Movie Tab II

After reading this, if anybody ever asks me to explain something, I'm just going to say no.

If one person wants an explanation and the other person believes they've already explained themselves, that's pretty much an impasse, yeah?

Casablanca is balls and I refuse to explain why.

Dammit you stole my idea.

"Balls" is negative, "the balls" is positive. Balls in general... can be good or bad.

EDIT: Yoda deleted his post and now I look like a crazy person.

Anyone who actually believes that his hate for the film has been properly explained, please enlighten me.

I'm not even saying he HAS to explain his opinion. I just said it would be more interesting, but then he started giving the impression that my response was totally uncalled for ("I'm not a critic!") and that he already did explain his opinion properly, while he clearly didn't (in my opinion).

That's why I kept responding. I hope people don't think I am the one who's being unreasonable here.

__________________
Cobpyth's Movie Log ~ 2019

I don't think you are being unreasonable. Maybe a little overly aggressive, but not unreasonable.

So when a creepy guy sneaks in a dressing room of female basketball team he should say: "Now we will be playin' with the balls" or rather: "Now we will be playin' with balls"?

__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.

I was hoping this post had taken care of that and would lighten the mood a little bit after Mark already pointed it out:

I guess that was a little naive of me.

But anyway, if the other person involved does not want to go on with this little discussion or talk about the movie that it's actually supposed to be about, I'll gladly withdraw myself. I just wanted to address a certain issue that bothers me sometimes when people are trashing a film. It was not my intention to start some kind of argument on a more personal level, even if it might have seemed that way to some people.

I was talking in the objective, descriptive sense, not about enjoyment, and you said:
" Whether I thought it was any good or worth seeing. I'm no Ebert. Or Rosenbaum. Or Pauline Kael. Hold your horses dude."
" I am not a film critic"

You are simply stated your personal enjoyment, and I have no problems with that, or your ratings, people use ratings differently, some use pure enjoyment, some attempt to apply some objectivity to them.

About how you state your opinions as objective facts? Well, it's my opinion too, not a fact, but I think a lot of people would back me up here, it's your vocabulary. You say thing's like "it's a bad movie" 'it's overrated" "it's an embarassment" and when films like The Untouchables, Casablanca, Chinatown, Under The Skin, and others come up you immediately state your 'opinion' as if we haven't heard you already and that you are informing them the correct opinion, as if you're right and everyone's wrong.

No it doesn't. I use a mixture of both, but sometimes it doesn't seem that you do. Like your Last Year at Marienbad comments where bluedeed made appropriate remarks about what type of movie and about 'engaging the audience', you seem to take a lot of what you see in a film at surface level and if you don't get it, you seem unforgiving and unwilling to comprehend why anyone else would.

And if you're using both then I highly doubt Harold and Maude would be a 0.5 film. That's bottom of the barrel stuff that I would only give to ametuer films. It's made professional, shot well and even though it doesn't work for you, it's clear what it's going for and what it's market it. I didn't particularly love the film, but I found it interesting and appealing and want to watch it again. I give it

True, no ones arguing about that, I 100% have no problems with you completely not enjoying Harold and Maude, but don't understand how you absolutely think that some o these films are terrible.

Fair enough, but I am going to paraphrase something Mark always says, but you're not really rating films on a level playing field. What he seems to do is start at 2.5 for the average, and then move up and down depending on how successful he found it. 0.5 is for embarrassments and are rarely used for mainstream films, and in the same way 5 is rarely used but for absolute favourites he considers masterpieces. 1.5 to 4 are the ratings he mainly uses.

Cool, but again no one is doing this. Similarly if you think it's cool to go against the opoosite and feel the need to constantly state your minority opinion to be controversial, then I feel sorry for you.

Excuse me? Then what do you call this?
I explained the many aspects of the film which I strongly disliked, yet you still complain. You're obviously bitter because you love the film and you deemed my comment aggressive (maybe I shouldn't have expressed my dislike for the film in the way that I did to start with, but I couldn't help it, sorry).

All this is fine though, you can disagree with my comment all day long, but these personal attacks and your constant bickering is just making you look really immature. To make things even worse, you have made yourself (and me, which is something that I loathe) the center of attention because of your theatrics. This thread should be used for movie talk only, and even arguing about films is acceptable (I hope), but now you've completely went off topic because you're focusing on a forum member (me) rather than the discussion.

These weren't direct personal attacks, like for example, "you're a complete moron". But you're constantly implying that I'm incapable of forming an opinion and unable to explain things, which a "normal" person would be able to.

Yeah, you'll probably respond now by saying I am completely overreacting, but if there's anyone who's overreacting here, it's you.

No, what this whole discussion has proved so far, is, like I said, that you can be very immature and overemotional at times, especially for films that you love. And as soon as you read a negative response on those films, you feel the need to act aggressively by disparaging the member who commented on the film rather than trying to discuss about the film.

I did explain, briefly, because like I said, sometimes I just can't be bothered to write a long review, and this film certainly doesn't deserve it. Furthermore, I'm not even a good reviewer (hence "I'm not a critic!"). I could try and write a review if I wanted to, but this isn't the place to do that, and this is something which seems you're not capable of understanding, no matter how hard I try. Reviewing a film is one thing. Commenting on a film, and explaining why you liked or didn't like it, is another. The latter I'm very capable of doing, as is every avid film watcher I believe.


Anyway, this has been a really pointless conversation so far and I honestly regret wasting my time and energy on it. I bet it has been extremely irritating for the readers and for that I'd like to apologize. Please return to discussing about what we all love.

__________________
''Haters are my favourite. I've built an empire with the bricks they've thrown at me... Keep On Hating''
- CM Punk
http://threemanbooth.files.wordpress...unkshrug02.gif

Maybe this is the problem: he's not asking you which aspects you dislike, he's asking you why you disliked what you did. So merely enumerating them ("premise, to the script and dialogue, to the execution, everything") wouldn't really serve as an explanation.

This is a perfectly fair response! You don't like the movie and don't care about it enough to delve into why. Totally fine, and I doubt anyone would have a problem with it. But it should be noted that this reason is different than saying an explanation has already been given.

This doesn't even make sense. How do you know this, are you inside my brain? I never enjoyed A Clockwork Orange, but I think it's great nonetheless (hey, explain why it's great!)

lulz I haven't even seen The Untouchables. You sir have a great memory.

Under The Skin for me was a massive disappointment, and I found the film shallow and unaffecting, with nothing unique to offer.

As for Casablanca and Chinatown, this is where my objectivity comes into play, which you claim is nonexistent when it comes to my movie watching. I wouldn't say I liked those movies (I would lie to myself if I said I did), but I never denied the fact that those films are good filmmaking. I think that's the biggest compliment you can give to a film you're not too fond of. I appreciate and respect those films. I'll never respect anything like Harold and Maude, however.

I never tried to do that. There's no such thing as right or wrong.

Um, what? I never got Persona, but I think it's a work of art anyway. That argument is invalid.

How am I controversial? Most of the films I love are extremely mainstream! I honestly don't see where you're coming from.

What I meant was that an explanation had been given as far as my initial comment is concerned. Basically I tried to sum up what I didn't like about the film. Cobpyth then asked me to explain everything in detail (which pretty much constitutes a review), and I gave him three reasons why I wouldn't do it.

1) The film doesn't deserve it.
2) I'm not a professional reviewer, meaning, even if I do attempt to review it, in all likelihood he will not be satisfied because of for example my vocabulary, the way I analyze the film, and so on. You can go and take a look at Ebert's website for example, and see how even professional critics are treated by the readers. I feel as though one can never be satisfied with a review if they disagree with the rating assigned to it. It's that simple.

and 3) This isn't the place to do it. This is Movie Tab where you rate films. It isn't a thread for reviews.


I hope I've made myself clear.

I was going to tab a movie, but I appear to've stumbled into the wrong thread.

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

Okay, instead of going back and forth arguing I'll explain my main problem in one simple statement.

The biggest issue I have, and I hope I am not the only one. Is the way that you write/speak, it seems very matter of fact, I'm right you're wrong, and deliberately controversial and provocative, as if you want to upset people you like a film you don't.

You've just provided me with another example of this:

--------

Not really, there's no rules or regulations, people can use it as they please, if you wantto use it for just ratings, fair enough

BlueLion got into discussion about a movie he hated and wasted a lot of time on wanton quarrels. He lost. :P

I call that an enumeration of aspects you call "bad". Explaining means that you actually say why they are bad.

"An explanation is a set of statements constructed to describe a set of facts/opinions which clarifies the causes, context, and consequences of those facts/opinions."

Again, you haven't explained anything. That's something you should be realizing by now.

I don't love Harold and Maude. It's not a favorite of mine and I'm certainly not bitter because you seem to hate it.

Again, I haven't made any personal attacks. You're the one who's calling me immature now, even though you used the word "poop" as an argument and you tried to ridicule all my former statements with an image. Ironic.

I was never focusing on you as a person. I was focusing on the way you were commenting on a certain film.

You seem to think this thread should be used for movie talk only and I agree, but then I think it's rather odd that you've been specifically defending your right to not talk about a certain film this whole time.

Please, give me one example where I am overreacting. I think I've been reasonable the whole time, so you won't find any.

Again, I've stated multiple times that my intention was not to make any personal attacks (and I never said anything that could officially be categorized under that term either). I was always focusing on the issue.

Give me one example of me being immature and overemotional in this whole discussion.

You're the guy who started taking things personally, who used the word "poop" and who called me laughable, while adding a Jim Carrey image to your post as a reinforcement...

I didn't ask for a review. I asked for a proper explanation, which shouldn't take more than 10 lines of text. If you had simply refused, that would've been the end. You started implying that my remark was uncalled for though and you actually started believing that you explained something, while you didn't. That's why I kept responding.

That was exactly what I was trying to do in the first place.