Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by C.B. (A) on February 01, 2006 at 04:48:56

In Reply to: His description wasn't appropriate, but if "nothing personal" is an apology, it's accepted without reservation. posted by Audiophilander on February 1, 2006 at 00:06:10:

You're right, of couse--tin didn't need to put you down in order to make his point. And yes, he has a history of issuing gratuitous ad hominems on this forum (of which I've been the target more than once), so perhaps I shouldn't have encouraged him. Had there been more time last night, I might have added some conciliatory thoughts of my own on the subject.

I'll grant you that there is much worthy sci-fi literature out there, everything from Ray Bradbury and Jules Verne on down. I've read and enjoyed a lot of it myself. Obviously that's not I was taking issue with, nor I suspect the Tinman. Mostly, I concur with his remarks concerning sci-fi movies (if I understand him correctly), since I've had to sit through too many sci-fi flicks in recent years that are heavy on the effects and devoid of plot and character developement. Tin's comparison of these with movies such as Constant Gardener which are more closely grounded in reality (although, of course, it's a Hollywood-style "reality"), was apt and overdue, IMO. That's not to say that there haven't been a few worthy sci-fi movies in recent times--you named several that I've enjoyed. But the issue was not yours or anybody's personal taste and preference in movies, sci-fi or otherwise, so he needn't have turned the discussion into a personal dig, since, as you point out, you were more than fair and objective in your criticism of Constant Garderner.

I certainly wasn't bummed out by what you said. I simply enjoyed watching the flick, but I'll admit that it's not a great one. And, I still think it's a much better movie in the long run than Munich.