KrabbiPatty said:
Jesus, grow up. No seriously, grow the fuck up, this isn't kindergarten--no one cares if you liked the movie or not. No one.
I am just pointing out stuff. You can decide to care or not. I don't care if no one cares.
KrabbiPatty said:
But really, that describes every movie critic I've ever known (including Moviebob): Immature and Asinine.
That's your opinion. Nothing wrong with that. But with a standpoint like that, nothing critics say will matter. Which could also include nothing I say would matter to you. Although I did hit a nerve looking at your grand reply.
KrabbiPatty said:
These are the spoiled rotten man-brats who think their "vaunted" seal of approval means sooo much to everyone, then self-immolate outside of a theater to protest when it doesn't. And ignorant snobs like you are the ones who keep paying THEM to think for you.
First of all, I don't let critics think for me. I don't let the "average consumer" influence me either. I will decide whether the movie is good, regardless of what critics or other people say. It also doesn't matter that my "seal of approval" doesn't mean anything to other people.
KrabbiPatty said:
This is what bugs me about movie critics, people who listen to movie critics, and their ilk. You people can't take rejection. If movie snobs actually had any power, if you were all SOOOO smart, don't you think you'd be able to stop these movies from being made? That's the argument I always make when some smartass pulls out that old "EVERYONE IS STUPID BUT ME!" gimmick: if you're so smart why don't you have any actual power? Because surely it must be child's play to outwit such idiots and convince them to go see your precious Scott Pilgrim movie right? I mean if you really are that smart? But you're not are you...
For me, this has nothing to do with being smart or being stupid and it has also nothing to do with convincing people whether a movie is good or bad. Also movie critics are but a small number compared to the moviegoers. The only fear movie studios would have is that critics can convince people not to go see a certain movie. But in reality critics don't influence people that much.
For me, the only difference is argumentation. If you ask the "average consumer" why he liked the movie, all he can say is that because the movie was awesome, or because Brad Pitt was in it. I like to separate myself from the average because I can explain everything I say. I can enter an intellectual discussion if I would desire so.
KrabbiPatty said:
And if everyone who went to see the Hangover II or Transformers II or Fast Five whatever is so dumb they'll see anything then how come a lot of big budget blockbusters fail? Cutthroat Island? Ever heard of it? It was a big budget studio blockbuster that was so shitty and so hated by the public it tanked a company! Clearly, the public has some discerning tastes.
Hey, Cutthroat Island was an awesome movie! Nah, just kidding. Some big budget movies fail, but most seem to succeed. If it's a big budget blockbuster main stream movie, that doesn't mean I don't like it because of that.
KrabbiPatty said:
See the reality is you just don't want to admit that no one cares about all that crap that movie snobs care about and just want to see an enjoyable movie. Because if you did, then suddenly whatever little indie film festival fodder you like, or some BS quasi-mainstream geekstravaganza like Scott Pilgrim, would be no better objectively than anything else. It'd be about taste and personal opinion...and that can't be because then you wouldn't be smarter than everyone else!
That's an interesting point there. But I guess that's the paradox. You want to be different, standing out amongst people; you don't like the mainstream and comment that all those mainstream movies are crappy. But at the same time you don't want the movies you like to become mainstream, because if that would become the case, you would no longer stand out. But I can break that paradox by being objective. Even if I don't like a movie, I can still respect the movie.
KrabbiPatty said:
No it must be some vast systemic problem with Hollywood, or better yet some vast systemic problem with the "average consumer" (which, newsflash, would include you). Obviously it must be. Obviously.
The "average consumer" is the majority of people, which does not automatically include me. I may be the "average consumer" when it comes to buying groceries, I am not the "average consumer" when it comes down to going to the movie theater and reviewing movies.
KrabbiPatty said:
And insulting people by calling them stupid because they liked the movie is not just immature but asinine.
And of course I'm sure you'll just write off anything I say as "trolling" (i.e. disagreeing with you) or say I'm "stupid" because obviously you can judge someone's intellect based on something as arbitrary and silly as what movies they like. Obviously.
Or you can man up and at least TRY to respond to something I said. Go on, stand up for what you believe in, try to justify it. Shock me.
I never said I can judge someone's intellect based on what movies they like. Also, if I would say that it's stupid to watch a certain movie. That wouldn't automatically mean that people who go see that movie are stupid in my opinion. No, it would just mean that 'that' particular action I find to be silly, not the person himself.
