So, is it only eloquence and extended-articulation that separate my statements and your own? I mean, I might have been more explicit than yourself... but, if my comments are so "condescending", what are yours?

Normal. I don't try to intimidate people with my overwhelming intelligence. This is a message board full of a lot of idiots, none of whom really give a shit about what you have to say. PS, you're still being condescending

So, it's alright to be condescending by proxy, but not explicitly...?

Alright, that makes a f**k-load.

well personally I wasn't a fan. This thread is full of opinions, I may think one movie is bad and I'll have my reasoning for it. If it isn't your reasoning, to be quite honest I don't care.




Yes Nate, the Fountain was a bit of yawn.

National Lampoon's Pledge This.

My god, it was just apalling. Awful, AWFUL people.

See, when you make comments like these, you should follow them up. What about the movie was sophomoric and what makes you call it pretentious? How was it poorly executed? I really have nothing to say about this since I haven't actually watched The Fountain, but I've disagreed with a lot of your comments about movies I DID like... such as Juno and HAVE felt that what you said about those movies are a bit pretentious and condescending.

I've read movie reviews that cut down movies I like, so it's definitely not that. Most reviews tell you just what it is about certain films that they find horrible, where the redeeming qualities are, and why they hate it so much. Calling something "pretentious and sophomoric" is not a review, it's an opinion. You've never followed it up.

You use big words, but people really need to dig through that pile of shit to get to what you're really trying to say.

Seems that its a bit hypocritical to allow your opinion to be shared but not mine, nor my opinion on your opinion. You don't really have to care, I just have to care enough to type it out. Which doesn't take long thanks to my amazing typing skills.


I think if you honestly read what he said past the word sophomoric you would have gotten all of the information you're asking for.

I think the whole point of a forum like this is a sharing of opinions. And if you honestly don't like someone's opinion, you shouldn't just say "Well you're being a c*ck." Provide a counterargument, and give supporting reasons. It's simple. It's a discussion not an argument.

^ I actually did read past sophomoric, thanks. And if you read past my first few sentences, you'll realize that I've never fully watched this movie, but for now, I'll give my critique on his critique and rent the movie later.



What exactly are these old tricks? Sometimes, old tricks are the best; they've been used and have obviously been successful, so there's nothing wrong from borrowing from the past to prove a point or try to make a movie work. As for yawn-inducing... I thought Space Odyssey was yawn inducing and still liked it.



There's another point that you don't follow up.

You don't give any comparisons to put it up against.

I don't really care enough to disagree with his opinion. Everyone has their own and of course, he's entitled to his. I just really don't care for the way he presents it. If he wants to write a long paragraph, at least make it worthwhile. All I got from what he said was that he thought it was a pile of shit and that people who have an opposing opinion are wrong.

But then again, that's just my opinion.

Never having fully watched a movie doesn't really have anything to do with any part of what I said.

And from what I can understand from his posts he wasn't so much saying other people's opinions are wrong. In fact there was nothing there that eluded to it. He merely stated his opinion in confidence. Yeah, he said the movie was a pile of shit, but Rachel said the same thing about Hot Rod, and no one jumped down her throat.

Personally I liked Hot Rod. It wasn't outrageously funny, but it was unassuming and quaint. It was a movie I could sit down and it won't necessarily move me, or make me laugh a lot, but it's got its moments and it was a good way to melt off some stress.

But that's just my opinion.

from justin to kelly

Because I am amazing. DUH

Haha well there's that too I'm sure.

I don't know. I think a lot of my criticisms (say Harold and Kumar and Juno) have been informed by more detail and evidence, while some might have been more vague (possibly in this instance). But, I'm not compelled to really articulate anything much further than my most immediate impressions when someone praises a film in perfect simpleness and utter ambiguity. Although I agree that my comment could definitely benefit from greater substantiation, I couldn't possibly concede that I have presented my opinion in any less detail than anyone else in this particular thread. Further, I am not persuaded that my comment is any more or less condescending, in comparison to anyone else's comment here, given merely by its explicitness.

If you actually see the film, and still disagree with my (more general) opinion, I would encourage a discussion. But, for now, I'll leave you with this:

The Fountain was so pretentious impart because it was so self-indulgent. The same scene(s) - literally the same scene - is shown an unreasonable amount of times. The symbology of the film is overwrought and cliched (the tree of life, etc. etc.). The jilted time frames and chronology of the "stories", which add very little to whatever depth one might be able to invent, are unnecessarily confusing as well as arbitrarily placed though-out a far too lengthy running time (during which very little actually happens). Usually, the highlight of a slow-paced or minimalistic film is its attention to tone, however, because of the non-contingency of the entire experience, no atmosphere is truly unearthed. Instead, the movie just appears lost. Worse is that the filmmaker is constantly informing us, through his direction, his use of dramatics, and his imagery, that something profound is happening. To me, the constant reminder that something important is happening only extends the dubiosity I hold to any film that already can't seem to articulate it's supposed insights.

Really, I could go on forever.

We know

I'm still sticking with Catwoman and I don't feel obligated to explain why.

PS, Nate, you had me a dubiosity. hahaha

One day, I'm going to wake up and live in a world where having a decent vocabulary is not automatically mistaken for being condescending.

That's going to be a good day.

^ lol, you're the one who thinks I'm fickle, right?

edit/
But on that subject, I have no problem with big words. Trust me, I don't. But unless you're trying to say something substantial, using big words to fill up space is stupid.

I don't mind the big words when he's saying something worthwhile like this:


I'm actually going to rent it when I'm done with finals and back home now to see if I agree with this.

Not Another Teen Movie
Dude, like seriously stfu.

All Bring It On movies, excluding the 1st one.

Haha I OWN Not Another Teen Movie! It's ridiculous but it makes me laugh.

Hahaha, genius!

I've only seen the first one and the second one. Or wait, the second one is all or nothing, right? Because that's the one I saw. And OMG, so bad. I mean, I like Hayden Panetierre, but ew, the character she played. Even though the moves and stuff were cool, that's the same for most cheerleading movies. This is probably her worst movie. Or maybe the worst that I've seen from her, at least.

Sort of... I thought you were someone else named Melissa from a while ago, who I DID think was fickle. I don't actually know you at all.

YUP. this must be the worst movie

oh wait ... i so hated SKINWALKERS ... omg .. i cant believe i paid to see it ..

I HATE Waiting... and Grandma's Boy.

i hate the first air bud movie...it makes me cry...idk

Battle Royal II. HORRIBLE!