Oh gosh. I only read through the first page. Let me go ahead and annoy all sides with my very own opinion on a few points listed as if they were truth:
1) "Offended over the INTERNET": <-- Yeah, so? No seriously, is it the cool thing to do now to look down on the concept? People are people, lives are lives, and feelings are feelings. It doesn't become non-existent just because it's the internet. That sounds just as silly as hearing people get (too) offended by trolls. Seriously, emotions on the internet exists folks. Get off thought that everyone should be emotionless when they're insulted and/or hurt. I would hope people are more experienced in life in general for that.
2) Last week's review and the this week's review(s): I have to admit there is some irony to be had here. Going by my standards, I wouldn't watch any of the three movies. They all equate to shallow trash in comparison to what I seek in my movies, right? That's it. Trash is trash. Sure one trash might smell better, but it's still trash in the end. Bashing people for liking trash and (somewhat?) praising another is a great way for backlash to happen. And hey, I'm sure on the other 8 pages I have yet to read, my point is proven. Which goes to point 3
3) To be fair, I believe there could be a chance we could have a major communication error with what Bob meant. Sure, if he actually means "If you liked x, then you are y, end of story", then the backlash, I don't really have much to say. I believe there are exceptions to everything in life, hence my first point. If it is one of those cases where he should have clarified, then whoops on his part, I hope he takes the time to clarify things, with an apology for a clearly mixed message.
4) Those who named called and got a bit TOO angry, congrats, you now are in the same boat as good ole' Bob here.
5) Bob, pushing all of this aside, I DO have to bring up a personal concern or two. I'm a man who enjoys innovative quality, so don't worry about me defending any of the movies over the past two weeks. This is about your presentation over these movies.
Whether or not you wanted to come across as the overly angry guy who thinks that everyone who saw/enjoyed The Expendables were stupid mindless jocks or whether you meant something else, clarification was obviously needed, and usually, you clarify. But instead, there was no clarification. Only a bullet statement. Why not? It leads everyone to believe you have one way and one way only to glance at things. If that's true, it'd suck not to be able to take you seriously anymore, but I am someone who needs several, several outlooks on one given topic, and even encourage people to heavily debate me so I can see more angles and learn. And as such, that opinion of yours, if it was as it sounded, is simply wrong.
Another thing was conflicting/ironic opinions. I understood what you meant perfectly when you reviewed 2012: High budget, great acting, great music, great script, great pacing, great emotional moments, told in a familiar formula. It was done right and by all means done better than a lot of innovative titles that were "meh". However, "Pirhana", as you sold it, was just about gallons of blood, 3D, women (I don't know my women, soo...), and cheese violence. That, to me, is no better than The Expendables and what it represents. So basically, no matter who wants to bash me for it, I view them all as "avoid spending cash on them" category. Same trash experience for me.
So in the case of the two movies, what, exactly, was separating your enjoyment of The Expendables? The answer the forum will tell me would be nudity, and what your review has told me, is nudity. That does not bold well when topped with insulting (accidentally or otherwise) the Escapist community.
Please do fix, one way or another, before you do more reviews. And note: I was not insulted by anything you said, however, this situation is very interesting on all sides, so I thought I'd partake in it.
