Art by Northwest (AxNW)
bogleech:

thebeldamsbuttons:

damianimated:

LETS PLAY A GAME. It’s called: Who directed it TIM BURTON or HENRY SELICK
We’ll start with the 2009 Laika film Coraline based on the novel by Neil Gaiman. Do you know who directed it? Burton or Selick?

Did you guess yet?

If you guessed Henry Selick, you would be correct. Tim Burton actually had absolutely nothing to do with Coraline at all in anyway ever. Reminder: Tim Burton has NOTHING to do with Coraline. At all. But that was an easy one. Let’s go to the Walt Disney Pictures adaptation of Roald Dahl’s novel, James and the Giant Peach next.

Think you got it? Are you sure? Better double check…

Oh, look. It’s Henry Selick again! Tim Burton actually interacted with this project, though only as a producer. Bet that was tricky… Next one! Let’s go to the Disney/Touchstone Pictures film Tim Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas.
Have you guessed it correctly? Have you really?

Yep that’s right. Even Tim Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas was directed by Henry Selick. Though Burton wrote the poem and created the characters in which Nightmare was based he didn’t have much interaction with the project beyond that. At the time he had already signed off to direct the film Batman Returns and did not want to be involved with the “painstakingly slow process of stop-motion animation.”
Looks like it was a trick quiz. But now you know Henry Selick, whom people rarely know of is responsible for many of the most well known stop-motion animated films. The more you know!

This isn’t even being qeued. This is just being reblogged, because some of you still don’t understand who directed Coraline.

Burton didn’t even have a TANGENTIAL connection to Coraline but because it was advertised as “from the director of Nightmare Before Christmas” and people think Burton directed Nightmare (or even wrote the script or did much of anything but visit the set off and on) they still equate Coraline with him.
The same thing happens to “9” because people don’t get what “produced by” means.

bogleech:

thebeldamsbuttons:

damianimated:

LETS PLAY A GAME. It’s called: Who directed it TIM BURTON or HENRY SELICK

We’ll start with the 2009 Laika film Coraline based on the novel by Neil Gaiman. Do you know who directed it? Burton or Selick?

image

Did you guess yet?

image

If you guessed Henry Selick, you would be correct. Tim Burton actually had absolutely nothing to do with Coraline at all in anyway ever. Reminder: Tim Burton has NOTHING to do with Coraline. At all. But that was an easy one. Let’s go to the Walt Disney Pictures adaptation of Roald Dahl’s novel, James and the Giant Peach next.

image

Think you got it? Are you sure? Better double check…

image

Oh, look. It’s Henry Selick again! Tim Burton actually interacted with this project, though only as a producer. Bet that was tricky… Next one! Let’s go to the Disney/Touchstone Pictures film Tim Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas.

imageHave you guessed it correctly? Have you really?

image

Yep that’s right. Even Tim Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas was directed by Henry Selick. Though Burton wrote the poem and created the characters in which Nightmare was based he didn’t have much interaction with the project beyond that. At the time he had already signed off to direct the film Batman Returns and did not want to be involved with the “painstakingly slow process of stop-motion animation.”

Looks like it was a trick quiz. But now you know Henry Selick, whom people rarely know of is responsible for many of the most well known stop-motion animated films. The more you know!

This isn’t even being qeued. This is just being reblogged, because some of you still don’t understand who directed Coraline.

Burton didn’t even have a TANGENTIAL connection to Coraline but because it was advertised as “from the director of Nightmare Before Christmas” and people think Burton directed Nightmare (or even wrote the script or did much of anything but visit the set off and on) they still equate Coraline with him.

The same thing happens to “9” because people don’t get what “produced by” means.

visualreverence:

Simon Roy's Dinosauroids

[T]he crux of this project is based on the following premise, and not an altogether original one. The great dinosaur-killer, the Chicxulub asteroid, misses earth. However, the resulting world is not simply a long-lived cretaceous paradise - the Deccan Traps still flooded the sky with ash and changed the climate and atmosphere, killing off most, if not all, of the great dinosaurs. The survivors of such an event, however, are a handful of small therapods, mammals, birds, and even a few pterosaurs.

Do yourself a favour and read through the rigorous thinking that Simon Roy has put into conjuring the physiology and culture of his Dinosauroids. Amazing work.

senjukannon:

nwartist:

senjukannon:

Random photos from within the last month.

One month of a dirt lens.

It’s some random black spot that doesn’t even show up on the lens. There’s nothing physically there as far as I’ve been able to see.

That sounds very frustrating! I’m sorry it’s been plaguing you, that you know about it, but can’t seem to find what’s wrong.

Best of luck!

senjukannon:

Random photos from within the last month.

One month of a dirt lens.

mistofstars:

gereordwyrhta:

barefootdramaturg:

jewlesthemagnificent:

oldtobegin:

velveteenrabbit:

englishpracticenow:

commonly misused words - learn the proper usage of these words to get your way up to any English proficiency exams - IELTS, TOEFL, GRE, etc.

2,000 notes.

JERKING OFF TO THIS

OH GOD LESS VERSUS FEWER THANK YOU FOR ACKNOWLEDGING MY PERSONAL GRAMMATICAL VENDETTA.

By accident. On purpose. Never on accident.

Few native speakers make the less vs. fewer distinction.

Also, this could just be regional, but I don’t think I’ve ever heard an actual person say “by accident” (Ihave read it, however). There is nothing semantically linking the use of the particular preposition “by” to the abstract substantive “accident,” just as there is no semantic link between “on” and “purpose.” “By” implies adjacency, which doesn’t add anything to the meaning of the phrase “by accident”; Why must one be next to and accident but upon a purpose?  There’s no logic linking these words, but rather arbitrary usage, and if usage is the gauge, then both are correct and you can stop being a prescriptivist elitist.

I get a bit of anxiety after seeing this T.T

fancylemurs:

girls just wanna have

real pockets on our clothes, damn

maxkirin:

Neil Gaiman’s 8 Rules of Writing, a remake of this post. Source.

Want more writerly content? Make sure to follow maxkirin.tumblr.com for your daily dose of writer positivity, advice, and prompts!

thexmanxwhoxcantxdie:

thegenderqueeralchemist:

bisexual and pansexual people are actually made of stardust and flames and are immortal pass it on

image

Is that a reaction or an example?

sunwukong-stoaway:

ringaroundtheprose:

the-captain-of-davesol:

imageimage

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

THE ULTIMATE FUCKING POST

You know it’s good when you bother to scroll all the way back up just to reblog it.

…Wait scroll up HOW OLD IS THIS THING

caseyanthonyofficial:

fayemccuskerthings:

caseyanthonyofficial:

What’re some good charities to donate to

It depends what you’re interested in maybe wwf or save the children or something like that:)

I’m not donating to the world wrestling federation I know it’s a noble cause but still

You can do a continuous donation (fraction of a penny) through Tab for a Cause. Once its on your browser, TfaC puts ads on every bank tab you open before you use the page. The ad revenues go toward charities, and new users can vote which ones get how much of a cut.
You can register here [x]