If only he had written a manifesto we could have rendered the entire critic industry obsolete. There is only ONE truth!!!!! Watch out, RLM....
It's time for everyone to stop this pointless bickering and work together, so we can discover the meaning behind none's use of the wrong-facing parenthesis.
^Is a mystery, sometimes we just don't know things but maybe this Shriners Fez is a clue :
zombie84 said:
Vaderisnothayden said:
So basically anybody who doesn't agree with your relativistic view of art is immature, egomaniacal, idiotic, etc? Nice to know. I won't bother discussing art with you in the future.
I wouldn't bother discussing it with anyone other than other deluded elitists convinced they know better than others just because they don't enjoy certain things. I doubt you could convince any reasonable person that their taste in things is somehow "incorrect." "Sorry, sir, you may think that Star Wars is a good movie, but actually it's not. Trust me, I've thought about it a long time." At best, people will say they simply don't agree, and at worst you will offend them. "I'm sorry you don't agree. You're still wrong, however."
An absolutist view of any art, whether fashion, comics, cinema, or music, is pure lunacy. I don't know how any person can honestly convince themselves that this has any logical value. In order to do so you would have to believe that you are "correct" about certain opinions and others "incorrect", which is pretty self-absorbed. It also shows how people have absolutely no grasp of cultural and art history, otherwise the only explanation of why films from certain periods have similar characteristics and why people liked certain things during certain periods is "well, they're not as sophisticated as us now", while exempting the present moment from the same analysis. Except for the vintage material that you like yourself, of course, that stuff is "truely" good, not just illusionarily good because of herd-mentality. Because everyone is wrong except for you, right now.
Blah blah blah. In case you hadn't caught on, I stopped debating with you two pages back. I thought I made it clear enough, too. To have any chance of reaching somebody with views as far out as yours would take too much effort and I'm not going to bother (all the more so seeing as you can't stop being insulting). I don't get paid for posting, you know. But you stubbornly refused to recognize that I'd stopped debating with you and so you hijacked my discussion with Warbler to find material to use as an excuse to insult me further. What I find interesting is that you can't accept me as a valid human being. Once I'd indicated I had views at odds with your prized relativistic doctrine of art, out came a stream of abuse. According to you I'm an idiot, immature and an egomaniac, etc. All because I don't share your views. This incapability to accept as valid a person who disagrees with you is a nasty trait and one that I think indicates you have serious issues.
That said, you've got me back into debating with you a bit just to clear some things up. Congratulate yourself.
In order to do so you would have to believe that you are "correct" about certain opinions and others "incorrect", which is pretty self-absorbed.
Which is what you are doing now, with your "Vaderisnothayden's view is incorrect and zombie84's view is correct and any view of art the disagrees with zombie's is that of "deluded elitists convinced they know better than others just because they don't enjoy certain things"". People regularly feel their views are correct and opposing ones are incorrect. If they didn't they couldn't believe in their opinions. Get used to it.
It also shows how people have absolutely no grasp of cultural and art history, otherwise the only explanation of why films from certain periods have similar characteristics and why people liked certain things during certain periods is "well, they're not as sophisticated as us now", while exempting the present moment from the same analysis.
Again you attribute to me views I do not hold and assume I'm arguing things I'm not arguing.
zombie84 said:
If only he had written a manifesto we could have rendered the entire critic industry obsolete. There is only ONE truth!!!!! Watch out, RLM....
Well you seem to think the critic industry is pointless anyway. There is only The One Truth of Zombie84 and the critics are all "deluded elitists" or whatever.
Because everyone is wrong except for you, right now.
Actually, what you're arguing is that everybody is wrong except for zombie84. Everybody who thinks any work of art is better or worse and that it's not all subjective (which includes most critics and academics dealing with the arts, plus a whole host of other people) -all those people- are wrong and zombie84 is right, and because of that they're probably all "deluded elitists" and immature idiot egomaniacs.
All I've done is dared to have my own view, dared to have confidence in my own view, dared to hold to my view when an individual or individuals have told me my view is wrong, and dared to hold to to my view despite the fact that the majority among a certain group disagree with me (the last re Wrath of Khan in particular). For this crime you call me an idiot, an egomaniac and immature. From that I deduce that you must be very much a the-individual-must-submit-to-the-majority/independent-thought-is-bad type of person. I'm not. I believe strongly in the right of the indivudual to think for themselves and go their own way.
You have succeeded in opening my eyes about you. In the past I have noted to myself some faults in the thinking in The Secret History of Star Wars, such a tendency to overly quickly dismiss opposing evidence and to build theories on insufficient evidence, but I kept quiet about it, because the book is a great store of Star Wars info despite those problems. But now I am adding together the aggressive narrow-mindedness of your reaction to my views with the extreme nature of the views you state here and adding in the problems with the thinking in your book, and the picture that emerges from all that is... interesting.
But I am done debating with you. I will try to avoid having any discussions with you in the future, because this has not been a pleasant experience. You turned a civilized discussion into a row, for which I don't thank you. Perhaps you should learn not to get spontaneously insulting with people you are having a discussion with. It would be a mark of maturity. Have a nice day.
TheBoost said:
Warbler said:
Vaderisnothayden said:Without emotional depth you've got jack shit in terms of art. The problem is there are some pretty mistaken ideas about art and what's of artistic value.
in your opinion
Vaderisnothayden said:
Oh there are other criteria for evaluating movies, sure, but artistic value and emotional depth is the big one.
in your opinion
Warb, you're missing the point. VINH doesn't express opinions (if he even has such lowly feelings). He reveals fact.
Bullshit. All I do is believe in my opinions. I do nothing that everybody else doesn't do. Or do you argue things while believing they're wrong or automatically count your opinions as mistaken just because somebody tells you they are?
Surely you have the intelligence to realize it's low-down to join in attacking somebody who is being abused?
Warbler said:
first of I want to apologize for my part in derailing this thread. I saw Vaderisnothayden's comments on the Star Treks movie and just couldn't keep myself from commenting. Sorry. This will be my last post in this thread as 1. the discussion between VINH and myself isn't going anywhere. We just disagree and that's that. 2. I no longer wish to contribute to the further derailment of this thread.
Vaderisnothayden said:Without emotional depth you've got jack shit in terms of art. The problem is there are some pretty mistaken ideas about art and what's of artistic value.
in your opinion
Vaderisnothayden said:
Oh there are other criteria for evaluating movies, sure, but artistic value and emotional depth is the big one.
in your opinion
Vaderisnothayden said:
I'm not going to list a top ten movies, because that sort of list is too hard to make up. There are movies I like more than others, but the list changes and there are different ways to judge such a list. For example, there are movies I think are great and movies I like a lot and while the two lists overlap they are not the same.
ok, how about listing say 5 movies that you feel are great and 5 movies that you like a lot?
first of I want to apologize for my part in derailing this thread. I saw Vaderisnothayden's comments on the Star Treks movie and just couldn't keep myself from commenting. Sorry. This will be my last post in this thread as 1. the discussion between VINH and myself isn't going anywhere. We just disagree and that's that. 2. I no longer wish to contribute to the further derailment of this thread.
Thank you for not being like certain other people. You have not insulted me at any point on this thread and for that I thank you. We can agree to disagree, no problem. :)
in your opinion
in your opinion
Well of course it's my opinion. I wouldn't be saying it if it wasn't. I never see the point in people saying "In your opinion", except for people to say "I think you're mistaken" without actually saying those words. I never claimed it was anything other than my opinion. It is my opinion, my opinion which I believe is right because I have thought it out very carefully and found it solid, same as you believe your opinions are right. Same as most people believe their opinions are right.
ok, how about listing say 5 movies that you feel are great and 5 movies that you like a lot?
Maybe some other time. Right now, our discussion doesn't seem to be thrilling everyone on this thread, so I'd rather just draw it to a close.
TV's Frink said:
It's time for everyone to stop this pointless bickering
I agree. I am done with all that now.
Dear Mods,
I have recently started to build a list of the most entertaining (by my definition) threads on OT.com:
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Classic-Train-Wreck-Moments-in-OTcom-History/topic/11271/
It has been suggested to me that this thread qualifies, and I am inclined to agree. However, I don't want my list to degenerate into the mocking of current forum members. And thus, it would make me feel much better about including this thread in my list if you could ban those who have really been stirring up trouble.
Please ban the following users:
Bingowings
vote_for_palpatine
none
RedLetterMedia
TV's Frink
Ric Olie
CP3S
Jay
doubleofive
ThrowgnCpr
Nanner Split
ferris209
Chewtobacca
Moth3r
Stinky-Dinkins
Davnes007
xhonzi
Ric Olie
bkev
RedLetterMedia's Dead Ex-Wife
Lazy Lucas, was Lazy.
Zion
Adywan
Mugatu's Dog
The lolcat that says "Khaaan!!"
My Scroll Wheel
hot.like.olie
none
The Russian Women's Curling Team
Gaffer Tape
Biff Tannen
FanFiltration
Raptor Jesus
I thank you, and the thread thanks you.
Yours,
TVF
Sweet! Top of the list!
IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!
"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005
"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM
"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.
Vaderisnothayden said:
TV's Frink said:
It's time for everyone to stop this pointless bickering
I agree. I am done with all that now.
TV's Frink really said:
It's time for everyone to stop this pointless bickering and work together, so we can discover the meaning behind none's use of the wrong-facing parenthesis.
I'll teach you to take my quote out of context!
Vaderisnothayden said:
TV's Frink said:
It's time for everyone to stop this pointless bickering
I am all that I agree with, done now. Oh, and Hayden was the best thing about all six star wars films.
:P
Also,
((((((((((((((((((((((((((
xhonzi said:
Sweet! Top of the list!
Check again.
Crap! Should have kept my mouth shut!
IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!
"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005
"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM
"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.
Was tempted to try and ban myself to see what would happen. However, seems like Jay has made the forum software sufficiently idiot-proof: I don't even have the option to get to the ban button on my account.
Interestingly, it is possible to add Jay to my ignore list.
Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here
Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here
You can't ban anyone?
SCREW YOU, MOTH3R!!!! WOO-HOO!!!! VIVA THE REVOLUTION!!!
Oh, wait a minute...I think I read that wrong. What I meant to say was...have you tried banning Jay yet?
Note: Added FanFiltration to the ban request list, out of sympathy for the MURDER at the Sylvester Estate! Incident.
Vaderisnothayden said:
Which is what you are doing now, with your "Vaderisnothayden's view is incorrect and zombie84's view is correct and any view of art the disagrees with zombie's is that of "deluded elitists convinced they know better than others just because they don't enjoy certain things"". People regularly feel their views are correct and opposing ones are incorrect. If they didn't they couldn't believe in their opinions. Get used to it.
This is the pot calling the kettle black. My stance is that everyone is entitled to their opinion, your stance is:everyone is really wrong and I am not. That's what is absurd, what is offensive. Of course I disagree with that. Can you not see why this would piss people off? Holding yourself as Knower of Truth, and everyone's elses feelings and views as misguided falsities? Maybe you shouldn't be totally invalidating everyone else while situating yourself as the only valid opinion if you don't want any flak. I am not stating every view I hold is the absolute truth but simply indicating that this particular view of your is quite arrogant and presumptuous on your part, aside from its demonstratable inaccuracy. I know when people debate movies, people assume they are "correct" in as much as they hold certain beliefs and argue for the merit of them, but most people have the grace to admit that this is their opinion and yours is yours and it all depends on the viewer, most people don't have the gall to look down and say "well, your opinon is your own, but there is actually only one truth and I am the one who knows it." That's the difference you have made. People debating the merit of their beliefs for being "correct" itself demonstrates the subjectivity of perception, which you deny exists in the first place.
Again you attribute to me views I do not hold and assume I'm arguing things I'm not arguing.
If you are going to write off all historical stylizations while exempting the previous moment from this, it certainly is what your attitude has suggested and indicated.
Well you seem to think the critic industry is pointless anyway. There is only The One Truth of Zombie84 and the critics are all "deluded elitists" or whatever.
This is patently different from your view, which doesn't even leave room for debate because everyone can simply be "Wrong" if you say they are, in the end. I think the critic industry is a very interesting and important one, in fact I work in the Cinema Studies department at University of Toronto, I just don't think any one view is inherantly True, beyond our own views. If one view was true, we wouldn't need critics, just this one Art Jesus to lead the way and tell us why we are all mistaken, despite our actual preferences and feelings that disagree. This reminds me of a very Stalinist stance actually.
Actually, what you're arguing is that everybody is wrong except for zombie84. Everybody who thinks any work of art is better or worse and that it's not all subjective (which includes most critics and academics dealing with the arts, plus a whole host of other people) -all those people- are wrong and zombie84 is right, and because of that they're probably all "deluded elitists" and immature idiot egomaniacs.
I don't think all art is equal, I just recognize that it's my opinion and that others may have a different view, and that I'm not inherantly better than them simply because we disagree. That's the fatal flaw that you've failed to realise. You conflate opinion with fact, but it's only a fact if it is your opinion, and that's the true mark of arrogance. But nice try to turn it around and make it about me and my "narrow-mindedness." It's the equivalent to saying people who don't accept Neo-Nazi's are narrow-minded haters. Come on. In as much as I oppose a view that dismisses everyone else as really being wrong and yourself as the only one with the self-appointed capability to dictate the truth of what is personal taste, then yes, I suppose you could say that this is discriminatory.
All I've done is dared to have my own view, dared to have confidence in my own view, dared to hold to my view when an individual or individuals have told me my view is wrong, and dared to hold to to my view despite the fact that the majority among a certain group disagree with me
What you've dared to do, actually, is present your opinion as fact, while writing off everyone else as having "just opinions," misguided views of the real truth of the matter that only you or an imagined elite is privy to.
From that I deduce that you must be very much a the-individual-must-submit-to-the-majority/independent-thought-is-bad type of person
Because that was totally what my point was. You really don't get it.
In the past I have noted to myself some faults in the thinking in The Secret History of Star Wars, such a tendency to overly quickly dismiss opposing evidence and to build theories on insufficient evidence, but I kept quiet about it, because the book is a great store of Star Wars info despite those problems
I am not above criticism, if you think my work has faults I am more than open to constructive criticism.
On the other hand, this argument started because you didn't feel Wrath of Khan was very good. Fine. But since you believe in One Truth when it comes to art, that means that you must be correct, or else you are wrong. When it was pointed out that there is wide preference against your view, you must therefore defend your ego, because as far as you are concerned it's not just an opinion, it's fact:
-When it was pointed out that most people feel that WOK is the best and STV the worst you accused that they are just herd-thinkers, without qualifying this. Since it's unfalsifiable in the first place, it becomes unfounded paranoia since you can subject any popular work you disagree with as herd-thinkers without having to qualify it.
-When it was pointed out that STIV is considered better than STV, you accused that it was because 80s trends were crappy and that if it was re-shown today it wouldn't be successful, indicating that people at the time didn't really have valid opinions, but now would. Which writes off historical trends in art. Which makes sense if you don't believe in subjectivity. Aside from the fact that people have been re-watching it and maintaining more or less the same view.
-When you made the same accusation to STII, it was pointed out that a great many fans weren't even alive when it was released because of its age, and therefore the movie wasn't acccepted "at the time" because they weren't there, but accepted it in relatively modern times. This tied into the fact that there was no re-evaluation going on in the first place, as you surmised there ought to be. Which is again unfounded paranoia--people would really hate the film if only they could watch it outside of 1982, even though two generations since then have been born and doing the same thing. This is the "nostalgia" argument that prequel people use against OT fans, even though there are a million films people love as a kid that they think are crappy when they grow up.
-This would then feed back into the herd-thinking mentality, I must assume, they like the film because it's popular, bringing us in a nice circular loop to your first point. You know they only like it because its popular because you say you do. You have to, because it's the only way you can be Correct, and you must be Correct because you don't believe in relative views.
You leave us only with a convoluted maze of unfounded and unsubstantiated accusations passed off as material fact. Whatever you say becomes objective fact, simply because you believe it to be, and even if you can't prove it. And your opinions become fact while others remain just opinions, because you believe that only you are correct.
Or it could have gone like this:
-I think STV is better than STII. Just didn't do anything for me, never understood why people think it is so great. But to each his own.
Because in the end, that's all your argument came down to anyway!
zombie84 said:
If one view was true, we wouldn't need critics, just this one Art Jesus to lead the way and tell us why we are all mistaken, despite our actual preference and feelings.
Look, I've tried not to take sides on this thing, but now you've gone to far. Art Jesus? There's only one true Jesus, and you know it.
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/The-Church-of-Raptor-Jesus/topic/7297/
Dear Mods,
I added Raptor Jesus to the ban list.
Yours,
TVF
Bingowings
vote_for_palpatine
none
RedLetterMedia
TV's Frink
Ric Olie
CP3S
Jay
doubleofive
ThrowgnCpr
Nanner Split
ferris209
Chewtobacca
Moth3r
Stinky-Dinkins
Davnes007
xhonzi
Ric Olie
bkev
RedLetterMedia's Dead Ex-Wife
Lazy Lucas, was Lazy
Zion
Adywan
Mugatu's Dog
The lolcat that says "Khaaan!!"
My Scroll Wheel
hot.like.olie
none
The Russian Women's Curling Team
Gaffer Tape
Biff Tannen
FanFiltration
Raptor Jesus
just to clarify, TV's Frink,my name's got a peirod in it. but why'm I gettin' banned for?
Lazy Lucas, was Lazy. said:
just to clarify, TV's Frink,my name's got a peirod in it. but why'm I gettin' banned for?
Not sure what a "peirod" is, but I fixed it anyway.
You're gettin' banned for bein' lazy.
No you fool, you added a period, not a peirod!
"Mattingly, I told you to trim those sideburns!"
Is it pronounced "Mother" or "Moth three are?" I have to know.
Want to book yourself or a guest on THE VFP Show? PM me!
im looking for the one they call MOTHTHREEARE
I refuse to let this thread die, so I'll just say...look what I discovered! The tyranny of none is at an end. Long live non-OP post header titles!
Recent Interview with RLM:
<blockquote>“When I did the first review, the Star Trek: Generations one, I started to record it in my normal voice and it was just horrible and dull. So I decided to do it in character to make it more palatable, especially since my goal wasn’t to just give a cursory review, but rather to get really detailed. It is a massive amount of pointless nerd deconstruction so there has to be a ‘wink wink’ element to it. If you didn’t have some kind of humor with the material you’d come off as either someone with no life at all (which is true in my case) or someone who’s a big armchair critic that thinks he knows everything. The character adds a certain level of irony and fun to it .”</blockquote>
lots of other tid bits in the interview, the creation process, the differences between series (ST, SW, LotR), and his owning of awkward.
He's uploading the parts of AOTC as I type. part 1 is link, obviously. Also, protagonist pronounced properly.
A Goon in a Gaggle of 'em
I don't know which is cooler - an AOTC RLM review, or seeing this thread revived. It brings warm feelings to my heart.