|
Films/DVD Asylum Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star. |
|
|
|
Films/DVD Asylum Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star. |
|
In Reply to: Simple, quet life in Evertville posted by Victor Khomenko on April 1, 2005 at 09:25:02:
Obviously, you missed the point of my post. You stated that the film only appeals to the unsophisticated and and does not appeal to the experienced. Modern man has defined those terms. I asked you to provide specific examples. You failed to do so. I gave you two examples of persons who did enjoy the film, and who, under any intelligent analysis, would certainly be considered experienced, significantly more so than you or I. Your failure, which I interpret as inability, to specifically define who you were referring to when you wrote such a statement, undermines your statement. You may not agree with Roger Ebert and Stephen Holden, but they are not inexperienced, no matter how you define that term, which you most certainly called them by writing that experienced people would not enjoy the film, which logically is the same thing as writing that inexperienced people would enjoy the film. You may certainly disagree with their opinions, but calling them inexperienced is incorrect, and your failure to offer any support other than "I say so" belies the shallowness of your opinion.For you to think that the purpose of my citing their names was to support the opinion that the film was a good film demonstrates that you have difficulty in reading what is written rather than what you would like to believe was written. If I was using those critics as authority to support an opinion of the film itself, which I have never done in this asylum, I would have quoted relevant language from their review. Please re-read my post. I did not do so.
Your original statement is akin to me saying "Anyone who enjoys tube amplifiers is unsophisticated and inexperienced." I cannot tell you whether I thought whether the film was good or bad, as, if you would read my post a second time, or how ever many times it will take you to comprehend it, I have not seen the film. Unlike some, I feel that precludes me from offering an opinion (although if you tell me the subject matter, I could probably offer an opinion.)
However, your statement that only inexperienced people could like the film takes not one second of viewing to dispute. I was not disputing your opinion of the film, but rather your blanket, unsupported (still) statement vis a vis experienced viewers. So, here is another opportunity to name names. Who are these inexperienced viewers, and why are they inexperienced? I offered you two names. Ebert and Holden. Without discussing their abilities as critics, how are they inexperienced? Certainly, if I asked you why your amplifiers sound so good, I am sure you could prattle on page after page explaining it to me. So this one should be easy for you.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Simple, quet life in Evertville - jamesgarvin 10:18:15 04/01/05 (2)
- Re: Simple, quet life in Evertville - Victor Khomenko 10:41:31 04/01/05 (1)
- BTW - - Victor Khomenko 11:17:39 04/01/05 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
