Originally posted by Neo Darkhalen
You do know what Adaptation means right, because from the context as to which you used it just leads me to believe you do not.
You do know what Adaptation means when it comes to films, right? Because from the context as to which you infer the meaning in your above post leads me to believe you do not.
In fact, the meaning can be derived from my posts, alone.
See below:
Originally posted by dadudemon
1. Adaptation is incorrect, as it's already a film.2. Even if it were a written story, George Lucas acknowledges it's influence.
If one could not derive the meaning of what a film adaption is from those two points alone, then they would would have a hard time even talking about films and film influence. Agreed?
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
Shut the **** up.
Rather odd coming from you. If I interpret this is a serious post, then I submit to you your own hypocrisy. You have been on RJ, myself, and others for the immature posting that has occurred in the OTF. When an intelligent, well thought-out post, arrives as a reply to you, you react negatively towards that poster in the very same immature fashion that you have recently decried. You either want more intelligent conversation or you don't. Me thinks that you just want less unintelligent conversation with those around you not disagreeing with your opinions.
If it was in jest and was intended as humor as in, "lulz, you got me. you can STFU now", then, my bad for assuming the worst.
Originally posted by dadudemonKnock Knock.
You do know what Adaptation means when it comes to films, right? Because from the context as to which you infer the meaning in your above post leads me to believe you do not.In fact, the meaning can be derived from my posts, alone.
See below:
If one could not derive the meaning of what a film adaption is from those two points alone, then they would would have a hard time even talking about films and film influence. Agreed?
Rather odd coming from you. If I interpret this is a serious post, then I submit to you your own hypocrisy. You have been on RJ, myself, and others for the immature posting that has occurred in the OTF. When an intelligent, well thought-out post, arrives as a reply to you, you react negatively towards that poster in the very same immature fashion that you have recently decried. You either want more intelligent conversation or you don't. Me thinks that you just want less unintelligent conversation with those around you not disagreeing with your opinions.
If it was in jest and was intended as humor as in, "lulz, you got me. you can STFU now", then, my bad for assuming the worst.
Originally posted by dadudemon
You do know what Adaptation means when it comes to films, right? Because from the context as to which you infer the meaning in your above post leads me to believe you do not.In fact, the meaning can be derived from my posts, alone.
See below:
If one could not derive the meaning of what a film adaption is from those two points alone, then they would would have a hard time even talking about films and film influence. Agreed?
Rather odd coming from you. If I interpret this is a serious post, then I submit to you your own hypocrisy. You have been on RJ, myself, and others for the immature posting that has occurred in the OTF. When an intelligent, well thought-out post, arrives as a reply to you, you react negatively towards that poster in the very same immature fashion that you have recently decried. You either want more intelligent conversation or you don't. Me thinks that you just want less unintelligent conversation with those around you not disagreeing with your opinions.
If it was in jest and was intended as humor as in, "lulz, you got me. you can STFU now", then, my bad for assuming the worst.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
Nah. It's an adaption of sorts of a Japanese movie from the late 50's, 'The Hidden Fortress'. Of course all the mythology is new, but the basic plot of it and character templates are all there. Good film, too.
Do you see the giant text? Those nice big letters prove you wrong. Move on and stop trolling. Another post consisting of your trolling will result in a report. Consider this a chance to redeem yourself and not cause further trouble in the thread.
Also, If you don't understand why the large text proves you wrong, I can always offer a full explanation in layman's terms to assist you. I'm really not trying to be rude here but I honestly doubt you'll get it.
Thank you.
Originally posted by Genesis
Do you see the giant text? Those nice big letters prove you wrong. Move on and stop trolling. Another post consisting of your trolling will result in a report. Consider this a chance to redeem yourself and not cause further trouble in the thread.Also, If you don't understand why the large text proves you wrong, I can always offer a full explanation in layman's terms to assist you. I'm really not trying to be rude here but I honestly doubt you'll get it.
Thank you.
You seem to overestimate the power of the report button. In fact I find your whole bearing odd, very moral apostle-y.
"You do know what Adaptation means when it comes to films, right? Because from the context as to which you infer the meaning in your above post leads me to believe you do not.
In fact, the meaning can be derived from my posts, alone.
See below:
quote: (post)
Originally posted by dadudemon
1. Adaptation is incorrect, as it's already a film.
2. Even if it were a written story, George Lucas acknowledges it's influence.
If one could not derive the meaning of what a film adaption is from those two points alone, then they would would have a hard time even talking about films and film influence. Agreed?"
You said it's not an adaption because it's already a film, but that's what the term constitutes my good sir, taking an existing piece of work and then altering or removing points from the key source in order to create a work similar to that of the original, so in effect no it would be an adaption because it was derived from an earlier work that was used as a basis for that particular story, although it is not an accurate adaption, you claimed it was not one at all because this Japanese movie was already a movie that came out before star wars ergo star wars would be an adaptation since it took source material from a previous work as it's inspiration and created a film based on that and I'm sure an algorithm of other movies.
Maybe I misinterpreted where you are coming from I don't really know oh but one thing.
Don't try and talk down to me I won't take any of it. I really don't care for your smartassness.
I suggest you rethink your attitude towards people.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
ANH is Star Wars. When it was released, that was it's name, that was what it was called, not sure if you knew that. And that's what I was referring to: Star Wars.
You are neither old enough, nor is that "definition" applied to ANH anymore since it was given the name "ANH" in 1981, just five years after the original release.
Also, among Star Wars fans, ANH, Episode IV, EpIV, or "A New Hope", are the common names or titles given to the film in written discussion. In a verbal discussion, it is referred to as "A New Hope."
It can be assumed from your post that you were quite directly referring to ANH in your post (it's called context), however, citing the other 6 films as further evidence against your claim of it being like "Hidden Fortress" was my passive aggressive way of calling attention to your error of calling it just "Star Wars", considering it's official title hasn't been just "Star Wars" in 28 years. It was just a way that I could make another numbered point against your post. I just wanted more points and this particular point worked quite well.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
Not ESB. I even used this argument to back up why 'Empire' is the best SW film (because it's totally original etc.).
Forgive me for not having read all of your posts. Had I read all of your posts, I would have known that (Seriously, I'm that creepy. Just ask Bardock42). However, it still would not have changed me getting an indirect dig in on your newbish reference to it as just "Star Wars." 😛
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
Mythology as in Star Wars Mythology you thick ****, as in The Force, Aliens, etc., not whatever shit you were thinking of. I meant all the SW mythology was new. Jesus Shit.
This is exactly what I was referring to as well. It is quite obvious from what I typed. 😬
If you cannot remain civil, I suggest you stop posting on this for a whle as a ban is certainly not something I wish on you, even if you are immaturely insulting me.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
Seriously... DDD... you misunderstood everything I posted there.
Actually, it would appear that you misunderstood what I posted and even missed indirect insults.
The opposite is reality.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
So basically you wasted all that smartassing time for something totally redundant.
No I didn't. I corrected your incorrect post with 7 different points.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
That's how sad your life is, man.
My life is sad, really. Working 40 hours a week, going to school full time year-round, and having so little time to actually play video games. Thanks for rubbing it in. (If they would let me play video games at work, I would do it, then my life wouldn't be so sad.)
But, really, I'm at work, nothing to do, because no computers are broken. Is it a sin, in your book, to post at work with there's nothing to do?
Also, you should probably not resort to personal attacks. If you cannot take apart my points, then you shouldn't immaturely resort to "Well, so! You're a doodoohead!"
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
You can't even comprehend posts that you try and denounce.
Again, the opposite is true.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
All I was doing was noting it's massive influence on the basic plot of Star Wars,
"Massive influence" /= film adaptation, sir.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
not mocking it or anything, you dim bastard.
I never said you were. You could have said that same thing of a movie that I didn't like and you would have gotten a similar response.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
I'm probably a bigger SW fan than you anyway,
Unlikely that you know as much as I do, which this point is supposed to allude to.
Also, the rabidness of one's Star Wars fanboyism does not make one correct or add to their opinions of Star Wars.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
so I take care in what I say since blasphemy against SW is totally unforgivable.
Only to close-minded fanboys.
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
As is sickening idiocy like your comprehension of my post, may I add.
If only you would not have posted this rhetoric so much, your post would have just ended up being a slight misunderstanding. Instead, it turned your reply to my 7 points into a fit of ignorance and immature name-calling.
Originally posted by Genesis
Do you see the giant text? Those nice big letters prove you wrong. Move on and stop trolling. Another post consisting of your trolling will result in a report. Consider this a chance to redeem yourself and not cause further trouble in the thread.Also, If you don't understand why the large text proves you wrong, I can always offer a full explanation in layman's terms to assist you. I'm really not trying to be rude here but I honestly doubt you'll get it.
Thank you.
Please, sir, tell me which film TGF was referring to in those giant letters?
Also, you have no clue what trolling is. Report away, please. You do know that misusing the report button can eventually result in a ban, don't you?
Originally posted by Neo Darkhalen
You said it's not an adaption because it's already a film, but that's what the term constitutes my good sir, taking an existing piece of work and then altering or removing points from the key source in order to create a work similar to that of the original, so in effect no it would be an adaption because it was derived from an earlier work that was used as a basis for that particular story, although it is not an accurate adaption, you claimed it was not one at all because this Japanese movie was already a movie that came out before star wars ergo star wars would be an adaptation since it took source material from a previous work as it's inspiration and created a film based on that and I'm sure an algorithm of other movies.
Sure, if you want to argue the point of 'adaptation" in that light, fine. However, you failed to realize the point of "adaptation" that I was referring to. In context with FILMS, adaption almost always refers to the movement of written work to film. The story is largely intact, as well, in film adaptations.
If it is not largely intact, it does not qualify as a film adaptation, but simply "influenced".
When discussing films, it would be rather strange or out of place to refer to a film adaption as anything other than that, a "film adaption."
Originally posted by Neo Darkhalen
Maybe I misinterpreted where you are coming from I don't really know oh but one thing.
You did misinterpret. In fact, one step further, it would appear that you were not aware of what the definition of adaptation meant when it came to films.
They even have an academy aware for best film adaption. Despite how awesome ANH was, it wasn't nominated for best film adaptation for a reason: it wasn't one.
Originally posted by Neo Darkhalen
Don't try and talk down to me I won't take any of it.
1. Ditto. Don't talk down to me. Obviously, there's nothing you or I can do about it, so you and I WILL take it. Even using the "ignore" feature does not change the fact that a "talk down" post can be posted in response to the other.
2. Why are you being a hypcrite?
Originally posted by Neo Darkhalen
I really don't care for your smartassness.
Odd. You of all people talking about "smartassness"...
On the other hand, I DO like your "smartassness" and hope you continue to employ, liberally.
Originally posted by Neo Darkhalen
I suggest you rethink your attitude towards people.
That will never happen. Not even when I run for public office.
I do have a suggestion for you, though:
Don't butt your heads into conversations that you don't understand, especially if you initial "butt-in" post is diminutive in nature. Furthermore, don't then reply with "butthurt" because the person defended themselves with your very own post.
Since I don't mean any of that, I could care less. I hope you butt into future conversations of mine, especially if you feel that I have erred. Chances are, I have not, and it gives me the opportunity to further solidfy a point when someone brings to the table a fresh perspective on an incorrect idea. The other side of that: I could very well be wrong and I certainly hate arguing for the wrong side of things. It's a win win, really, for me.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I believe I did not say any of those things you address.
Nor did you imply it. Knownig those two things, why do you think I posted it?
Originally posted by Bardock42
I believe I did not say any of those things you address.
Indeed
Which tells me that you're not actually butthurt over my parody of your post. You are just as bored as everyone else and using this place as entertainment, the same as everyone else. 🙂