Fun Stuff > ENJOY
Inglourious Basterds
beat mouse:
Did I cross some hidden line where it's no longer okay to disagree with people and explain why? I wasn't calling the guy out to duel me in the town square, or calling him a worthless piece of shit who deserves to die. Sure that could be considered a little strong, but dear god, act like that was the first time you saw someone break down an argument a little more.
Alex C:
People have a low tolerance for condescension around here, that's all.
Alex C:
I don't think I explained myself there well enough and condescension is kind of a heavy thing to accuse someone of, so I'll throw a wall of text at you real quick.
Honestly, I think the biggest thing here is probably the way you came in and basically told SonofZ3 that he doesn't know what he's talking about. It's generally considered good form not to rub it in when someone makes a mistake or is misinformed. Pointing out a misconception is one thing, but that had already happened, so it came across as rather harsh when you put it in such terms. And for better or worse, people tend to read posts in sequence, so the overall effect is making you sound like you have a slight case of nerd rage even if the individual comments aren't so bad on their own.
It's not something that can't be fixed though; just keep in mind that this is a relatively small and slow moving forum, so things don't get lost in the background noise like on a bigger webcomic forum like PA. People can and will remember posts that you make here, and that'll influence the way they interpret your other posts, so generally it pays to be a bit more polite than you have to be on other places.
Ikrik:
-> Beat Mouse
That was pretty awesome. I actually like having my arguments picked apart by someone who actually knows what they're talking about. I've had too many arguments where the person arguing with me boils it down too "you're an idiot and you don't get it." I'm pretty bad with debating, obviously, and so having someone like you just rip apart what I'm saying is actually really helpful to me. So...thanks.
What I think of Tarantino is that:
1. His movies are just exploitation films, I don't think that there's that much going on with his storytelling. I think he has a very distinct style and that he's very good at writing and at shooting scenes.
2. He relies way too heavily on nostalgia. I'd go more into this but I don't really know how without being torn apart.
3. I don't really have a problem with his relationship with Rodriguez but I think that pretty much every time they've collaborated together it's turned out awful or half awful. I'll cite Grindhouse and From Dusk Till Dawn.
Is there a way to turn that into a cohesive argument?
beat mouse:
I'm not interested in getting into more arguments over this. Sorry SonofZ, Ikirk, sean, anyone else. I'll just say that I've lurked here for years, and I have witnessed far worse posts from unnamed members garner applause and encouraging laughter time and again.
-> Ikirk.
I think at the end of the day it boils down to whether you do or do not like the "film nerd" angle he goes after. His movies can be given a real "for us by us" mentality in that he is going to usher his movies to people who get excited over the same movies that he does. I would say if anything it's just not a matter of positive vs negative, just taste vs taste. I myself grew up watching a lot of movies from the 70s and 80s, and a fair amount from even earlier (I'm 22, to give an idea of why this isnt just a product of my time) so with Grindhouse as an example, it was cool for me to watch something new in the style of older movies that I grew up on.
Tarantino is a hard director to argue over because of how love or hate his work is. My reaction was more addressing the way your argument held his work accountable by his personality, and not by the work's individual merits, as criticism should be directed, hence what looked like a much more personal attack than was intended.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version