during return of the king, the whole unedited sequence for the ride of the rohirim. I STILL get chills everytime I hear that horn and see the calvary just begining to emerge over the crest of the ridge with the dawn behind them, that charge was TRULY the most epic, awe inspiring, adrenaline pumping scene I've ever seen in ANY movie EVER!
Just 5 off the top of my head.
1. THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY- final shootout in the cemetery.
2. 2001 A space odyssey- Star child is born.
3. Godfather - Baptism scene...Michaels settles all family business.
4. Casablanca - Rick makes Ilsa get on the plane.
5. Empire Strikes back - Vader lets Luke in on a little secret.
Let me guess; 300 is a piece of shit because it's new and almost everyone loved it, for good reason. The Godfather is excellent for the same reasons, but because it's old and has a reputation?
Spartacus being a "historical" war movie doesn't actually mean it's better than 300 because it's old. It's a great movie, I like it, but people put too much acclaim on antiquity and reputation rather than "Is this actually a great movie?".
I actually watched all the Lord of the Rings for the first time early this month, they're good. That's it, good. Fight Club as a single movie is much better than all of them, in my opinion, but it'll never receive the acclaim because it's not been hyped and accepted as much.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Let me guess; 300 is a piece of shit because it's new and almost everyone loved it, for good reason. The Godfather is excellent for the same reasons, but because it's old and has a reputation?Spartacus being a "historical" war movie doesn't actually mean it's better than 300 because it's old. It's a great movie, I like it, but people put too much acclaim on antiquity and reputation rather than "Is this actually a great movie?".
I actually watched all the Lord of the Rings for the first time early this month, they're good. That's it, good. Fight Club as a single movie is much better than all of them, in my opinion, but it'll never receive the acclaim because it's not been hyped and accepted as much.
-AC
Ummm what? Fight Club isn’t as under "hyped " as you'd like to think, I know tons of people who hold it in high regard. No… 300 was a piece of shit for reasons that were intrinsic to the film. The Godfather has a first rate cast, first rate plot, first rate director and was based upon a timeless book. Many of those qualities can be said about Spartacus as well. You're an idiot, don't go around trying telling me why I like/disliked a movie, you arrogant dolt.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Ummm what? Fight Club isn’t as under "hyped " as you'd like to think, I know tons of people who hold it in high regard. No… 300 was a piece 🙂 has a first rate cast, first rate plot, first rate director and was based upon a timeless book. Many of those qualities can be said about Spartacus as well. You're an idiot, don't go around trying telling me why I like/disliked a movie, you arrogant dolt.
Yikes! I'm pretty sure he didn't mean to tell you why you liked or disliked a movie, merely stating why he thought it was good movie, not necessarily why HE liked or disliked it. Sometimes in order to present a valid arguement one can use facts or present the qualities of certain aspects of films as being not as good as others... I thought LOTR, 300, The Godfather, Fight Club and Spartacus were all enjoyable movies, there are not many movies I don't like. I seem to be able find likable aspects about all movies. 🙂
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Ummm what? Fight Club isn’t as under "hyped " as you'd like to think, I know tons of people who hold it in high regard. No… 300 was a piece of shit for reasons that were intrinsic to the film. The Godfather has a first rate cast, first rate plot, first rate director and was based upon a timeless book. Many of those qualities can be said about Spartacus as well. You're an idiot, don't go around trying telling me why I like/disliked a movie, you arrogant dolt.
I did say "Let me guess..." and then asked questions. I'm pretty sure that doesn't qualify as me telling you why you thought anything, peasant.
You knowing "tons" of people who hold Fight Club in high regard is in no way contradictory to my claim about it being underrated, is it? I know a lot of people who love it, but when do you ever see it mentioned when great movies are? Especially in the public eye or media compilations or lists. Not that these things hold any officiality, but it's to prove a point.
300 was shit for reasons you didn't like it, if you hold the belief that it was a factually shit film, you are the idiot.
300 had a great cast for what the movie had to achieve. What would have been achieved by having De Niro, Pacino and Robert Duvall in 300? Or Gerard Butler in The Godfather? The Godfather is amazing, but it attains most of its acclaim from the its director and its cast, at least more so than the plot (Which does get a lot of praise too.).
A first rate cast isn't necessarily a cast chock full of "names". There were a lot of nobodies in 300 but they did what they had to do, hence the point of actors.
To deny that a lot of The Godfather's acclaim comes from reputation is silly. That's taking nothing away from what a great movie it is, but it's the truth.
Give me your reasons as to why 300 was supposedly shit? And if you're gonna say "Not historically accurate.", just don't bother. It wasn't meant to be. It was the suggestion of "This happened for real, and we'll tell a story based loosely on the events." so fans and people who would enjoy it thought "This is awesome, oh, and it happens to be BASED on history.", rather than the typical history epic marketing of "This is historical, therefore it must be awesome.". Zack Snyder, for once, put the horse in front of the cart with regards to "historical" epics.
If you're just bitten that more people would rather watch an action packed, loose historical epic like 300 than Spartacus, then I'm sorry, but it's what movies are generally for.
-AC
The Ride of the Rohirrim in RoTK is the best I can think of, combining the massive forces preparing to attack eachother, the music and the awesome visuals.
The end of the last Samurai was pretty epic, although overdramatacized.
The end of Return of the Jedi where they entire fleet turns around and the greatest quote is said: "ITS A TRAP!" Well, that and the final duel scene.
I really think music is 50% of the epic-ness of a scene.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I did say "Let me guess..." and then asked questions. I'm pretty sure that doesn't qualify as me telling you why you thought anything, peasant.
Hahaha “peasant”, and I suppose you're of the scholar class, eh? Anyways said "try" to tell me why I liked a movie, you lame dolt, which you were clearly trying to do ( whether you admit it or not). Stop trying to predict other peoples thoughts and notions, you poor excuse for intelligentsia.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You knowing "tons" of people who hold Fight Club in high regard is in no way contradictory to my claim about it being underrated, is it? I know a lot of people who love it, but when do you ever see it mentioned when great movies are? Especially in the public eye or media compilations or lists. Not that these things hold any officiality, but it's to prove a point. .
Stop trying to make it look like Fight Club is underrated, that’s bullsh*t, so do not waste my time with that anymore unless you have some sort of statistic or proof. Furthermore, lets at least kill this so people can get that much closer about talking about Epic Movie scenes again, discuss this with me on a Fight Club thread if you care to.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
300 was shit for reasons you didn't like it, if you hold the belief that it was a factually shit film, you are the idiot.
Oh what a hypocrite you are, you poor soul. Just because you’re one of those petty ******* afraid of holding anything to any cannon and calling anything absolute “shit”, doesn’t mean I have to be. I call it shit because I’ve seen countless films that were better than this steaming pile of dog shit. Now if you think it’s NOT “factually” shit, you’re an idiot. So stop wasting my time, dolt.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
300 had a great cast for what the movie had to achieve. What would have been achieved by having De Niro, Pacino and Robert Duvall in 300? Or Gerard Butler in The Godfather? The Godfather is amazing, but it attains most of its acclaim from the its director and its cast, at least more so than the plot (Which does get a lot of praise too.)
A first rate cast isn't necessarily a cast chock full of "names". There were a lot of nobodies in 300 but they did what they had to do, hence the point of actors.
Ummm…. did I ever say that this movie needed De Niro Pacino or Duvall? No. Stop pointing out irrelevant garbage. Putting actors of high caliber in this movie would be like putting a gold ring on a pig’s snout. As for the things you said about The Godfather, I agree with you, because I’ve pointed most of them out already.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
To deny that a lot of The Godfather's acclaim comes from reputation is silly. That's taking nothing away from what a great movie it is, but it's the truth.
I wouldn’t say “a lot”, why would you? Oh course some of the praise comes from idiots who think it’s good just because they listen to the critics or whomever. Don’t go around saying things you really can’t prove.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Give me your reasons as to why 300 was supposedly shit? And if you're going to say "Not historically accurate.", just don't bother. It wasn't meant to be. It was the suggestion of "This happened for real, and we'll tell a story based loosely on the events." so fans and people who would enjoy it thought "This is awesome, oh, and it happens to be BASED on history.", rather than the typical history epic marketing of "This is historical, therefore it must be awesome.". Zack Snyder, for once, put the horse in front of the cart with regards to "historical" epics.
Ok 300 was shit because it was too long firstly. Now I’ve never read the comic but many characters were one dimensional and extremely dull. The movie had many parts were the acting was so bad I had to chuckle to myself. The whole movie was so excessively dramatic and tried so hard to be “epic” it was sickening, but I guess it all worked on people like you and the hordes of people who were sad to see the movie end.
Also, no you idiot, I didn’t expect to see anything remotely historical, nor did I hold to movie to historical standards when I was watching it, god forbid I would cry “ Hey, ogres and mutants with knives for arms don’t exist!”. So, this paragraph you wrote, again is a heap of presumptuous bullsh*t too.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriIf you're just bitten that more people would rather watch an action packed, loose historical epic like 300 than Spartacus, then I'm sorry, but it's what movies are generally for.
Wrong again, and assumptions about me AGAIN. Let people eat shit like they do so often in today’s cinematic world. All I care about is people like you , who cry “blasphemy” when I call this movie “shit”. Stop trying to convince me that this movie was so great, It seems like you’re the one who can’t accept that I think 300 is “shit”.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Hahaha “peasant”, and I suppose you're of the scholar class, eh? Anyways said "try" to tell me why I liked a movie, you lame dolt, which you were clearly trying to do ( whether you admit it or not). Stop trying to predict other peoples thoughts and notions, you poor excuse for intelligentsia.
So it has come to the point where whatever you decide about me is true, regardless of whether it is or not? That's an age old and very cowardly tactic; tell them that they believe something whether they admit it or not, so when they don't admit to something untrue, you still have room to continue the denial, sad.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Stop trying to make it look like Fight Club is underrated, that’s bullsh*t, so do not waste my time with that anymore unless you have some sort of statistic or proof. Furthermore, lets at least kill this so people can get that much closer about talking about Epic Movie scenes again, discuss this with me on a Fight Club thread if you care to.
Statistic? That would be impossible. Proof? As I said, name some times that Fight Club has been noted of any merit, multiple times. The Notebook got more coverage than Fight Club. I'm not saying coverage or popularity means anything, it doesn't, in the grand scheme of things, but you will never see that movie held in any kind of famous acclaim that is mentioned as a classic, when much lesser movies will be, even if it's just their rep that's better, not the movie.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Oh what a hypocrite you are, you poor soul. Just because you’re one of those petty ******* afraid of holding anything to any cannon and calling anything absolute “shit”, doesn’t mean I have to be. I call it shit because I’ve seen countless films that were better than this steaming pile of dog shit. Now if you think it’s NOT “factually” shit, you’re an idiot. So stop wasting my time, dolt.
It's not factually shit, you cretin. It's not an undeniable truth that 300 wasn't a good movie, it's FACT that it's your opinion. I would never call anything that pertains to personal taste as factually shit because it never is, it has nothing to do with being afraid to. There are movies I believe are complete shit, such as The Notebook, which many people love. 300 is not shit by fact, it's shit by your opinion, and if YOU think otherwise, you are an idiot. Unless you have factual, undeniable proof that the movie is shit, which is impossible, I suggest you learn the difference between fact and opinion.
I like 300, you don't. I think it's great, you think it's shit. Neither of us can prove either side factually right, so stop being an idiot and learn fact/opinion.
You call it shit cos you've seen many films you like better? That's a bit dumb. I asked you a question; why do you think it's shit? Give me reasons. Or is this another case where you turn tail and run away because I have you pressed?
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Ummm…. did I ever say that this movie needed De Niro Pacino or Duvall? No. Stop pointing out irrelevant garbage. Putting actors of high caliber in this movie would be like putting a gold ring on a pig’s snout. As for the things you said about The Godfather, I agree with you, because I’ve pointed most of them out already.
Try to have some substance to your posts, idiot. Talk about why you dislike the movie rather than moaning that it's shit, or did I take your one complaint away by telling you it wasn't meant to be historically accurate?
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
I wouldn’t say “a lot”, why would you? Oh course some of the praise comes from idiots who think it’s good just because they listen to the critics or whomever. Don’t go around saying things you really can’t prove.
You claimed I was an idiot for not thinking 300 was FACTUALLY (I.e; Undeniably proveable as a truth.) shit, which you cannot prove either, so maybe next time you shouldn't suggest that I don't say things I cannot prove.
Either way, there's no way to prove what I claimed, since everyone is different and everyone can lie, but nobody has the same taste, so it would be impossible for everyone to like it for the reasons you or I think it's great. A lot of its acclaim, like Bob Dylan in music or whatever, comes from people who listen to critics. As does 300 I imagine, it doesn't change the fact that these things can be great.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Ok 300 was shit because it was too long firstly.
300 running time: 117 mins.
The Godfather running time: 175 mins.
Pardon?
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Now I’ve never read the comic but many characters were one dimensional and extremely dull.
It was a short comic about one battle and soldiers who are born and bred for war, did you expect Neo or something?
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
The movie had many parts were the acting was so bad I had to chuckle to myself. The whole movie was so excessively dramatic and tried so hard to be “epic” it was sickening, but I guess it all worked on people like you and the hordes of people who were sad to see the movie end.
Hordes of people who were sad to see the movie end? What happened to not saying things you can't prove?
You have decided that it wasn't epic, fine, that's your taste. Don't assume that this means it's factually everything you say it is and therefore everyone is dumb for liking it. You seemingly hate it because it wasn't Spartacus, big deal.
It was meant to be dramatic and "epic" is entirely subjective.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Also, no you idiot, I didn’t expect to see anything remotely historical, nor did I hold to movie to historical standards when I was watching it, god forbid I would cry “ Hey, ogres and mutants with knives for arms don’t exist!”. So, this paragraph you wrote, again is a heap of presumptuous bullsh*t too.
Well at least you retained that level of dignity.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Wrong again, and assumptions about me AGAIN. Let people eat shit like they do so often in today’s cinematic world. All I care about is people like you , who cry “blasphemy” when I call this movie “shit”. Stop trying to convince me that this movie was so great, It seems like you’re the one who can’t accept that I think 300 is “shit”.
Huh? I'm not crying blasphemy, I couldn't care less that you think the movie is shit, I'm just trying YOU to stop crying "SHIT!" and get you to formulate some kind of constructive criticism on the movie. Though I find it funny that in the same paragraph you speak against assumptions, you also make two incorrect assumptions about me.
I accept that you think it's shit, you refuse to accept that this is your opinion and instead act as if I'm lesser because I recognise the subjectivity of taste, rather than being an idiot and trying to claim the movie is factually shit.
You WISHED I took this shit as seriously as you do, which is why you're telling me I am.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So it has come to the point where whatever you decide about me is true, regardless of whether it is or not? That's an age old and very cowardly tactic; tell them that they believe something whether they admit it or not, so when they don't admit to something untrue, you still have room to continue the denial, sad.
What is sad is your obvious hypocrisy. Stop trying to tell me what I think if you don't like me doing the same.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Statistic? That would be impossible. Proof? As I said, name some times that Fight Club has been noted of any merit, multiple times. The Notebook got more coverage than Fight Club. I'm not saying coverage or popularity means anything, it doesn't, in the grand scheme of things, but you will never see that movie held in any kind of famous acclaim that is mentioned as a classic, when much lesser movies will be, even if it's just their rep that's better, not the movie.
Thanks for admitting you have no proof, that shows you're not totally in denial about yourself. You didn't have to use so many meaningless words and notions though.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's not factually shit, you cretin. It's not an undeniable truth that 300 wasn't a good movie, it's FACT that it's your opinion. I would never call anything that pertains to personal taste as factually shit because it never is, it has nothing to do with being afraid to. There are movies I believe are complete shit, such as The Notebook, which many people love. 300 is not shit by fact, it's shit by your opinion, and if YOU think otherwise, you are an idiot. Unless you have factual, undeniable proof that the movie is shit, which is impossible, I suggest you learn the difference between fact and opinion.
I do know the difference, it seems you dont. That's why when I called 300 "shit" you rushed to try to prove me wrong. You silly sad, man you.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I like 300, you don't. I think it's great, you think it's shit. Neither of us can prove either side factually right, so stop being an idiot and learn fact/opinion.
Oh yeah? You think of that all by yourself. This clearly is proof of your high intelligence.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You call it shit cos you've seen many films you like better? That's a bit dumb. I asked you a question; why do you think it's shit? Give me reasons. Or is this another case where you turn tail and run away because I have you pressed?
I did give you reasons you dolt, you even responded to them.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Try to have some substance to your posts, idiot. Talk about why you dislike the movie rather than moaning that it's shit, or did I take your one complaint away by telling you it wasn't meant to be historically accurate?
Don't worry about "taking away one complaint"... you'll just try and give me another one, you arrogant prick.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You claimed I was an idiot for not thinking 300 was FACTUALLY (I.e; Undeniably proveable as a truth.) shit, which you cannot prove either, so maybe next time you shouldn't suggest that I don't say things I cannot prove.
When did I say you were an idiot for that? Quote me. I've called you an idiot for putting words in my mouth and for being hypocritical.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Either way, there's no way to prove what I claimed, since everyone is different and everyone can lie, but nobody has the same taste, so it would be impossible for everyone to like it for the reasons you or I think it's great. A lot of its acclaim, like Bob Dylan in music or whatever, comes from people who listen to critics. As does 300 I imagine, it doesn't change the fact that these things can be great.
Obvious mindless bullsh*t that I already know. Of course I know difference of opinion exist, why can't YOU understand that personal standards exist? Thus me calling it shit by my OWN standards did I ever once say "300 is undeniably shit" and claim to know that is absolute shit? No, I've given my own reasons.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
300 running time: 117 mins.
The Godfather running time: 175 mins..
Pardon?
Idiot... the quality of a movie being "too long" is intrinsic to each movie. For example, I watched the Good the Bad and The Ugly (161 mins), that movie seemed short, because every single scene had something to offer.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It was a short comic about one battle and soldiers who are born and bred for war, did you expect Neo or something?
Well, either way the characters were one dimensional, right?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Hordes of people who were sad to see the movie end? What happened to not saying things you can't prove?
Any idea how much money 300 made? .
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You have decided that it wasn't epic, fine, that's your taste. Don't assume that this means it's factually everything you say it is and therefore everyone is dumb for liking it. You seemingly hate it because it wasn't Spartacus, big deal.
Same B.S. you've said 1000 times...
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It was meant to be dramatic and "epic" is entirely subjective.Well at least you retained that level of dignity.
If you think so... but trying to be "action packed" isn't subjective? Right? A movie can obviously aim at being "action packed" but not aim to be dramatic?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Huh? I'm not crying blasphemy, I couldn't care less that you think the movie is shit, I'm just trying YOU to stop crying "SHIT!" and get you to formulate some kind of constructive criticism on the movie. Though I find it funny that in the same paragraph you speak against assumptions, you also make two incorrect assumptions about me.
.
If you don't care if I think the movie is shit, why the hell are you wasting your time?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I accept that you think it's shit, you refuse to accept that this is your opinion and instead act as if I'm lesser because I recognise the subjectivity of taste, rather than being an idiot and trying to claim the movie is factually shit.
You've said this same thing about 10000 times in different words. So, please.. just be concise.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriYou WISHED I took this shit as seriously as you do, which is why you're telling me I am.
When did I tell you that?
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
What is sad is your obvious hypocrisy. Stop trying to tell me what I think if you don't like me doing the same.
If you lack the perceptive abilities to tell that I've never once told you what you think, that's your problem.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Thanks for admitting you have no proof, that shows you're not totally in denial about yourself. You didn't have to use so many meaningless words and notions though.
Technically I gave proof through a notion, example and request. I can't prove any statistic as to how Fight Club is underrated in my opinion, because it's just my opinion, but it's obvious when you look at what I said afterward, though you are too busy trying to reply at ME rather than what I said, so I'll repost it:
"As I said, name some times that Fight Club has been noted of any merit, multiple times. The Notebook got more coverage than Fight Club. I'm not saying coverage or popularity means anything, it doesn't, in the grand scheme of things, but you will never see that movie held in any kind of famous acclaim that is mentioned as a classic, when much lesser movies will be, even if it's just their rep that's better, not the movie.".
What do you think about that part of my post?
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
I do know the difference, it seems you dont. That's why when I called 300 "shit" you rushed to try to prove me wrong. You silly sad, man you.
I didn't try to prove you wrong, because that would imply there's a wrong or right to preference, which there isn't. I tried to discover why you think the movie is shit, stop getting your vagina in a fuss.
You obviously do not know the difference between fact and opinion if you think the movie is bad as a fact.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Oh yeah? You think of that all by yourself. This clearly is proof of your high intelligence.
This coming from the man who said "Now if you think it’s NOT “factually” shit, you’re an idiot. So stop wasting my time, dolt.". followed by, "I do know the difference (Between fact and opinion.".
Why don't you try replying to my posts instead of AT me with this insecure ad hominem nonsense? Must I inspire such insecurity that you always reply with insults?
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
I did give you reasons you dolt, you even responded to them.
Dolt was funny the first time, not the ninety fifth time.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Don't worry about "taking away one complaint"... you'll just try and give me another one, you arrogant prick.
For crying out loud, you bitter little man, what is your problem? You're so insecure, just chill out and try debating about the movies. Not sure what your problem is.
Now you're telling ME what I'll do? Hypocricy knows no bounds with you.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
When did I say you were an idiot for that? Quote me. I've called you an idiot for putting words in my mouth and for being hypocritical.
Short memory, too, huh? Sad. "Now if you think it’s NOT 'factually' shit, you’re an idiot.". *Awaits ridiculous excuse where there should be a retraction and/or apology.*. If you stopped losing your temper you'd remember what you have and haven't said, and avoid being a hypocrite. YOU put words in MY mouth; "You will...", "You say..." etc.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Obvious mindless bullsh*t that I already know. Of course I know difference of opinion exist, why can't YOU understand that personal standards exist? Thus me calling it shit by my OWN standards did I ever once say "300 is undeniably shit" and claim to know that is absolute shit? No, I've given my own reasons.
Do I have to paste the quote where you called me an idiot for not thinking 300 was factually shit?
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Idiot... the quality of a movie being "too long" is intrinsic to each movie. For example, I watched the Good the Bad and The Ugly (161 mins), that movie seemed short, because every single scene had something to offer.
Then it wasn't too long was it? It just didn't have anything in the time that you enjoyed. The movie itself was not actually overly lengthy for you, was it? Because you've sat through longer.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Well, either way the characters were one dimensional, right?
Not necessarily. They weren't Jake from Raging Bull, but they weren't flat. Not all of them. That said there wasn't any intention to go into their characters, for someone so keen to talk about application and having a point, you certainly missed the point of 300. For someone so "advanced" in his tastes, it seems 300 was lost on you.
If you can't comprehend the story that amounts to lots of men fighting for honour, well...
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Any idea how much money 300 made?
I don't pay attention, but I'm curious as to how 300's profits will prove that all of those people were sad to see the movie end, as opposed to proving how much money...it made, but go on.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Same B.S. you've said 1000 times...
And I've yet to encounter a decent reply to anything I've said yet, so you can put up with that if I can put up with your long tirades of throwing tantrums at me rather than replying.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
If you think so... but trying to be "action packed" isn't subjective? Right? A movie can obviously aim at being "action packed" but not aim to be dramatic?
To be action packed you more or less have to try to be, whether or not it ends up as being epic is subjective. Die Hard has lots of action, fact, but whether or not it's good, or epic, or shit, is subjective.
Just like some people may find certain scenes dramatic and others not. You can aim to be dramatic, but it doesn't mean your movie will be. You can pretty much guarantee action if you want to. You can't guarantee drama.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
If you don't care if I think the movie is shit, why the hell are you wasting your time?
I don't care if you think the movie is shit, this whole impasse stemmed from me simply raising questions as to why you were making such comments, not attempting to change your view. You are the one who got pissed off, threw a fit as usual and now we've ended up with you replying at me, not TO my posts. Accompanied by calling me idiot, dolt, prick etc. Quite needless, quite childish, quite unnecessary but entirely predictable. I knew as soon as I asked the questions that you'd end up here, it's what you do, because you cannot debate.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
You've said this same thing about 10000 times in different words. So, please.. just be concise.
When I'm dealing with someone who says one thing then forgets it and denied it a post later, I feel the need to make sure I drill my points home, even now, you still try to push things on me that I haven't said or done.
Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
When did I tell you that?
By telling me I can't accept that you think 300 is shit, and by telling me that I am trying to change your view.
Neither are true.
-AC
like for rillios, the two of you should shut up already...
300 was a badass movie to many many people, so majority wins...
annnnd... hmm more epic scenes...
Christian bale in Equilibrium, last battle scene...
watching starscream kicking three autobot asses by his lonesome
omaha beach in saving private ryan
and ill think of more later.. im suppose to be working damnit!