12/07/2003 2:59am, #11
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
Thanks for the book recommendations, i'll check em' out sometime
12/07/2003 3:13am, #12
Wow. Brilliant. Truly brilliant. 10 whole posts (11 now)...your criticism and commentary have been truly inspirational and awe-inspiring.
Why was it good? Because it was entertaining. Because I walked out of there having spent almost 14 bucks (Canadian) and didn't think to myself "**** I want my money back!". Because even if every scene dissected in your little whiney thread sucked, as a coherent whole, they were quite entertaining.
Perhaps you believe your endless prattle passes for analytical intelligence. Perhaps you think rambling on endlessly means you have something of value to say. Perhaps you simply like to see yourself type long messages.
So please, continue to rage against the establishment and big budget films. And please throw out the names of movies that most people couldn't care less about. Like so many people before you, rebel against the norm and dissect and analyse a movie to death. PLEASE?
Because for most of us, it's a simple dichotomy: Did you like it, or not? We don't need to explain to ourselves why.Regards,
"Na'h, they should go to old school rules.
One guy gets sword and sheild, the other gets a net and a trident.
Lions eat christians between rounds." - Strong Machine
12/07/2003 5:49am, #13
Wow, someone's cranky.
Yeah, I liked the movie, most of the bad reviews out there annoy me. I was just "fanwanking" with him (bullshitting explainations for plotholes and inconsisstancies).
12/07/2003 12:30pm, #14
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
So..it was good because it was entertaining; it forms a coherent whole that's entertaining. Well, I would argue that a movie being a coherent whole is a requirement and doesn't necessarily make it entertaining, but I don't think you have the attention span to read that much. There's a lot of movies that form a coherent whole better than the sum of their parts..and I still think they're sort of lame. Like Master and Commander. I'm a tough critic. Boo hoo.
Because for most of us, it's a simple dichotomy: Did you like it, or not? We don't need to explain to ourselves why.
12/07/2003 12:46pm, #15
I agree with CT...
I don't really enjoy many movies...but I really liked TLS. It was entertaining...and that's what we go to the movies to do...be entertained.
If I wanted an accurate historical dipiction of Samurai life, I'd read a book.
12/07/2003 12:55pm, #16
Isn't "it's good because it's entertaining" kid of stupid?
Like, the point is that the person criticizing the film WAS NOT ENTERTAINED.
It's not as if he was entertained, but then went out of his way to explain how bad the film was.
If you don't like talking about film, then DON'T TALK ABOUT FILM.Normally, I'd say I was grappling, but I was taking down and mounting people, and JFS has kindly informed us that takedowns and being mounted are neither grappling nor anti grappling, so I'm not sure what the **** I was doing. Maybe schroedinger's sparring, where it's neither grappling nor anti-grappling until somoene observes it and collapses the waveform, and then I RNC a cat to death.----fatherdog
12/07/2003 2:07pm, #17Originally posted by The Wastrel
[B]Isn't "it's good because it's entertaining" kid of stupid?
If I think a movie sucks, I wasn't really entertained by it...i.e., it bored the **** out of me...(Matrix 3).