Adam Sandler, Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson, etc are corney as fuck, but in a fun way. You can throw shit at the wall as long as you do it in an entertaining way.
Marketing Exec here. I specialise in generation segmentation. I wrote this recently for my employer:
Gen-Z
Are recession learned, young, with low disposable income and low income. They are in education, are career starters and living at home.
They are lonely, single, and spend 10 hours p/day online (hyper online consumption / always logged in) with the least attention to ads. They are engaged in people-discussing-products-and-services, prefer information over ads, and use ad blockers.
Otherwise known as ‘digital natives’, Gen-Z are highly socially consciousness (body image, cyberbullying, mental health) and highly environmentally conscious. They have a strong focus on saving and responsible spending and are quite frugal. They are study and career minded and prefer money over perks and benefits in employment. They dislike having their time wasted. They have a low attention span.
Millennials
Have long-term debt (mortgage/car/student loan) and have young children. They are not at full purchasing power, are the most adaptable generation ever to pre-and post-technology, are delayed in marriage, delayed in independence, and came of age through globalisation and economic rollercoasters.
They prefer texting/messaging, are high use smartphone users, and sleep with their phone. They are the most active and health conscious generation, environmentally conscious, and the highest consumers of web content. Learning is more compelling than buying to Millennials as they spend an average of 4 hours p/day online or with phone/apps. They prefer advisors, advice, and opinions over a corporate story. They prefer sharing economy (access not ownership). Prefer e-commerce as entertainment.
Millennials are impatient, have reduced brand loyalty, and are extremely tech savvy. They are researchers of ideas, thoughtful and seeking expertise, and love to collaborate and help companies or causes achieve. Online they use acronyms, slang, and respond to authentic but complex language. They prefer honesty and being empowered. They are price aware.
I’ve done them all. It’s my job. Here are the big ones but I could go all day on demographic, psychographic, and technographic segments.
Gen-X
Are nostalgic, middle-aged, family oriented, individual, busy/stressed, and time poor. They are consumers of media and marketing in the evenings and enjoy peace of mind. They apply high value to security and protection, are customer-service centred and insist on value. They are brand loyal.
Entering peak career/positions of power, Gen-X are financially stable. They are newly empty nesters with adult children. They are homeowners with high purchase power.
Gen-X thoroughly research products, rely on businesses as providers of information, and are the highest online information seekers with moderate use of smartphones (3 hours p/day). They prefer text and email and are high social media consumers.
Boomers
Are informed shoppers and prefer reliability of products. Boomers are independent, goal/solution oriented, are value and ROl orientated, careful buyers, and confident. They are less tech savvy (slow adopters of change), and don’t like or understand online trends and language. They prefer helpful and valuable content, no slang, and have a high focus on luxury. They have an attitude of 'the customer is always right’, and have a high use in their children as tech advisors. They are very brand loyal.
Boomers have a high disposable income, work hard and have an excellent work ethic. Now retired or entering retirement, they have grandchildren, are homeowners/investors with very high purchase power. Boomers are the wealthiest generation, set to bequeath $224B in the next two decades.
With a strong focus on health, Boomers spend to be comfortable, are big spenders, and prefer traditional relationships with business and necessary contact. They are high Facebook users, prefer clear and concise language, and spend 5 hours p/day on smartphones. Boomers are print and broadcast media consumers. They are traditional.
Silent Gen
Silent Gen are extremely loyal and expect loyalty in return. They are disciplined, family/community centred, prefer conformity, give and expect respect, are traditional, resilient, determined, very health conscious, and time rich.
Now Grandparents / Great Grandparents, they are retired, downsizing, and social. Silent Gen have an easy-life preference, seek value, are very frugal, and are budgeters. They are almost exclusively analogue and highly self-sacrificial.
[Gen Z] have a strong focus on saving and responsible spending and are quite frugal.
I feel like the general stereotype is the opposite, that they’re big spenders without much regard for saving (or at least they’re spending what they can given their broke-youngster financial situation). I’m curious why you say the opposite is true?
I don’t personally know many people who are Gen Z (I’m a Millennial, and most people I know are Millennials, Xers, or Boomers). So most of what I “know” of Zoomers comes from things I’ve read, either social media conversations like this one or news articles/thought pieces. The impression I’ve gleaned from those is that Zoomers are not frugal: they’re Apple customers, chronic online shoppers (often for products like fast fashion that are individually cheap but quickly add up), and are spending big on experiences like travel and concerts. For example, another comment in the thread asserts that “[Zoomers] needlessly spend more money than their older generation counterparts [on technology because they replace rather than repair].”
Now I take these types of demographic assumptions with a grain of salt, especially having witnessed all the nonsense articles and conclusions made about my generation. However there is some logic behind the explanations I’ve heard for why Zoomers are spenders rather than savers. Such as, perhaps Zoomers are more focused on living (and spending) in the moment given their experience being deprived during their formative years that happened to fall during covid lockdowns. Perhaps Zoomers spend more frivolously because why bother save for a bleak future (“go ahead and splurge a little: it’s not like you’ll ever afford a house either way!” or “In the 21st century you can do everything ‘right’ and still easily end up failing, so why bother following the ‘right’ path?”) Perhaps it’s because we’ve created a world (at least in the US) where people are lonelier than ever and everything costs money: you can’t even hang out at the mall for free anymore because the mall was torn down last year, so you either spend money at another “3rd space” like a coffee shop, or you try to fill an emotional hole by purchasing things to make being stuck at home all the time more bearable (especially if you’re still living with your parents because you can’t afford to move out). Perhaps it’s because there’s more addictive stuff to spend money on that’s targeted at youth, like online streamers and pay-to-play games. Again I don’t know if any of this is true, but IMO it at least passes the sniff test.
However your comment asserts the opposite of what I’ve heard, so I was curious where you got your info from, especially since it’s presumably based in some kind of research if it was part of a work report. Did you survey Zoomers asking about their spending habits? Did you analyze credit card data? Etc.
This is a tear-off summary of a much bigger report created from multiple peer reviewed sources over months. I think from memory, the Gen-Z content had the fewest peer reviewed sources attached to it as a) there hasn’t been as much study done on Gen-Z because if they’re age (half aren’t even adults yet), and b) most of the studies done are based on change culture and online habits.
Gen-Z as wasteful spenders is an age biased assumption. Research suggests that their learned experiences through GFC, COVID, geo-political inability, environment, and a post-COVID economy has hardened their resolve, much like WW1, the Great Depression, and WW2 did for their grandparents.
I mean shit could change. They’re only 26 at the oldest so their data is evolving.
For pots and pans, buy Demeyere. The Demeyere Apollo pots and pans I bought 21 years ago still look just about as good as the day I unboxed them, and I am rough on my cookware. I have a little weathering along the edge of the heart conductive disk on the bottom of some pans, but that is it.
They sit dirty too long and get crusty. They go right into my dishwasher. They fall out of my lower cabinet onto my tile floor all the time. None of this phases them. I bought them over two decades ago because I had an employee discount at a cookware store and the company rep classified them as, “dishwasher recommended.” As an avid home cook and occasional caterer, these pans, a Le Creuset Dutch oven, and my grandmothers’ cast iron are my daily workhorses.
You are going to pay through the nose for Demeyere pans, but they will last long enough for your kids to cook with them after you are gone. You can get their least expensive line of regular pans, cry once, and be good for life.
You might see used Demeyere indoor smokers, asparagus steamers, egg poachers, and other similarly oddball pans in online market places. Ignore those. They were a cheap line made in a different factory at one point. They are not the same quality. All of the regular style Demeyere pans (skillets, sauce pans, woks, sauciers, etc.) are excellent, and I would not hesitate to buy them used.
The MOST important tool that everybody doesn’t know or forgets about in wood working is wax/oil/paste wax. This is because you use this to lubricate the faces of your tools, what slides and presses against the wood. Just by applying this to the sole of your plane makes it 2x easier to push and is a game changer.
You can add this to your saws as well and they will glide through their cuts with ease. You can put it on a shooting board too, anything that your tools rub up against.
Another good one is saw setting pliers. These exist to easily adjust the “set” of a saw. The saw’s teeth taper out slightly to make the width of the cut wider than the saw plate, to prevent binding in the cut.
Cheaply made saws often have a poorly made set, often far too thick which makes a very wide cut (the saw is now more likely to wander off cut) and slows you down significantly. If the set is 30% wider than it needs to be, the saw is now by extension 30% slower (you are removing more material than necessary).
Now to the point (no pun intended). The biggest difference in performance from a cheap saw and expensive saw IS the set, and with these pliers and a triangular file you can make every cheap crappy saw cut like a dream and just as well as any expensive saw. Only thing other than that is the handle, which you can carve down yourself as most are too large.
The Dark Knight has fucking terrible editing and a lot of bad, hammy acting. The opening bank heist is just bad, with really on-the-nose dialogue delivered pretty badly…even William Fichtner seems like he’s trying a little too hard, and he’s an otherwise good actor.
I know the editing has been covered in some YouTube essay that made the rounds a number of years ago so maybe that’s not such an unpopular opinion, but it really sticks out to me like a sore thumb.
Before anyone gets totally mad at me, I still enjoy the overall story, a lot of the action, and I think both Ledger and Bale (dumb batman voice aside) are great. Also, Morgan Freeman, Michal Caine and whatshisname who plays Harvey Dent are also very good too.
I actually fell asleep watching The Dark Knight in a movie theatre. They fucked up the pacing.
Another instance of this is the second Spider Man (the one with Doc Ock). It was so sluggish that I forgot there was a villain halfway through the movie. Then it cut to Ock doing something and I was like “Oh yeah, that guy still exists”.
Another unpopular opinion I have is that spider-man 2 is pretty good, but not on the level people seem to put it on. The train fight is good, the overall plot is decent, Alfred Molina is a good choice as Doc Ok, but the whole split personality thing came across to me as kind of cheesy. At least Willem Dafoe’s scenery chewing in the first movie was highly entertaining.
Gonna make sure my faucets have a slight drip and the outdoor ones are covered.
Other than that, we’ve got a kerosene heater and a jackery battery that’s been charging for a few days now. We’ll use that for charging phones/plugging in our wifi if the electricity goes out again!
Christopher Nolan hasn't made a truly good movie since The Prestige. Everything since then has been too long, too convoluted, and/or too loud (or in the case of Oppenheimer, not loud enough).
I could hate on the Dark Knight all day. The month it came out, my brother put it best, “It’s two movies. A good, short, Joker movie and a bad, long, Batman movie.”
When you watch this film and only the Joker scenes, its 10x better.
While I haven’t watched enough of his movies to have a overall opinion of them. As the only movie of a certan trilogy that I found good came out before The Prestige and the second which I VERY unpopulary don’t like came out after. I can somewhat agree with you.
Really? I found it to be extremely mid. It took at least an hour for the film to not feel like a trailer montage and find proper pacing. The writing didn’t feel organic at all, and felt like actors reading historical quotes from a page at each other. Also, when Florence Pugh’s character started riding Oppenheimer’s dick while he said his famous Bhagavad Gita line, I burst out laughing in the theater and had a really hard time taking the rest of the movie seriously.
I think this movie will be forgotten in 3 years, if not sooner.
asklemmy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.