The stupidest thing you've heard someone say about a movie..

[pete]

One of my ex girlfriends described everything she liked by first saying "I loved....". Then she would name such and such film or such and such band. I wondered if any other feelings or thoughts mattered.

at the end of the day, no.

[Gold Trumpet]

One of my ex girlfriends described everything she liked by first saying "I loved....". Then she would name such and such film or such and such band. I wondered if any other feelings or thoughts mattered.

at the end of the day, no.

Good for you. I can't argue basic emotions.

[Gold Trumpet]

One of my ex girlfriends described everything she liked by first saying "I loved....". Then she would name such and such film or such and such band. I wondered if any other feelings or thoughts mattered.

at the end of the day, no.

Good for you. I can't argue basic emotions.

I'll reply to my own post. My first instinct was dismiss Pete's reply because it was stupid, but my dismissal will be continuing evidence I am a basically a robot to the boy.

The point is that someone can love something, but it shouldn't be the end all description about a movie or piece of music. Both things are suppose to relate back to different experiences and memories, both of which are based in emotions and intelligence. To simplify love as the crown jewel of descriptive words and continually say it is not only blatant over use, but inaccurate as well. The Beatles said "all you need is love", but hundreds of years ago Dante said love came both with good and evil. It isn't the hallmark of all good.

To say you like or love something isn't important. What is important is how you love it. The description should be honest and detailed enough that by the end it isn't simple "love" at all.

I also don't buy the fourteen year old kid's idea that the movie was able to make her believe in love and music. As a fourteen year old, most of her experience in life was behind the bars of a crib. Even if she did have enough experience to credit a film for such an accomplishment, it would be bullshit anyways. Personal experience forces someone to take consideration to the feeling of love. Music is more complicated because Vladamir Nabokov admitted he never understood the appeal of it so a film has that possibility, but I'd still argue general experience would likely be closer to the truth. As I said a few paragraphs above, music and films compliments our experience and memories. Life has to be lived before the value of a work of art can be appreciated. I also remember the interaction in Finding Forrestor. Jamall Wallace, the up and coming writer, says a book taught him something (I forget exactly what) and William Forrester replied back, smugly, "You needed a book to tell you that?"

[Gamblour.]

I don't know about all of what you're saying, dissecting a 14-year-old's opinion, regardless of gender, is working a bit too hard, since they have nothing to say (as you say, and I agree). I do like what you say about blanket-stating one's "love" for a movie, with no real support. I have a friend who always calls something "the best movie ever" or the "best whatever in the whole existence of the world" and I hate that. You say nothing by doing that.

Jim Emerson's been on a kick lately of critics passing off emotional opinion as meriting criticism with no evidence. I feel that's kind of the professional version of "love this/that" or "best episode ever"

[pete]

The point is that someone can love something, but it shouldn't be the end all description about a movie or piece of music. Both things are suppose to relate back to different experiences and memories, both of which are based in emotions and intelligence. To simplify love as the crown jewel of descriptive words and continually say it is not only blatant over use, but inaccurate as well. The Beatles said "all you need is love", but hundreds of years ago Dante said love came both with good and evil. It isn't the hallmark of all good.

To say you like or love something isn't important. What is important is how you love it. The description should be honest and detailed enough that by the end it isn't simple "love" at all.

an educated answer to reassert an emotional response until in the it's not even emotional anymore will only satisfy a very minority group of people who don't really matter much to this world.  I love observations, but I'm perfectly ok with them coming from journalists or kids on a message board; that's my responsibility to seek them out.  to expect former girlfriends and 14-year olds to write love poems with words and phrases of your choosing to satisfy your suspension of disbelief, is kinda sick. 
usually monsters like us internet people trip over our words two times over to describe a reaction, or break down the movie to pieces to single out what parts made you feel what, but in the end, are we're trying to do is to capture our feelings as precisely as possible.  and many times I've seen people who are so tempted to just replace all of them with words like "love" and "hate".  but on this funny network, we're held back by our duties to report information about the movies to each other.  if someone's particular role in life does not warrant any such ridiculous duty, good for her.  don't expect everyone you meet to turn into monsters.

[Stefen]

Girls are dumb. You can't expect your girlfriend to have the same interests as you. That's what boyfriends are for.

[Gold Trumpet]

I don't know about all of what you're saying, dissecting a 14-year-old's opinion, regardless of gender, is working a bit too hard, since they have nothing to say (as you say, and I agree).

Trust me, I wish I didn't have to write about that but I felt I did to just make my opinion known. The kid something potentially aware for a fourteen year old, but nothing meaningful overall.

Jim Emerson's been on a kick lately of critics passing off emotional opinion as meriting criticism with no evidence. I feel that's kind of the professional version of "love this/that" or "best episode ever"

Critics are always at the mercy of total endearment for one subject or another. I admire critics who bridge professional criticism with personal experience. So when they do go on an emotional tangent they are relating it back to personal history and experience. Criticism is considered the ultimate form of auto-biography. On one level you get to record the development of your thought intellectually but you get to also record personal experience. I prefer memoirs that are based on someone's experiences with other people and things instead of just with himself. The tale of someone's personal habits isn't very interesting. I think that goes along with criticism as well.

[Gold Trumpet]

an educated answer to reassert an emotional response until in the it's not even emotional anymore will only satisfy a very minority group of people who don't really matter much to this world.  I love observations, but I'm perfectly ok with them coming from journalists or kids on a message board; that's my responsibility to seek them out.  to expect former girlfriends and 14-year olds to write love poems with words and phrases of your choosing to satisfy your suspension of disbelief, is kinda sick.

I ask them to do nothing of the sort. All personal feelings should only honor the person who feels them, but if that person wants to convey the importance of what they feel to others (which they always do), they should find adjectives and descriptions that go beyond one word. Their word choice is completely up to them, but the word love can just become redundant when over used.

usually monsters like us internet people trip over our words two times over to describe a reaction, or break down the movie to pieces to single out what parts made you feel what, but in the end, are we're trying to do is to capture our feelings as precisely as possible.  and many times I've seen people who are so tempted to just replace all of them with words like "love" and "hate".  but on this funny network, we're held back by our duties to report information about the movies to each other.  if someone's particular role in life does not warrant any such ridiculous duty, good for her.  don't expect everyone you meet to turn into monsters.

The monster description is dumb, but who says we want everyone to look at movies the way we do? You are going after us for saying someone who makes blanket statements about everything all the time looks disingenuous, but anyone can make that observation. They also often do. Most people understand the idea of redundancy if someone says they love something to everything.

Second off, you don't know my ex girlfriend. She certainly would consider herself of enough intellectual capacity to be able discuss and analyze with anyone, but her continuous expression of 'I love this' and 'I love that' went opposite of her ambitions and didn't help her case if she was trying prove herself with anyone. Which she always was. The fourteen year old's comments really can't be taken serious. She is still young enough to be a follower instead of being able to reflect on her experience and come to her own conclusions.

[pete]

lets just pretend, for a moment, that I detest redundancy as much as you do.
if an overused word can be redundant, so can an overused combination of words, and attitudes.  I'm sure to a lot of people, your arbitrary and systematic way of looking at films are just as redundant as "I love this", because you still end up being unable to relate your experience in words, no matter how many words are at your disposal.
secondly, it is disingenuous for you to follow up the 14-year old girl statement with a story about your ex-girlfriend, thus making both "I loves" redundant, and then all of a sudden pulling the rug when the argument no longer serves to your favor, going "Well, you don't know her like I know her."  Of course I don't, but I thought I had all the information because of your redundancy.
and all of this is to serve that I am taking the 14-year old's comment very seriously.  it doesn't mean it's to be taken literally, but right now, not knowing her nor the movie, sitting in my room before going off to work, I don't know what's there for me to dismiss.

[Gold Trumpet]

if an overused word can be redundant, so can an overused combination of words, and attitudes.  I'm sure to a lot of people, your arbitrary and systematic way of looking at films are just as redundant as "I love this", because you still end up being unable to relate your experience in words, no matter how many words are at your disposal.

I'm so happy you turned this into a personal attack. Are you going to be that new person that attacks the way I look at films? Last time I checked I was able to write sentences that were understandable and said actual things. You and the others who have attacked me don't care what I say. You take interest in how I say it. You criticize the platform from which I speak and question its validity.

Until you guys can actually start making connections between what I say to find total contradictions and arguments that supercede the other, you have no basis. You need to start finding evidence to support an argument to what I say is just arbitrary. This also isn't something you compare to the love argument. Love is one word and one description. Last time I checked my position on films wasn't so simple. I say various things about various films to support or go against them. You are taking on a large subject to make such an arbitrary assumption.

Do I take it serious that people fault me? No. Because I've seen the same people who attack me compliment before for what I said about a movie. They start to attack me because I go against their favorite films. Some people don't like that and allow personal feelings to take over.

[pete]

I did find contradiction, because you were using redundancy to illustrate one thing, all the while attacking the others for being redundant.  that's not that personal; you think something is redundant, and I'm just saying, hey, you're redundant yourself, redundancy is such a bad thing.
also, I largely leave your opinions on films alone, and you should know that.  I'll get into it every once in a while, but I don't recall in any recent memory.  I only responded to you after you tried for the umpteenth time to uphold what serious filmtalk oughta be, at the expense of some stranger 14-year old and your ex-girlfriend.

[JG]

thread split!

[Gold Trumpet]

I did find contradiction, because you were using redundancy to illustrate one thing, all the while attacking the others for being redundant.  that's not that personal; you think something is redundant, and I'm just saying, hey, you're redundant yourself, redundancy is such a bad thing.

Don't move on like you assume you made a good point. I didn't say I was being redundant and you still didn't prove your case to how I was at all. You associated my redundancy to how I review films. If you believe that then start explaining because it is a large claim to make with nothing to back it. Since I'm not here to just talk sports and say unfunny things in the Caption thread, I find it a little inflammatory.

also, I largely leave your opinions on films alone, and you should know that.  I'll get into it every once in a while, but I don't recall in any recent memory.  I only responded to you after you tried for the umpteenth time to uphold what serious filmtalk oughta be, at the expense of some stranger 14-year old and your ex-girlfriend.

You have no place to comment on my ex girlfriend. You don't know the situation. And about the fourteen year old, I said I didn't even want to comment on it. It was absurd to. She's just fourteen years old so who cares. I did it after the point as a wrap up to a position. Don't take it too serious.

This also isn't a thread split. It still encompasses part of the thread. Making it another thread gives credence there is any argument on the other side anyways.

[Pubrick]

thread split!

to what?

"In this thread we double post instead of using the modify button"

[pete]

GT, GT:
you threw your ex-girlfriend out there, with no information about her personality or the sound of her laughter, only to group her in the same category as the 14-year old that you love to hate.  then when I asked you to be fairer to the 14-year old and the ex-girlfriend, you get mad like I just told you she was a bad fuck or something.  You're mad because your text is misinterpreted even though what you wanted to say about your text was quite clear.  then you got mad at me for not understanding the world outside your text.  IMAGINE how people with knowledge about filmmaking must feel, then, when they read essays by academics who are doing that all day everyday?
I called your comments redundant because, no matter how many words you use, your attitude towards films is no less alienating than people who just said "I loved it" about everything.  you're just as redundant, as the people you're trying hard to detest.
we seem to be taking on two opposite sides of some sort of discussion, but I bet, in the eyes of the jackasses with no investment into either of our stances, they'll just say "oooh now THESE are the stupidest things ever said about movies", even though we're arguing opposite things!  That's because you're me, man.  You say you're someone else with a very different eye for films, but soon emotions and contradictions betray your arguments.  You're actually on my side, GT, arguing against yourself.  Take a step back, and I guarantee you, that the ocean is as wide as the sky.