"...it all has to do with people's strong dislike of a film..." - people being a euphemism for you & patrick.

>>> "It is perfectly normal to use words like shit, crap, trash, etc in a conversational discussion of films, just like words like marvel, gem, hight of artistic achievement - there is really no difference." <<<

MOST folks are respectful of other's film tastes (notice my emphasis on the word 'most'); use of profane language to describe a film without provision of a well reasoned rationale for it is the epitome of vulgarity, insensitivity and arrogant behavior.

>>> "What is NOT normal is your immature inability to handle the rejection..." <<<

Rejection? Hmmm, ...are you sure that your aren't transposing your own fears, negativism and unpleasant experiences onto others? Food for thought. As for maturity, your's appears limited to age rather than emotional development.

>>> "...you have been on the vendetta path, stalking people here." <<<

Excuse me for a moment while I clean up the spewed coffee! ... What can one say about an over-the-top assertion like the one you've just proffered? This is pure baloney and you know it. The only "stalking" going on around here can be found along the twisted "vendetta path" trailing from your own snobbery! When you and patrick are bored you two Ebert/Roper wannabes stealthily attack certain films over and over again just to get a reaction.

Apparently you guys only see it as a "win" if everyone agrees with your warped grey poupon perspective. So you keep carpet-bombing insults at the films you both "love to hate" with a smirk and a strut in the hope that film mavens will either come over to the "dork side of your farce" or give up and move on having been low-brow beaten into submission.

>>> "Most people learn to handle such rejections and move onto things that matter to them." <<<

That's an oddly ironic statement, because you sure don't practice what you preach.

>>> "Also, writing things like "$#!+" in place of words you find offensive is a sign of a philistine, and something we expect the giggly thirteen year old girls do..." <<<

Interesting use of the word "we" in your diagnosis, Hippocrates. Your comment makes about as much sense as my saying that you're apparently infatuated with thirteen year old girls, but let's not go there, patrick might get jealous. ;^)

>>> "All in all, Patrick has written more about more films than you will probably ever see in your life..." <<<

A mime is a terrible thing to waste; too bad he chose not to be one! ;^)

>>> "...good advice for you would be to move onto movies and their discussions..." <<<

I'll take that under advisement, but as I provide at least as much insight on AMERICAN film as either of our two grey poupon specialists without any insulting Euro-trash snobbery I think it would behoove you to follow your own advice.

>>> "...endless personall attacks do not contribute to anything productive here." <<<

I would agree; perhaps you'll be the archetect of your own positive reconstruction and next time you won't build your house out of glass.

AuPh

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Harry Potter and the Gobelet of Fire---- - patrickU 08:17:07 04/12/06 (24)

GoF certainly had its moments... - Harmonia 01:22:37 04/16/06 (1)

Re: GoF certainly had its moments... - patrickU 02:27:10 04/16/06 (0)

We've got a teen Potter fan at home, so these are always obligatory purchases - padreken 11:11:51 04/13/06 (1)

Re: We've got a teen Potter fan at home, so these are always obligatory purchases - patrickU 01:23:47 04/14/06 (0)

Re: Harry Potter and the Gobelet of Fire---- - Analog Scott 09:36:34 04/12/06 (19)

King Kong shot on film? Well... - Dalton 22:50:22 04/12/06 (1)

Re: King Kong shot on film? Well... - Analog Scott 08:40:17 04/13/06 (0)

"What does that mean?" - Here's the Wikipedia definition: - Audiophilander 10:15:03 04/12/06 (10)

Are you saying her merders the English language? * - mr grits 16:59:37 04/12/06 (0)

Re: When will you get over your scatological phase? - patrickU 11:16:30 04/12/06 (5)

That's the question you should be asking yourself. (nt) - Audiophilander 11:45:50 04/12/06 (4)

The question you should be asking yourself... is... - Victor Khomenko 19:35:19 04/12/06 (3)

That dog won't hunt no matter how hard you wag it from the tail. - Audiophilander 00:02:54 04/13/06 (2)

Re: That dog won't hunt no matter how hard you wag it from the tail. - Victor Khomenko 05:57:16 04/13/06 (1)

"...it all has to do with people's strong dislike of a film..." - people being a euphemism for you & patrick. - Audiophilander 11:17:05 04/13/06 (0)

Wasn't asking about a word but the entire sentnce. - Analog Scott 10:19:21 04/12/06 (2)

Yes, I knew that. - Audiophilander 11:01:29 04/12/06 (1)

My mistake. Thanks for the clarification. - Analog Scott 11:04:36 04/12/06 (0)

Re: Harry Potter and the Gobelet of Fire---- - patrickU 09:52:04 04/12/06 (5)

you made the same wrong assumption as audiophilander - Analog Scott 10:32:58 04/12/06 (4)

Re: you made the same wrong assumption as audiophilander - patrickU 11:14:28 04/12/06 (3)

Re: you made the same wrong assumption as audiophilander - Analog Scott 11:22:33 04/12/06 (2)

Re: you made the same wrong assumption as audiophilander - patrickU 06:39:46 04/13/06 (1)

Re: you made the same wrong assumption as audiophilander - Analog Scott 08:42:52 04/13/06 (0)

Follow Ups

"...it all has to do with people's strong dislike of a film..." - people being a euphemism for you & patrick. - Audiophilander 11:17:05 04/13/06 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.