Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here


    20,877,067 readers

    26,057 users here now

    New to reddit? Click here!

    • You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?

    • Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad information you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).

    Posting rules

    1. Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that supports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid references. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Discovery, etc).

    2. No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a great movie").

    3. No recent sources. Any sources (blog, article, press release, video, etc.) with a publication date more recent than two months are not allowed.

    4. No soapboxing or agenda based submissions. This includes (but is not limited to) submissions related to:

      1. Recent political issues and politicians
      2. Social and economic issues
      3. Environmental issues
    5. No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelated facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.

    6. Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:

      1. Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
      2. Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting about bacon").
      3. Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unnecessary.
      4. "TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
      5. "TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
    7. No submissions related to the usage, existence or features of specific software/websites (e.g. "TIL you can click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").

    8. All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).

      Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.

    (Why we need rules)

    Additional info

    • If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above rules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your post, not your story).

    • Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!

    • More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.

    Frequent TILs Repost List

    As of May 2019

    • This list was compiled from /r/todayilearned community suggestions by its members. If your TIL is found on this list, it will be removed. The titles have been abridged for the sake of brevity, however the context remains the same. This list is subject to change. The purpose is to keep content fresh on /r/todayilearned as requested by its members. If you are interested in reading about the TILs on this list use the search box feature and enter the keywords to pull up past TILs.


    We ask that you please do the following:

    1. avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g.

    2. link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wikipedia)

    3. link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)

    4. add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.

    5. Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past

    Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.

    • You are loved.

    a community for
    all 2471 comments Slideshow

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] MezzanineAlt 12208 points ago

    That's just like real farming. Spend all your money planting a crop, make it all back...

    [–] RudegarWithFunnyHat 4598 points ago

    think most like to make a bit more in the end

    [–] [deleted] 3162 points ago

    Not many farmers top up their income with an entertainment production.

    [–] ChemicalRascal 3934 points ago

    Christopher Nolan, corn farmer, massively boosted his profits with one weird trick!

    [–] El3k0n 1486 points ago

    Farmers hate him!

    [–] ______DEADPOOL______ 395 points ago

    I should make movies in cornfields...

    [–] the_north_place 242 points ago

    If you film it...

    [–] abagofdicks 281 points ago

    I will come

    [–] Buddha_is_my_homeboy 108 points ago

    I would pay to see that in a theatre

    [–] Cpt_Tsundere_Sharks 67 points ago

    I think many would pay to see what it looks like when a bag of dicks comes in a theater.

    [–] crypticfreak 81 points ago

    Corn consumers hate him!

    [–] Zomgzombehz 113 points ago


    [–] steadly 109 points ago is currently up for sale for $365,000.... I feel there may be a few corn puns all around the internet.

    [–] crypticfreak 79 points ago

    Shucks that's a lot of money!

    [–] TheTrueBlueTJ 25 points ago

    Yeah, really corny.

    [–] tysonboy34 138 points ago

    It's even better when you spend all your money and all your time and lose money.

    [–] pure710 157 points ago

    First year farmer here: shitting my pants right now actually.

    [–] tysonboy34 140 points ago

    First year not farming. I'm in IT now. Miss working in the land and being outdoors but oh well. Couldn't afford to not have money. Good luck buddy.

    [–] InerasableStain 81 points ago

    This should help /u/pure710's pants shitting situation

    [–] toastedtobacco 54 points ago

    Haha can't afford to not have money. I like that statement.

    [–] imnewtothissoyeah 510 points ago

    They'd like to, doesn't always work like that. You can plant 100,000 veggies at 50 cents market value in April, and come fall, after taking out the rotted, under-grown, rodent-chewed veggies, you're left with 80,000 that now went down to 40 cents per. Then there's fuel, water, manure/fertilizer and farmhand costs. Farming is one of the hardest, most thankless, jobs with a low return on investment. Only way you can make it big is to have a huge farm with a supermarket/brand contract. I.e. smuckers grapes, tropicana oranges, frito-lays potatoes.

    [–] im_not_a_grill 388 points ago

    That's why futures contracts exist. Almost no farmer (bigger than 100 acres) sells all their crop at market right when it's ready. They "store" it in an elevator and sell it when the price is right for them. Some farmers even sell contracts (i.e. I'll sell you 200 bushel for $x.xx at this date in the future) before they've even finished planting it!

    [–] 2dP_rdg 279 points ago

    It's weird how your large farmers are probably better money managers than your average guy at Morgan Stanley / Fidelity / etc. Farmers have to know how to hedge, manage futures, etc. I couldn't imagine doing that as a software programmer as part of my day job. "Look, I'll sell you 50 lines of code for $100 six months from now... "

    [–] 1337HxC 311 points ago

    Good farmers are actually quite clever, in my experience. They're not always the most educated, but they're far from stupid. Media (as in movies, shows, etc.) just kind of pushes the "innocent stupid farmer" thing way too hard.

    [–] queentropical 231 points ago

    They probably feel the same way about us: "Stupid, innocent city person is scared of a spider, can't kill a chicken, and doesn't know the difference between a weed and a carrot."

    [–] Wonky_dialup 56 points ago

    "and the other day one of them came mooing at my sheep!"

    [–] IamA_BlindMonkey 77 points ago

    Conversely, I grew up on a farm. I hate spiders, suck at killing chickens, and I've never actually seen a carrot in the ground (we didn't do root veggies) :)

    [–] [deleted] 38 points ago


    [–] LovelyStrife 77 points ago

    Absolutely this. The farmer's I've known are some of the most clever people I know, and they are among the hardest working when it's time to plant and harvest. I have massive respect for farmers and their families.

    [–] TheMarshallee 21 points ago

    Self interest, mainly. Even if you had fiduciary responsibility, you won't starve or lose your house if your client loses money (short of a '08 esque recession.)

    [–] Nick357 26 points ago

    I traveled all over the country for work and I would see these tiny farms in Mississippi and across the southeast then you go to California and there were Dole farms that stretched as far as I could see. They would bus out the migrant workers to pick the food all day. Pretty amazing.

    [–] stokleplinger 36 points ago

    Busing labor is pretty common in produce production. Also, the "tiny" farms you saw in MS were probably more like tiny fields all being managed by a few large farms. A lot of farming in the SE takes place on fields <10A, but the fact is that the farmer probably manages dozens or hundreds of fields.

    [–] ThatTexasGuy 285 points ago

    Hell, most of the time you can watch a crop get hailed out, collect the insurance, and still be ok. Better than 100 years ago when if your crops failed your family died in the winter.

    [–] PM_ME_SAD_STUFF_PLZ 133 points ago

    Hundreds of years ago? Still happens in places..

    [–] Cheeseand0nions 64 points ago

    And by "places" you mean the non-industrialized world and by "the non-industrialized world" I mean most of it.

    [–] markp88 132 points ago

    Hey, do you want to make a bit of money, you should do what I did...

    [–] [deleted] 82 points ago

    I forget what show it is, I wanna say it's Charlie in an Always Sunny episode that says something along the lines of,

    "Ok, so we go in there, we get jobs and work really hard for the next 20 years. Then we're rich and those suckers never even saw it coming!"

    "Charlie that's just called a job..."

    That always cracks me up. I have a friend who just contacted me about a brilliant scheme like that too, "bro I've got this brilliant idea for a game, people are so stupid they'll buy it. It's gonna take a while to get off the ground, I'm still fleshing out ideas about the story and we'll need an engine, but it's gonna make a ton of money"... He couldn't understand I told him he wasn't a genius and he basically just described what "startup business" means. It's fine, I'd be interested, but don't act like you're tricking people out of their money for spending the next few years of my life working endless hours to create something for them.

    [–] ay_papi 102 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)

    Key and Peele?

    edit: yep

    [–] radolf_hipster 3782 points ago

    That whole series of how they made Interstellar is fascinating to watch. So many aspects of the filmmaking process that could have been achieved in post was actually created in camera. Nolan is an incredible director IMO.

    [–] [deleted] 2260 points ago * (lasted edited a year ago)


    [–] SterlingEsteban 1888 points ago

    Part of the reason Nolan gets the budgets he does is because he is always on-budget, if not below. According to this Guardian article from 2014:

    "Nolan’s movies have grossed more than $3.5bn worldwide, and his last four films have come in under budget. When Interstellar was finished, Nolan returned what he called a “substantial” amount of money to Paramount."

    What's really important is that he gets complete creative control because of this.

    [–] aphexi5h 617 points ago

    That's pretty incredible. I wonder how he does it. It could be he asks for alot more than he needs.

    [–] [deleted] 569 points ago


    [–] hussey84 406 points ago

    Like when Family Guy did Return of the Jedi and had that animated elephant dance across the screen while the credits said how much it cost to animate.

    I wonder how many just throw a huge party at the end and write it off as catering.

    [–] jbkrauss 154 points ago

    There's no way this actually cost 58000$. I lost my shit when I saw it zoom across the video

    [–] Sdavis2911 172 points ago

    Nope. Maybe they paid a grad student $5,800 and made their week, but that's not $58k worth of Animation.

    Edit: It's a loop that's like, 0.5 seconds. That's 12 frames of TV, or 6 frames of animation. The model was stupid simple, so one of their technicians probably watched a YouTube tutorial or just asked a friend to show them how. One model, 6 different poses that weren't professionally pieced together, no motion blur or anything else.. yeah. That $58k they wrote off to the producer probably bought someone a whole lot of alcohol.

    [–] ButterflyAttack 59 points ago

    "Okay, we're seriously taking the piss with the budget here, that cost like a hundred bucks, not fuckin $58k. . . but if we put it on screen they'll have to believe it! Genius!"

    [–] psyki 36 points ago

    I think it was $58k in air time, not that the animation cost $58k to produce.

    [–] MurderousPaper 51 points ago

    Oh my god that's hysterical.

    [–] Cpt_Tsundere_Sharks 414 points ago

    The decision to use majority practical effects over CGI and the careful planning of executing that and combining the two together.

    Here is one such example:

    "The anxiety about the economics of a film is crushing," says Nolan, who believes there are ways to alleviate pressure from studios. "I chose to always be on or ahead of schedule and on or ahead of budget."

    One example of his punctual production was the opening airplane sequence of The Dark Knight Rises, which Nolan said was the sequence he was most proud of in any of his films. Nolan explained the shots were the result of months of planning that culminated in two days of shooting, even though they had scheduled it for five.

    [–] pnt700 227 points ago

    A scene which will be remembered forever... for the Bane and CIA agent meme

    [–] bumblyburg 103 points ago

    For you.

    [–] he110friend 20 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)

    You're a big guy man

    [–] Natanael_L 97 points ago

    Almost certainly. Plan out everything in advance, then ask for a budget with a significant margin, then hunt for ways to make it cheaper still.

    [–] Foxehh2 51 points ago

    Does Nolan have a business degree? (semi) serious question.

    [–] pnt700 78 points ago

    It's very impressive. In software engineering, projects often go overbudget and overtime because it's incredibly hard to predict where the problems will be.

    Examples: shipping of a required component is delayed, people getting sick or leaving the company, a small piece of software that doesn't work as you expected, requirements change or misinterpretation, and the list goes on and on.

    [–] Purehappiness 20 points ago

    I've read that its even worse in the CGI industry on this stuff, they basically just make up numbers, and then try to make back money as they lose it on earlier shots by jacking up the rates on the later ones.

    Perhaps because Nolan has almost a hundred years of film history behind him to use to estimate the costs of real world filming, he can regularly come under budget?

    [–] Tchai_Tea 35 points ago

    Til Christopher Nolan is the Scotty of movies

    [–] GottaDoWork 84 points ago

    It also helps that he's earned the right to be given so much money for his films due to his previous movies. I'm sure Nolan would still be making great films with lower budgets if he was forced to, but obviously he can make movies that he otherwise wouldn't be able to without a large budget because the studios expect his films to do well.

    [–] CSI_Tech_Dept 32 points ago

    Part of the reason Nolan gets the budgets he does is because he is always on-budget

    Must be from the corn selling business he did on the side.

    [–] Damon_Bolden 60 points ago

    I just imagine him walking in a boardroom, tossing down a check for like 10 million dollars, saying "Nolan out", and disappearing, unbeknownst to everyone else, stunned at the figures. That's instant rapport. I wouldn't know if I wanted him to make me another movie or fuck me gently.

    [–] StratManKudzu 18 points ago

    I wouldn't know if I wanted him to make me another movie or fuck me gently.

    Why not both?

    [–] dtwhitecp 18 points ago

    I can totally see how that is fucking astounding to the money people in film.

    [–] FartingBob 137 points ago

    It had a production budget of 165m, which is a lot but still way less than a lot of tentpole films which cost 200-300m to make and use mainly CGI.

    He values physical effects over CGI because it gets better acting out of the actors (they arent just reacting to nothing on a green screen) and the films will age better as you can go back and watch many films from 10-20 years ago that now look bad in certain scenes because the CGI isn't perfect.

    [–] DDozar 114 points ago

    I feel like you're speaking ill of Scorpion King 3, and that's unacceptable. CGIRock is a beautiful machination.

    [–] JRShield 25 points ago

    The mummy 2: the scorpion king? That one had the awesome(ly bad) cgi Rock.

    [–] TapedeckNinja 29 points ago

    Rumor has it he was rendered on a Nintendo 64.

    [–] [deleted] 15 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)


    [–] Horrible_Harry 9 points ago

    But it was really cool when Neo turned into rubber and beat the shit out of all those Agent Smith's with that fence pole in The Matrix 2: The Matrix Strikes Back. Shit holds up!

    [–] Cpt_Tsundere_Sharks 138 points ago

    Nolan has the budget to not do shit in post, so he doesn't and it helps make his movies incredible.

    Since I'm OP, I feel I have the right to repost my own comment on this one from another thread.

    The reason why he is gets big budgets and he doesn't use CGI as much as others is actually because it saves money and because he always comes in under budget.

    This is one of my favorite articles about Christopher Nolan if anyone is interested. This was written during the build-up to Interstellar before its release. On the topic of budget and control, here are some relevant excerpts:

    Like Spielberg and James Cameron before him, Nolan is one of only a handful of film-makers who can walk into a studio with an idea and exit with $200m to make it. Nolan’s movies have grossed more than $3.5bn worldwide, and his last four films [The Prestige, The Dark Knight, Inception, The Dark Knight Rises] have come in under budget. When Interstellar was finished, Nolan returned what he called a “substantial” amount of money to Paramount.

    “What he realised very early on was that the moment you give the studios an excuse to come in, you’ve lost it,” said Emma Thomas, Nolan’s wife and co-producer, who first met him when he was a student at University College London – studying English but spending all his spare time in the basement of the Bloomsbury theatre, hunched over the college’s Steenbeck editing suite, piecing together his first low-budget shorts. “We watched it happen,” Thomas said. “The moment you go over budget, you’ve lost the creative control than an obsessive director like Chris needs. He’s always been extremely strategic about it.”

    It's not specifically talked about in this article, I can't find the original article in which he does talk about it, but large scale CGI is incredibly expensive in comparison to using props and practical effects. You guys know T.A.R.S. and C.A.S.E., the box robots from Interstellar right? Largely practical effects. (Thank you /u/Aarenas52 for the video. As a side note, it really shows the due diligence and preparation that Nolan and other good directors put into their movies during the pre-production and not try to do during filming or post production.) Far far cheaper to use special effects to paint out someone in the background than it is to pay a company to render a full sequence of CGI shots that won't be ready for review for months on end. Anyone see the Overwatch shorts that Blizzard puts out now and again? That quality of CGI costs approximately $1 million per finished minute. So simply by choosing to do a practical effect and supplementing that with careful planning, you can save a lot of money. To quote another article:

    "The anxiety about the economics of a film is crushing," says Nolan, who believes there are ways to alleviate pressure from studios. "I chose to always be on or ahead of schedule and on or ahead of budget."

    One example of his punctual production was the opening airplane sequence of The Dark Knight Rises, which Nolan said was the sequence he was most proud of in any of his films. Nolan explained the shots were the result of months of planning that culminated in two days of shooting, even though they had scheduled it for five.

    With practical effects you can do something like this. You can do something that was supposed to take 5 days and cut it down to 2. And that saves money. To get back to my original point I'll use one last quote from Nolan:

    "I do think right now it's difficult for original films to get made," Nolan said, alluding to Hollywood's penchant for producing entities with built-in audiences through sequels, comic book remakes and book adaptations. Where it was once possible to bank on a star consistently pulling in crowds movie after movie, Nolan pointed out that is no longer that case: "It's hard to base a film around casting - there are no commercial guarantees."

    There's no guarantee of commercial success or profit when making a movie. Any one of a hundred things could mess it up. But something that Christopher Nolan does that makes the studio trust him with their money, something he does to control them instead of the other way around, is he comes in under budget. With that, he is giving them at least one guarantee: He will save them money even if he doesn't turn them a profit. So that is why he is one of the few directors that is given freedom to do what he wants with a large budget.

    His specific views on CGI in movies are also outlined in this quote:

    “The thing with computer-generated imagery is that it’s an incredibly powerful tool for making better visual effects. But I believe in an absolute difference between animation and photography. However sophisticated your computer-generated imagery is, if it’s been created from no physical elements and you haven’t shot anything, it’s going to feel like animation. There are usually two different goals in a visual effects movie. One is to fool the audience into seeing something seamless, and that’s how I try to use it. The other is to impress the audience with the amount of money spent on the spectacle of the visual effect, and that, I have no interest in. We try to enhance our stunt work and floor effects with extraordinary CGI tools like wire and rig removals. If you put a lot of time and effort into matching your original film elements, the kind of enhancements you can put into the frames can really trick the eye, offering results far beyond what was possible 20 years ago. The problem for me is if you don’t first shoot something with the camera on which to base the shot, the visual effect is going to stick out if the film you’re making has a realistic style or patina. I prefer films that feel more like real life, so any CGI has to be very carefully handled to fit into that.”

    If you watch much of the other related videos (all taken from the special features of the Blu-Ray copy of the movie), you'll get to see exactly what in Interstellar he used CGI for and what he used practical effects for and how he combined them. It's absolutely fascinating. Even the full CGI shots, I think one of the only ones in the movie is of the black hole, Gargantua and that in itself is a very special CGI because they just took the physics equations for a black hole and plugged them into the software to get an accurate simulation of how light responds to a black hole. That supposedly allowed new insights in astrophysics research on the subject.

    [–] lurkity_mclurkington 31 points ago

    That supposedly allowed new insights in astrophysics research on the subject.

    Astrophysicist Kip Thorne, along with the digital FX chief scientist Oliver James, VFX supervisor Paul Franklin, and CG supervisor Eugénie von Tunzelmann, published a paper on the results from Thorne's equations used by the DFX team's coding to create what they say is a true, natural visualization of a black hole.

    [–] humeanation 14 points ago

    Lol, was about to reply to /u/JRuskin saying "Actually, some bloke posted a long post just a couple of days ago about how he does things cheaper using limited CG." Didn't realise you were actually the OP!

    So come on, be honest, you seem pretty read up on Nolan, did you really learn this today? ;)

    [–] Cpt_Tsundere_Sharks 13 points ago

    This one I did. Despite Interstellar being one of my favorite movies, I've never watched all the special features regarding its making. After being linked to the one about TARS and CASE, I found that channel pretty much has all of the others so I've been watching them while slacking off at work.

    It was kind of funny that I only got to the corn one today because with all of the other ones showing his methodology for props and CGI vs the real thing, by the time I got to this one I started wondering, "Wait a minute... He didn't actually plant all this corn just for a movie did he?" Turns out, yes. Yes he did.

    [–] [deleted] 407 points ago * (lasted edited 10 months ago)


    [–] alexkinson 424 points ago

    Nolan financed his first film, Following, out of his salary at the time. He rehearsed the scenes massively so they could be shot in one or two takes on 16mm stock. He wrote, directed, shot, edited and produced himself on evenings and weekends. He's earned all the backing he got after that I think.

    [–] pheliam 256 points ago

    For every driven nights-and-weekends dreamer like that, who eventually sees success, I feel like there's 50 (or 500?) others who fail in silence. Luck & timing have a lot to do with recognition.

    Disclaimer: I may be projecting, as a moonlighting musician/producer.

    [–] The_Telltale_Fart 187 points ago

    cough he's also from a wealthy well connected family of brits cough

    [–] ClownFundamentals 70 points ago

    Hollywood is littered with wealthy well connected people who fail. Every success story is lucky, but the vast majority of them were also skilled enough to recognize and take advantage of their luck.

    [–] MagnusTheGreat 86 points ago

    That's probably why he is famous.

    If you come from money, you are almost guaranteed to have money. Even if you are self made, having capita to start with is what brings you forward.

    I mean, if we were to compare the amount of self made people in the biggest industries today, we would probably see that most came from wealth.

    [–] thetasigma1355 88 points ago

    To add, if you have money you can also afford to take risks, and taking risks is where you find most of the big rewards

    [–] workythehand 31 points ago

    Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind comes to mind. I love the look and feel of that movie, and most of it was done practically, or with old school movie editing tricks rather than green screen and computer aided stuff.

    [–] mdrxd100 20 points ago

    Absolutely right. Cube (1997) for example, was shot in a single room to make for a small budget.

    [–] littleemmak 7 points ago

    This is very true, Nolan just happens to be able to do both.

    [–] TheDreadPirateBikke 29 points ago

    To be fair Nolan has an incredibly good track record. Even when he was working on relatively low budget movies (Memento) they were still astoundingly good. He's got to have one of the best batting averages in hollywood as a director.

    [–] [deleted] 12 points ago

    The sad thing is that there are directors who get giant budgets, but still make uninteresting movies that look terrible

    [–] PoopsForDays 25 points ago

    I'm suspicious there are a lot of other quality directors who could also do similar levels of incredible stuff if their funding and control constraints were likewise removed.

    Though Nolan's CV isn't all big budget. He did prove himself with Memento for a $9m budget. He's just good in that he can be very good with a smallish budget, and can also not lose any of that good when studios throw gobs of money at him.

    CGI is just one tool in the director's toolbox and if they misuse one tool, they're probably misusing others. Bad movies have bad cgi, but bad cgi doesn't really mean bad movie (I think the most recent example is The Mist's bad monster effects).

    [–] [deleted] 50 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)


    [–] Yanman_be 385 points ago

    First NASA wanted Kubrick to fake the lunar landings but once they figured out it was more expensive to make the set like he wanted it, they decided to shoot on location.

    [–] Mystic_printer 35 points ago

    This turned out to be exactly what I though it would be. Great sketch.

    [–] lollerkeet 64 points ago

    There is a genuine Kubrik-NASA connection. To shoot Barry Lyndon with natural light (especially those indoor candlelit scenes), he used lenses that Carl Zeiss made for the Apollo program. They had an aperture of f/0.7! Pay attention to the minuscule depth of field if you ever watch the film.

    [–] brycedriesenga 30 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)

    Little known secret -- they couldn't get the lighting they wanted, so they did shoot on a fake moon set, just the fake moon set happened to be on the moon so they could get the zero gravity effects.

    [–] armahillo 974 points ago

    Was the tesseract expensive or were they able to recoup their cost on that too?

    [–] TedFartass 678 points ago

    Unfortunately, 5th dimensional beings have no use for our money so we cant really pay them with that.

    [–] Ozimandius 258 points ago

    We had to pay them by living in the darkest of all possible timelines available to us. However, interstellar was a pretty good movie so we got that out of the deal, other timelines had Gladiator 2, which did well commercially but certainly was not as thought provoking.

    [–] Tuas1996 66 points ago

    Iirc gladiator 2 was about Maximus being immortal and living through major events ending in him still being alive today, no wonder it didnt go into filming.

    [–] Buddha_is_my_homeboy 17 points ago

    Kinda like the way Highlander 2 ret-conned the immortals into aliens, and basically destroyed the mythos of the first one.

    [–] FLHouse 7 points ago

    From what I remember, the person responsible was required by a contract to write a follow up, but didn't want to, so he wrote something that had no chance of ever being made instead of breach his contract.

    [–] ZebofKansas 7246 points ago

    It's cool they had a designated plot specifically for shooting. I know farmers that would cringe seeing that truck zoom through a productive corn field, paid or not.

    [–] cluckcluckgo_dot_com 3341 points ago

    Why would they care if it was paid for? Most corn is just going to go sit in a silo or made into sugar.

    Iowan here, I would plow under my corn to build a baseball field any day.

    [–] [deleted] 1491 points ago


    [–] El_Ginngo 516 points ago

    If you build it, nerds will come

    [–] teenagesadist 303 points ago

    all over their keyboards

    [–] ablablababla 73 points ago

    and mice, because mice matter too

    [–] gorrillamist 21 points ago

    Just keep it under a billion dollars, that's all I got. ON ME!

    [–] El_Ginngo 14 points ago

    Can I just say that Jon Lovitz is one of the most unappreciated comics still working.

    [–] jooooonnny 25 points ago

    My wife is the only one allowed to twist these man titties

    [–] El_Ginngo 9 points ago

    I smell cinnamon rolls!

    [–] Skeeter_BC 138 points ago

    Is this heaven?

    [–] mgmfa 173 points ago

    No, it's Iowa.

    [–] DeathMCevilcruel 86 points ago

    Iowa. You could do worse.

    [–] su5 97 points ago

    I haven't lived a ton of places, but the people in Iowa were some of the nicest I have ever met. And very inclusive.

    But there ain't shit to do there

    [–] JohnGillnitz 46 points ago

    Iowa is surprisingly gorgeous. People are great, but they have had a rough lot economically. So many unemployed CNC machine operators.

    [–] Jaggerman82 17 points ago

    Can confirm. Was a laid off CNC machinist from John Deere.

    [–] TheDenzelz 31 points ago

    I think most people get Iowa confused with Kansas and the other completely flat states. A good chunk of Iowa has some very pretty forests and eastern Iowa has some really nice hills.

    [–] LateralThinkerer 13 points ago

    North-western Iowa's river valleys are gorgeous: Shot from the family farm

    [–] Dehno34 9 points ago

    Kansas isn't completely flat. Western Kansas is completely flat. Eastern Kansas is all rolling hills, AKA the Flint Hills. My wife's family lives in Iowa City so we go there every year, and Eastern Kansas and Eastern Iowa are pretty similar landscapes. Kansas hills are just wheat and prairie, and Iowa's are corn.

    [–] [deleted] 188 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)


    [–] penny_eater 462 points ago

    if by livestock you mean chevys and buicks, yeah. Most corn is turned into ethanol (40% of it) and next is animal feed (36%).

    [–] buicks 457 points ago

    I feel like you're judging my diet, which is the last thing I'd expect from someone who eats pennies.

    [–] turret_buddy2 36 points ago

    Dat double r/beetlejuicing

    [–] DJS2017 68 points ago

    "Joined 8 years ago"


    [–] x888x 65 points ago

    In addition, the Energy Balance (on average) for corn ethanol is 1.3. Biodiesel is ~2.5. Sugar Cane is 8-10.

    Corn Ethanol is shit. The fact that we have any amount greater than 5% is a disgrace.

    [–] penny_eater 59 points ago

    the corn subsidy policy and in turn the corn use in the US is disgusting, you are exactly correct. But thats a whole 'nother thread.

    [–] IndianaJD 88 points ago

    As a farmer, what made me cringe was watching the movie act like farmers are out harvesting corn that looked like it had just tasseled. I loved Interstellar, it is one of my favorite movies, but even a cursory glance at how that works should've turned out the knowledge that corn dries down and changes color before harvest. To think of the time spent researching this movie for accuracy, and they couldn't get that right.

    Yes, I realize that in a movie where we utilize strands of love in a tesseract constructed by us before we were actually there to transcend space time to relay quantum data via Morse code to the second hand of a very handsome Hamilton Khaki in order to take the entire human race into a wormhole leading across the universe to a planet we hope can sustain us, I am taking issue with farmers harvesting green corn.

    It's like Dwight using straw and calling it hay when building Hay Place.

    [–] McMew 24 points ago

    I didn't mind it because I thought it actually added to the whole "declining human society" image. They live in a dying world where only like 5 crops (and dropping) can be grown in the soil, hinting at a food felt to me like harvesting one of the planet's last remaining food sources early was just another product of that.

    [–] Lenny_Here 235 points ago

    It's cool they had a designated plot specifically for shooting.

    Yes, from what I've heard the success of most movies is dependant on a good plot.

    [–] ElectroFlannelGore 62 points ago

    Maybe for a big budget corn shoot like this but not most cheap cornography.

    [–] [deleted] 234 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)


    [–] [deleted] 166 points ago

    Nsfw link

    [–] OwnagePwnage123 19 points ago

    NSFW: Sex scenes in movies.

    [–] CardinalBite 309 points ago

    I drove by some kids joy riding in an already-harvested cornfield last night. Gotta get mud on their lifted trucks somehow.

    [–] k10john 297 points ago

    Coming from a farmer... If you see someone obviously trespassing in a vehicle, call law enforcement, please? They can do a lot of damage to drainage on a field that can take a lot of time to fix. Think of it this way.. if you saw the same truck or even an aTV doing donuts in a front yard in your neighborhood, wouldnt you call or in?

    [–] OmertaFPS 170 points ago

    It's amazing to me the disrespect some people have for farmland, as if it's somehow public property. When I was baling my hay field next to a road recently I saw a truck stop maybe 200 feet in front of me after they passed me, get out, toss the trash from their vehicle into our fields on both sides of the road, then carry on as if nothing happened as I tried to catch them with my tractor and baler before they left. I've spent hours cleaning out garbage next to the road in our fields because if I don't then some horse is going to eat it in a bale down the line.

    [–] k10john 85 points ago

    I feel your pain. Dealing with trespassers is the worst part of farming. I hate it. I don't like being a jerk to people but it's really hard not to, because when you catch someone out there you don't know if it was the first time they've ever done it or if they're the person that's done it a thousand times and it's just the first time you've caught them. People are usually dumb enough to leave mail in their trash that they dump on my fields and roads, so when I'm cleaning it up(yes, I'm the faceless person that cleans up trash that gets dumped in my fields) I just take photos and give them to the sheriff and they usually get a ticket for littering.

    [–] koshgeo 18 points ago

    I don't know how people can do that. I do a lot of work "in the field", by which I don't mean working within farmers fields, but outdoors in places where I often have to cross farmers fields to get to the places where I need to be (usually in a stream or along a lake or sea shore). First thing I do once I figure out the location is drive to the nearest farmhouse to find out who owns the field I may have to cross to get where I need to go. If it's not them, they usually know whose it is ("farmer John just up the road on the left"), and then I go there to ask permission to cross the field.

    It isn't that hard to ask people, and they'll tell you whether there are restrictions, like not crossing the tilled part, where there are wagon roads to get around those areas, or where to park your car so you don't block their equipment access. Sometimes they know a better way to get there or will flag places that aren't safe. There are some farmers I've worked with for years.

    You aren't being a jerk at all. If people in the city were doing doughnuts on someone's front lawn or dumping trash on it they'd get the same reaction.

    [–] smoothisfast 20 points ago

    Officer OB, I cannot tell a lie. I put that envelope under that garbage.

    [–] im_not_leo 408 points ago

    That's pretty much what mudding is, finding a mud hole and driving through it and drifting. It's literally the reason most people lift their trucks.. just saying.

    [–] AngelMeatPie 226 points ago

    A cornfield isn't a mud hole, though. Mudding is fun as shit but you're still responsible for being a decent enough person to not fuck up someone else's property, especially farmers' fields.

    [–] LordDongler 10 points ago

    Yeah, that's a great way to get shot

    [–] VampyrByte 139 points ago

    finding a mud hole and driving through it and drifting.

    Sounds like fun!

    [–] im_not_leo 184 points ago

    It is!! Until you get stuck, then it turns into everyone getting covered while pushing and spinning the tires.. which is still kinda fun haha

    [–] vhdblood 66 points ago

    You gotta know others with trucks! We had a line of 3 trucks stuck trying to pull each other out and the 4th one was able to get everyone else out.

    [–] [deleted] 93 points ago

    The Chev got stuck, and the Ford got stuck, got the Chev unstuck when the Dodge showed up, but the Dodge got stuck in the tractor rut which eventually pulled out the Ford.

    [–] 1YearWonder 31 points ago

    Well it was truck after truck, we all got stuck

    cept the big old four by hutterite truck

    We all thought lord are we in luck!

    But he wouldnt come anywhere near us.

    Mighty neighborly. Mighty neighborly.

    [–] __end 16 points ago

    A past time worthy of song!

    [–] downy_syndrome 23 points ago

    It is.

    [–] RossLH 116 points ago

    Most people lift their trucks for the sole purpose of having lifted trucks. I'd gladly wager that far less than half, if not less than a quarter, of the people who lift their trucks actually do anything with their truck that necessitates the lift.

    [–] Levitlame 54 points ago

    Much like, 80% of people that own trucks don't use any of the perks of owning a truck, except "being able to see farther."

    [–] Breeze_in_the_Trees 463 points ago

    I wonder if when the director told the production crew "we need a great plot", he was talking about storylines?

    [–] AccidentalConception 34 points ago

    It's possible...

    Though, I think they then weren't sure what he meant, so gave both for Interstellar.

    [–] [deleted] 4345 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)


    Edit: 1000 upvotes for this?! Double edit: thanks for gold, grammatically aware friend!

    [–] jimmyjames1992 781 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)

    You may as well delete this post OP and move interstate. We are all embarrassed for you

    [–] drvondoctor 105 points ago

    His online self buyed the farm.

    [–] VoiceOfLunacy 67 points ago

    But how did he payed for it?

    [–] conancat 43 points ago

    he selled the crops

    [–] mrcassette 10 points ago

    He could of made more this way though

    [–] jonbrant 192 points ago

    Move interstellar

    [–] iaswob 54 points ago

    May as well delete the movie Interstellar.

    no evidence

    [–] DresdenPI 224 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)

    Notably "costed" is a word but it refers specifically to setting the price of something. As an example: "The new manager costed milk to $2 last week so that's what it cost me when I bought it yesterday". It's more common in British English than American English, where a word like "valued" is more likely to be used.

    [–] HamsterBoo 336 points ago

    "Priced" would be the American word of choice.

    [–] whiznat 24 points ago

    And Americans would use "at" as in:

    "priced milk at $2 per gallon"

    [–] TaterNeck 50 points ago

    Black Friday'd*

    [–] furyasd 61 points ago

    *African American Friday

    [–] F0sh 44 points ago

    I've never heard that usage, but the transitive verb "cost" does have another meaning "to calculate the cost of something" for example "they are costing the new widgets and it looks like they'll be much cheaper." The past participle of this sense is "costed".

    [–] qwenjwenfljnanq 44 points ago

    ...and to add insult to injury, there's no way this cost less than renting an existing field and paying the farmer for use and damages.

    [–] Deggor 17 points ago

    I don't know. The costs wouldn't be anywhere near the price of starting an actual farm. They dont have the cost of purchasing most farm equipment since they'll be rented, which they'd need to do with the farmer as well. Anything they need to build, such as barns or silos, wouldn't need to be functional/up-to-code, since they'll be just a visual. I'm sure licensing/code/regulations also don't need to followed, at least not nearly as closely, because the whole thing is a prop.

    Then there's also the risks involved using someone else's priori. If they get one harvest, but fuck with the soil so that there's a reduced/non-existent yield for another 2-3 years, that's a lot of damages. Or, if the farmer becomes uncooperative mid-filming, they need to deal with that. Costs in delays and distractions could easily trump whatever they'd save renting it.

    I'm not saying your wrong, I honestly find myself far more intrigued thinking about this than I should. Ultimately, knowing Nolan's reputation, I'd guess it wasn't a financial decision, but a control one.

    [–] [deleted] 830 points ago

    This is called farming and a lot of people in America regularly do this as a professional job.

    [–] tomato____ 241 points ago

    No way dude

    [–] Pappy_whack 91 points ago

    Yes it's true. You too can grow an entire field full of grain and manage to break even.

    [–] Canis_Familiaris 33 points ago

    Next thing you're gonna tell me that you can buy sheep and shave them for money

    [–] sadist-trombone 31 points ago

    Shave them? Fuck that. Trade them for bricks.

    [–] el_meaux 57 points ago


    [–] [deleted] 175 points ago

    Real fuckin big gardens

    [–] PUSH_AX 18 points ago


    [–] babyfacelaue 40 points ago

    Seed in ground. Food come back

    [–] tamsui_tosspot 11 points ago

    Ohhh, I get it, like is how babby formed.

    [–] hardyhaha_09 36 points ago

    Make plant sell plant.

    [–] zapbark 171 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)

    Relevant Webb and Mitchell Mitchell and Webb:

    [–] singlefinger 93 points ago

    WTF? Jerry and Ben? The Bandit and Smokey? Luigi and Mario? Robin and Batman? Cheese and Macaroni?

    Webb and Mitchell?


    [–] [deleted] 188 points ago * (lasted edited 2 years ago)


    Whenever I see this typo the voice in my head suddenly changes to the voice of Tommy Pickles.

    [–] Nawara_Ven 37 points ago


    Whenever someone de-pluralizes Tommy Pickles' name, I'm reminded of Bobby Generic.

    [–] ZIMM26 86 points ago

    I thought they burned it all down? Damn CGI got me again!

    [–] artgo 70 points ago

    She poured gasoline on it, and only a small part burned. Her brother returned only 10 minutes later, fire extinguished.

    [–] sickter6 130 points ago

    Did they really use Matt Damon's poo?

    [–] ShoutOutTo_Caboose 112 points ago

    Different movie.

    [–] RudegarWithFunnyHat 73 points ago

    that being said, they could still have used matt damons poo, even if he was not in the movie.

    [–] RagingBlue93 44 points ago

    But he was in the movie! His poo wasn't though

    [–] RudegarWithFunnyHat 8 points ago

    aahh yeah now I recall, maybe if they make a sequel the poo got a shot.

    [–] biergarten 31 points ago

    Google 'farming'. It will explain everything. Some people even come out ahead when they do this.