Films/DVD Asylum

• He is doing great public service for those of us who refuse to waste time on that. - Victor Khomenko 05:41:38 12/21/03 (16)
  In Reply to: So, have YOU seen the film, or are you just smokin' blow? (nt) posted by Audiophilander on December 21, 2003 at 00:50:22:

  Gives me some lines to use at a coctail party.
  

  
  
  
  

  ---

  • That's sad... - Harmonia 19:40:22 12/21/03 (8)
    In Reply to: He is doing great public service for those of us who refuse to waste time on that. posted by Victor Khomenko on December 21, 2003 at 05:41:38:

    ...especially if you haevn't seen it. Not that it matters.
    
    

    ---

    • Hardly - Victor Khomenko 20:01:31 12/21/03 (7)
      In Reply to: That's sad... posted by Harmonia on December 21, 2003 at 19:40:22:

      Having witnessed the parts of the first two films left me completely unwanting of getting any more of it.

      So unless you are implying the third one is done in a completely different style I see no reason to waste my time on it.

      The first two I found incredibly boring... so sue me for not wanting to see the third one. But I truly believe that I can find better use for my time and money.

      Somehow I find the notion that one must see every film just to know it is bad indefensible.

      
      

      
      
      
      

      ---

      • Absolutely no problem with your decision not to see the film - Yo Mama 09:10:49 12/22/03 (1)
        In Reply to: Hardly posted by Victor Khomenko on December 21, 2003 at 20:01:31:

        As you have seen enough of the first two films to conclude that they are not to your taste... a personal decision, absolutely nothing wrong with that... then you certainly shouldn't waste your time on the third. Certainly the films are not for everyone, so I would argue against Audiophilander's logic in this case.
        
        
        

        ---

        • Argue though you may... - Audiophilander 11:15:23 12/22/03 (0)
          In Reply to: Absolutely no problem with your decision not to see the film posted by Yo Mama on December 22, 2003 at 09:10:49:

          ... his assertion that the 3rd film is "bad" simply because he doesn't like the bits and pieces of the other two films he's seen isn't logical; it's an assumption. He has every right not to see the last film and to say that he doesn't THINK that he would like it based upon what he has seen of the other two, but a careful reading of his post reflects an uninformed opinion which goes MUCH beyond that, even if this wasn't his intent.

          I certainly agree with you that it's a personal decision, because NO film is right for everyone, but my logic is quite sound, thankyou very much!

          AuPh
          
          

          ---
      • "Somehow I find the notion that one must see every film just to know it is bad indefensible." Baloney! - Audiophilander 07:24:02 12/22/03 (4)
        In Reply to: Hardly posted by Victor Khomenko on December 21, 2003 at 20:01:31:

        If you had stated that it's unnecessary to see an entire film to know you won't like it, that one thing, but to make an arrogant, preposterous, all encompassing assessment about a film's quality based solely on your own miserably narrow viewpoint is pretentiousness on a grand scale! This bears out the subjective observations I made about your doctrinaire opinions posted in another forum.

        AuPh
        
        

        ---

        • First you lied about clark, now you are lying about me... can't you stay with facts? Apparenlty not. - Victor Khomenko 08:06:06 12/22/03 (3)
          In Reply to: "Somehow I find the notion that one must see every film just to know it is bad indefensible." Baloney! posted by Audiophilander on December 22, 2003 at 07:24:02:

          I didn't see clark say it was a bad film, so you hysterically liead about that.

          Then I didn't say that either - there goes your another lie. I said that based on the privious films I have no inclination of wasting my time.

          Sounds like you are simply unable to think straight when someone disagrees with your choices... but that has been your traditon all along.

          But now you are down to pure lies... this is intellectually insulting.
          

          
          
          
          

          ---

          • LOL! ...Wow! You accuse me of lying when I place YOUR OWN QUOTED REMARK smack-dab in front of you! - Audiophilander 08:37:13 12/22/03 (2)
            In Reply to: First you lied about clark, now you are lying about me... can't you stay with facts? Apparenlty not. posted by Victor Khomenko on December 22, 2003 at 08:06:06:

            ROTFL! That's more than meager pretentiousness, that's pure unadulterated chutzpah! ;^D

            > > > "I didn't see Clark say it was a bad film..." < < <

            No, Clark weaseled out of that by using other critic's opinions, those in the vast minority, in order to reflect his own preconceived notions. Pretty silly approach to criticizing a movie if you ask me, but that's Clark for you!

            > > > "Then I didn't say that either..." < < <

            But you did, Victor. The fact that you tried to weasel out of it by employing a very weak caveat (i.e., having no inclination of wasting your time based on the other two films, which BTW, is rather disingenuous since you haven't seen either of the previous films except in bits and pieces) doesn't alter the fact that you're placing a value judgment on the film without having seen it.

            Heck, I even tried to sit through the Solaris (Russian), which is the most boring film this side of Robert Altman's Pret-a-Porter, before passing judgment.

            > > > "But now you are down to pure lies... this is intellectually insulting." < < <

            If there's any "intellectual insulting" going on around here, most folks now KNOW from whence it originates; let me give you a hint... it aint comin' from your's truly! ;^)

            AuPh

            
            
            

            ---

            • Sic 'em boy, sic 'em! n/t - Troy 08:52:25 12/22/03 (1)
              In Reply to: LOL! ...Wow! You accuse me of lying when I place YOUR OWN QUOTED REMARK smack-dab in front of you! posted by Audiophilander on December 22, 2003 at 08:37:13:

              !
              
              

              ---

              • Like a junkyard dog! (nt) - Audiophilander 11:17:37 12/22/03 (0)
                In Reply to: Sic 'em boy, sic 'em! n/t posted by Troy on December 22, 2003 at 08:52:25:

                ;^)
                
                

                ---
  • How is he performing a public service regurgitating the words of one of the few critics... - Audiophilander 09:05:41 12/21/03 (4)
    In Reply to: He is doing great public service for those of us who refuse to waste time on that. posted by Victor Khomenko on December 21, 2003 at 05:41:38:

    ... who happens to agree with his preconceived notions? If he hasn't seen the film, then Clark's opinion on TRotK is less than worthless!

    Furthermore, if you're relying on the second hand comments of a second string critic for something to say at a cocktail party then you're intellectual cache` is emptier than I thought!

    AuPh
    
    

    ---

    • "Clark's opinion on TRotK..." Excuse me, but where did I... - clarkjohnsen 12:52:29 12/21/03 (1)
      In Reply to: How is he performing a public service regurgitating the words of one of the few critics... posted by Audiophilander on December 21, 2003 at 09:05:41:

      ...express an opinion on TRotK? On TTT I did, indeed, express myself, but the charge against me here is as much a fabulation as the writer's stuff on Outside.

      Regarding "the second hand comments of a second string critic", well, we all know how the writer admires trash and now we learn that the "first string critics" -- like Ebert and SiskelII? -- evidently thrill his pants off because of their exalted status.

      So amusing...

      clark
      
      

      ---

      • "...where did I..." - *AND THERE YOU HAVE IT./cj* - Audiophilander 21:53:10 12/21/03 (0)
        In Reply to: "Clark's opinion on TRotK..." Excuse me, but where did I... posted by clarkjohnsen on December 21, 2003 at 12:52:29:

        Unless "cj" is the character from the fictional albeit more inspirational West Wing (i.e., the Press Secretary as portrayed by Allison Janny), then that opinion sure as shootin' looks like your's buckeroo! ;^)

        Of course, you'll probably say that the initialed comment merely separated the views of the critic, who's deftless prose you apparently admire greatly, from your own. However, it certainly leaves the impression that you completely agree with his viewpoint in spite of the fact that you obviously lack first hand observations about the film!

        So, I ask again: How did you formulate an opinion about a movie you haven't seen?

        Since some lessons bear repeating I'll re-link an excellent URL that provides a national cross section of critical opinion on TRotK. Needless to say, I'm inclined to agree with the majority opinion here, and BTW, I have seen the film!

        
        

        • Lord of the Tomatometer:   (Open in New Window)

        
        

        ---
    • That is an interesting point... - Victor Khomenko 10:15:54 12/21/03 (1)
      In Reply to: How is he performing a public service regurgitating the words of one of the few critics... posted by Audiophilander on December 21, 2003 at 09:05:41:

      Funny, what you call "preconceived notions" some might call experience and education.

      Personally, I could never understand those who insist that I must see every trashy movie out there.
      

      
      
      
      

      ---

      • On the other hand... - Harmonia 19:38:56 12/21/03 (0)
        In Reply to: That is an interesting point... posted by Victor Khomenko on December 21, 2003 at 10:15:54:

        I, and quite a few film critics, don't think ROTK is trash. (Not that you care to mathoms for my opinion or theirs.)

        Many people *don't* feel it dumbs down or appeals to the lowest common denominator. ROTK will obviously not be everyone's cinematic cup of tea. But it is NOT "trash". Au contraire, along with Weir's Master & Commander, I think it redeems commercial filmmaking for fall 2003.

        If you want trash...there's plenty of it currently in theaters, including that pretentious trash disguised as an epic The Last Samurai.

        Anyhoot, I got L'Atalante cued up inn the DVD player...catch y'all later.

        Frodo Lives!
        
        

        ---
  • Lines? - albee33 07:56:52 12/21/03 (1)
    In Reply to: He is doing great public service for those of us who refuse to waste time on that. posted by Victor Khomenko on December 21, 2003 at 05:41:38:

    Find a attractive woman, approach her, and say smoothly: "Hi, I'm Vic and I'd like to kiss and lick your naked body." It's a good ice breaker. I never got laid but I never got slapped.

    Oh yeah, it works best if you're young and cute--hence, I retired it 25 years ago.
    
    

    ---

    • It works better sometimes if you slip $500 in the purse. - Victor Khomenko 10:20:37 12/21/03 (0)
      In Reply to: Lines? posted by albee33 on December 21, 2003 at 07:56:52:

      I saw it in the movies.
      

      
      
      
      

      ---

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

Parts Connexion

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---