- Oct 9, 1999
- 46,940
- 10,840
- 147
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Multiple takes = fail. Would be cool if it was all one take.
Originally posted by: johnjohn320
(2) Isn't the idea of a Rube Goldberg is that it completes some simple action, ie turning on a light bulb, opening a door, blowing a whistle, etc? This one ended with small dumbell rolling down something.![]()
Originally posted by: YOyoYOhowsDAjello
Originally posted by: johnjohn320
(2) Isn't the idea of a Rube Goldberg is that it completes some simple action, ie turning on a light bulb, opening a door, blowing a whistle, etc? This one ended with small dumbell rolling down something.![]()
It ended with opening up window shades (line connected to dumbell?)
In High School I was part of a Rube Goldberg competition. We got 3rd place in Wisconsin for our contraption that put items representing the 20th century into a jar and screwing on the lid (the assigned task).
They should have made it loop back and start itself up then.Originally posted by: sactoking
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Multiple takes = fail. Would be cool if it was all one take.
Agreed. There were at least a half dozen takes. I believe that the whole machine never existed at one time. Based on the takes, complexity of the machine, and sheer size and inconvenience it would cause to those living there, I hypothesize that they made part, did a take, took it apart, made the next segment, did a take, took it apart, etc.
Originally posted by: TallBill
Definitely not one take, and would have been cooler if it actually had something to do with the alarm clock going off.
