Walls" "The Lady in Number 6: Music Saved My Life" "Prison Terminal: The Last Days of Private Jack Hall" Film Editing "American Hustle" "Captain Phillips" "Dallas Buyers Club" "Gravity" "12 Years a Slave" Foreign Language Film "The Broken Circle Breakdown" - Belgium "The Great Beauty" - Italy "The Hunt" - Denmark "The Missing Picture" - Cambodia "Omar" - Palestine Makeup and hairstyling "Dallas Buyers Club" "Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa" "The Lone Ranger" Music (Original Score) "The Book Thief" - John Williams "Gravity" Steven Price "Her" - William Butler and Owen Pallett "Philomena" - Alexandre Desplat "Saving Mr. Banks" - Thomas Newman Music (Original Song) "Let it Go" - "Frozen" - Kristen Anderson-Lopez and Robert Lopez "Ordinary Love" - "Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom" - U2, lyrics by Paul Hewson, aka Bono "Happy" - "Despicable Me 2" - Pharrell Williams "Alone Yet Not Alone" - "Alone Yet Not Alone" - music by Bruce Broughton, lyrics by Dennis Spiegel "The Moon Song" - "Her" - music by Karen O, lyrics by Karen O and Spike Jonze Production design "American Hustle" "Gravity" "The Great Gatsby" "Her" "12 Years a Slave" Short Film (Animated) "Feral" "Get a Horse!" "Mr. Hublot" "Possessions" "Room on the Broom" Short Film (Live Action) "Aquel No Era Yo (That Wasn't Me)" "Avant Que De Tout Perdre (Just before Losing Everything)" "Helium" "Pitaako Mun Kaikki Hoitaa? (Do I Have to Take Care of Everything?)" "The Voorman Problem" Sound Editing: "All Is Lost" "Captain Phillips" "Gravity" "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" "Lone Survivor" Sound Mixing: "Captain Phillips" "Gravity" "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" "Inside Llewyn Davis" "Lone Survivor" Visual Effects "Gravity" "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" "Iron Man 3" "The Lone Ranger" "Star Trek Into Darkness" Writing (Adapted Screenplay) "Before Midnight" - Richard Linklater, Julie Delpy and Ethan Hawke "Captain Phillips" - Billy Ray "Philomena" - Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope "12 Years A Slave" - John Ridley "The Wolf of Wall Street" - Terence Winter  Writing (Original Screenplay) "American Hustle" - Eric Warren Singer and David O. Russell "Blue Jasmine" - Woody Allen "Her" - Spike Jonze "Nebraska" - Bob Nelson "Dallas Buyers Club" - Craig Borten and Melisa Wallack

¡Bienvenidos al decimoséptimo programa de nuestra tercera temporada (o el 96 contando todos)! Hola amiguitos.  Esta semana, como siempre, empezamos con la "Semana en Serie", donde hablaremos del piloto de Amazon, Transparent [Amazon]. Después nos vamos a la "Cata de pelis" donde esta semana seguimos con las películas nominadas a mejor película en los Oscar. Esta semana, tenemos 2 de las 3 películas no basadas o inspiradas en hechos reales (la otra es Gravity, de la que ya hablamos), que son Her [Spike Jonze, 2013] y Nebraska [Alexander Payne, 2013]. La semana que viene, para terminar, 12 Years A Slave y Philomena. Si queréis saber qué películas y documentales vamos viendo, podéis verlo en nuestro perfil de Letterboxd. Luego nos vamos "A la Cocina" donde os contamos una receta que no nos ha salido del todo bien, así que podemos aconsejaros cuál es la mejor forma de hacerla. Se trata de un plato de tofu con sésamo, miel y sriracha. Desde luego, original es y puede que no hayáis comido nada igual. Para acabar, vamos a la "Sobremesa", donde comentamos nuestra vida, nuestro trabajo, cantamos, vuestros mensajes de Twitter, Facebook y iVoox... Muchísimas gracias a todos por vuestro apoyo y vuestros mensajes de ánimo. Seguid así, preguntando, comentando, reseñando en iTunes y todo lo que queráis. Si queréis comentar libremente detalles de las tramas de las series de las que hablamos, podéis hacerlo escribiendo entre las etiquetas de spoiler el texto que queráis ocultar, tal como muestra la imagen: Por si os da pereza escuchar todo el podcast (o tenéis que saltaros cosas por los spoilers), aquí os dejamos los tiempos para que vayáis directamente a lo que más os interese, esperamos que os guste mucho y que, si no os gusta, nos digáis por qué, para que podamos mejorar: 0:00'00 PRESENTACIÓN 0:01'54 SEMANA EN SERIE: 0:02'22 - Transparent (Piloto, Amazon). 0:12'00 CATA DE PELIS: 0:12'24 - Her (Spike Jonze, 2013). 0:24'24 - Nebraska (Alexander Payne, 2013). 0:36'43 A LA COCINA: 0:37'09 - Receta: Tofu con sésamo, miel, sriracha y lima. 0:42'27 PROMO: Asespod. 0:43'33 LA SOBREMESA 1:05'59 DISCLAIMER La música que se puede escuchar durante el podcast la hemos sacado de Jamendo y los temas son, por orden de aparición: Mai en l'oblit (Clepton/Seguint el joc), FunkyYeahYeah (Rod/You Are The One), Alien Rampage (Marc Teichert/The Founder), Comedy & Drama Demo (Cesc Vilà/Drama & Comedy Demo), Not in service (Freeze/Freeze - Volume 2), VoxyClavi (Rod/Yoy Are The One) y À la légère (Chriss Onac/Resonance). También nos podéis escuchar en iVoox y en iTunes.

In this week's Movie Date podcast, Rafer and Kristen recount their encounters with wildlife in the city and ponder the ways that dance-offs are better than shoot-outs. It's all in honor of the animated feature, "The Nut Job," the buddy cop comedy, "Ride Along," and the spy thriller, "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit." Rafer and Kristen also weigh in on the Oscar nominations, which were announced this Thursday. And there's a big trivia-related mea culpa as well!   THE FULL LIST OF ACADEMY AWARD NOMINEES Best Picture "12 Years A Slave" "American Hustle" "Dallas Buyers Club" "Her" "Nebraska" "Captain Phillips" "The Wolf of Wall Street" "Gravity" "Philomena" Actor in a Leading Role Bruce Dern - "Nebraska" Chiwetel Ejiofor - "12 Years A Slave" Matthew McConaughey - "Dallas Buyers Club" Christian Bale - "American Hustle" Leonardo DiCaprio - "The Wolf of Wall Street" Actor in a Supporting Role Barkhad Abdi - "Captain Phillips" Michael Fassbender - "12 Years A Slave" Jared Leto - "Dallas Buyers Club" Bradley Cooper - "American Hustle" Jonah Hill - "The Wolf of Wall Street" Actress in a Leading Role Cate Blanchett - "Blue Jasmine" Sandra Bullock - "Gravity" Judi Dench - "Philomena" Meryl Streep - "August: Osage County" Amy Adams - "American Hustle" Actress in a Supporting Role Sally Hawkins - "Blue Jasmine" Jennifer Lawrence - "American Hustle" Lupita Nyong'o - "12 Years A Slave" Julia Roberts - "August: Osage County" June Squibb - "Nebraska" Animated Feature Film "The Croods" "Despicable Me 2" "Frozen" "The Wind Rises" "Ernest & Celestine" Cinematography "The Grandmaster" "Gravity" "Inside Llewyn Davis" "Nebraska" "Prisoners" Costume Design "American Hustle" "The Grandmaster" "The Great Gatsby" "The Invisible Woman" "12 Years a Slave" Directing Alfonso Cuaron - "Gravity" Steve McQueen - "12 Years A Slave" Alexander Payne - "Nebraska" David O. Russell - "American Hustle" Martin Scorsese - "The Wolf of Wall Street" Documentary (Feature) "The Act of Killing" "20 Feet from Stardom" "Cutie and the Boxer" "Dirty Wars" "The Square" Documentary (Short Subject) "CaveDigger" "Facing Fear" "Karama Has No Walls" "The Lady in Number 6: Music Saved My Life" "Prison Terminal: The Last Days of Private Jack Hall" Film Editing "American Hustle" "Captain Phillips" "Dallas Buyers Club" "Gravity" "12 Years a Slave" Foreign Language Film "The Broken Circle Breakdown" - Belgium "The Great Beauty" - Italy "The Hunt" - Denmark "The Missing Picture" - Cambodia "Omar" - Palestine Makeup and hairstyling "Dallas Buyers Club" "Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa" "The Lone Ranger" Music (Original Score) "The Book Thief" - John Williams "Gravity" Steven Price "Her" - William Butler and Owen Pallett "Philomena" - Alexandre Desplat "Saving Mr. Banks" - Thomas Newman Music (Original Song) "Let it Go" - "Frozen" - Kristen Anderson-Lopez and Robert Lopez "Ordinary Love" - "Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom" - U2, lyrics by Paul Hewson, aka Bono "Happy" - "Despicable Me 2" - Pharrell Williams "Alone Yet Not Alone" - "Alone Yet Not Alone" - music by Bruce Broughton, lyrics by Dennis Spiegel "The Moon Song" - "Her" - music by Karen O, lyrics by Karen O and Spike Jonze Production design "American Hustle" "Gravity" "The Great Gatsby" "Her" "12 Years a Slave" Short Film (Animated) "Feral" "Get a Horse!" "Mr. Hublot" "Possessions" "Room on the Broom" Short Film (Live Action) "Aquel No Era Yo (That Wasn't Me)" "Avant Que De Tout Perdre (Just before Losing Everything)" "Helium" "Pitaako Mun Kaikki Hoitaa? (Do I Have to Take Care of Everything?)" "The Voorman Problem" Sound Editing: "All Is Lost" "Captain Phillips" "Gravity" "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" "Lone Survivor" Sound Mixing: "Captain Phillips" "Gravity" "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" "Inside Llewyn Davis" "Lone Survivor" Visual Effects "Gravity" "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" "Iron Man 3" "The Lone Ranger" "Star Trek Into Darkness" Writing (Adapted Screenplay) "Before Midnight" - Richard Linklater, Julie Delpy and Ethan Hawke "Captain Phillips" - Billy Ray "Philomena" - Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope "12 Years A Slave" - John Ridley "The Wolf of Wall Street" - Terence Winter  Writing (Original Screenplay) "American Hustle" - Eric Warren Singer and David O. Russell "Blue Jasmine" - Woody Allen "Her" - Spike Jonze "Nebraska" - Bob Nelson "Dallas Buyers Club" - Craig Borten and Melisa Wallack