Originally Posted by SamsoniteDelilah
We disagree.
I've talked to plenty of people who don't think it's "flawless". It's a good film, but, for the reasons I cited, it's not a perfect litmus test for whether subtitles alone are enough to put off the american public.
Yes. Your tone went from conversational to accusing me of trying to slide my personal opinion through as an objective fact. I didn't. The fact is NOT EVERYONE believes that City of God is "flawless". In fact, you're the first person I've heard use that word to describe it. Due to the fact that there were (painful as it may be for you to face) a few things that could undermine the wild popularity you apparently imagined for the film, it's not just my personal opinion that it might not be the most popular film ever. Reality bears me out on this.
there's that tone again, i never, NEVER, said it is the gratest film ever of that it should have earned as much as the titanic, or that it should be the most popular film ever, you may have gotten on the wrong side of the bed this morning, don't take it out on me, i was merely saying that it should have earned more than the measly what, 9 milion dollars if i remember it correctly? especially when a film as weak as catch me if you can earned 150 million...
Originally Posted by SamsoniteDelilah
You're refuting my personal opinion with your own personal opinion, and the conclusion you're drawing is illogical.
No. I'm being outright aggressive. You went there and I answered it. You bear that in mind before popping off to me again. There were much less accusatory and insulting ways to state your opinion than those you chose to use. You'd be well advised not to align your behaviours with Obi. He's not generally regarded as a paragon of polite discourse.
i reitterate that my post did not deserve such a response, i was just trying to have a normal , mature converstion, at no point did i adress you in a patronising mannor or called you stupid , which you did to me...i may be half your age, but that doesn't give you the right to talk to me that way, especially when you imagine some personal attack, trust me , if i wanted to attack you i would have done it differently....my mistake for trying to have a normal discussion with you......one i shall try not to make again.....
Originally Posted by Tacitus
If I may step in here....
You're basing your half cocked argument...actually not an argument but rather questioning the taste of the American cinema going public, purely because you think the film is 'flawless' and can't understand anyone not likeing it?
yes, i guess i am questioning the taste of the american general public
Originally Posted by Tacitus
Cindy offered her opinions as to why it didn't go through the roof and you compared it to The Matrix and LOTR?
i did? you'll have to explain that to me, i mentioned the matrix and the lord of the rings not to directly compare them to CoG ( as i myself think of both those movies as better than CoG and deserving of every penny they earned), she thought the american movie going public didn't go to see CoG because they couldn't relate to it, i merely mentioned those films as other example of unrelatable films, again, i don't think the film needs to be relatable for people to go and see it....
bottom line is, i think that if films like my best friends wedding, catch me if you can, hitch,oceans eleven,wedding crashers,signs,meet the fockers and other mediocre films can earn tens of millions of dollars, CoG should have earned a bit more don't you?
but i grow tired of this argument.....