Re: We'll apparently just have to agree to disagree.

Posted by Analog Scott (A) on April 10, 2006 at 09:43:06

In Reply to: We'll apparently just have to agree to disagree. posted by Audiophilander on April 9, 2006 at 23:40:45:

In Reply to: Re: "I agree with Patrick's sentiments fully on this movie." - And IMHO, he's wrong and you're mistaken. posted by Analog Scott on April 9, 2006 at 10:59:53:

"We both saw flaws in PJ's King Kong, but I saw past them and appreciated those parts of the film that worked. You did not,"

No it's just that IMO they dominated the film. There were plenty of flaws in TLOTR trilogy but they were small problems in what I saw as great films. So i has nothing to do with an ability to se past small flaws as much as an intolerance for so many large flaws.

"and apparently can't get beyond the scatological references that folks like patrick & Victor trade in."

I'm not sure why you are so worried about this. Words are just tools to convey ideas.

>>> "how can one be mistaken about an opinion that is purely subjective?" <<<

"Subjective is fine, informed is better,"

The three of us seem to be equally informed in so much as we all saw the movie in question. That is all the information one needs to form an opinion.

"and scatological references are rarely necessary."

Sharing opinions on movies is hardly necessary eiher. So what? If it conveys an opinion I see nothing wrong with it.

"You are mistaken in that you apparently decided to up the offensive "kaka" petard that p-u and Victor hoist themselves on so frequently."

The only time I find their Kaka comments offensive is when they go unsupported. I thought Patrick did a decent job of explaining why he disliked the movie. That is all I would ever ask of anyone who makes objective claims about anything, at least give us an explination. If I say I hate a movie I don't feel I owe anyne an explination since it is a personal reaction although I may offer an explination anyway. But if i or anyone else declares something to be bad that is different. It goes beyond pesonal. It should be supported with some reasoned argument IMO. That has been my only objection to comments that are no more than claims of Kaka. The language is not an issue to me.

>>> "OK name one thing that the character played by Jack Black did that was in any way not stupid." <<<

"Everything he did early in the film was exactly in the manner of a depression era con-man/filmmaker desperate to escape creditors and legal obligations in order to cash in on that one last pot-o-gold at the end of the rainbow."

That is simply not true. Nme one instance of a director being fired and then running of with the film elements in a Keystone cop like chase only to make a narrow escape on a boat to a mysterious island. the whole thing was ridiculous and completely unnecessary. It was a stupid attempt to create gratutous action and tension. It was utterly unbelievable and left all the characters looking phoney, shallow, and unlikable not to mention unbelievable. It just made a bad movie all that much longer and badder.

"His take on the Carl Denham character was that of a self-centered, single-minded hustler, capable of recklessly endangering all who he tricked into his scheme."

One can do that without all the ridicluous chases and unbeleivable set ups. That is how so many film makers are in real life yet you don't find them running away with stolen goods making narrow, unbelievable escapes onto chartered ships. It killed the believability of the movie. It was a pattern that continued throughout. Narrow escapes from shyically imposible chases ad nauseum. I think the giant gorilla was arguably the most believable part of the movie when all is said and done. That is abd thng by the way.

" In retrospect, Jack Black obviously wasn't the strongest actor that could've been cast in that role, but even his oft tongue-'n-cheek portrayal carried a certain cynical edge that worked most of the time; his ruthless determination and impatience quickened the film's pace somewhat, IMO."

I actually don't have such a big problem with jack Black. It was the writing that stank. i don't see a better actor fixing it without fighting with jakson over the script.

"Like I said, we'll probably just have to agree to disagree;"

That is fine and i don't have a problem with other people enjoying this movie I just hope that people can distigish between personal enjoyment and genuine excellence.

" while this isn't a great film, especially as a follow-up to the phenomenal LoTR series, it isn't in the "manure scategory" either!"

I agree to disagree.

" That's my 2 cents, but please, feel free to toss your chump change in with the grey poupon folks if that is your wish; no personal offense taken."

I have little tolerence for psuedo-intelectual snobbery. I love a good popcorn movie. And there objectively good ones out there.

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

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - The trilogie of King-Kong------- - patrickU 04:19:05 04/08/06 (37)

Re: The trilogie of King-Kong------- - PdL 16:49:02 04/08/06 (1)

Re: The trilogie of King-Kong------- - patrickU 01:38:02 04/09/06 (0)

It made money, and in spite of it's flaws was vastly superior ... - Audiophilander 12:05:31 04/08/06 (32)

Re: It made money, and in spite of it's flaws was vastly superior ... - Analog Scott 08:28:25 04/09/06 (7)

Re: You know what? This film is just not worth the epitaph, as it is said... - patrickU 10:39:09 04/09/06 (0)

"I agree with Patrick's sentiments fully on this movie." - And IMHO, he's wrong and you're mistaken. - Audiophilander 09:48:07 04/09/06 (5)

Re: "I agree with Patrick's sentiments fully on this movie." - And IMHO, he's wrong and you're mistaken. - Analog Scott 10:59:53 04/09/06 (4)

We'll apparently just have to agree to disagree. - Audiophilander 23:40:45 04/09/06 (3)

Re: We'll apparently just have to agree to disagree. - Analog Scott 09:43:06 04/10/06 (1)

"Words are just tools to convey ideas." - Yes, for wordsmiths who know better than to point them at live targets, but... - Audiophilander 00:39:25 04/11/06 (0)

Re: Incredible! - patrickU 05:28:02 04/10/06 (0)

beauty, eh? ..nt - late 20:14:28 04/08/06 (0)

Is there a Fx spectacular possible to imagine over which you wouldn't drool? nt - tinear 13:32:41 04/08/06 (16)

Re: Audiophilander stayed under his intellectual capacity* with his answer... - patrickU 01:59:52 04/09/06 (0)

snobs to the left of me, snobs to the right of me, volleyed and blundered ..nt - late 20:15:17 04/08/06 (0)

Yeah, quite a few in fact. - Audiophilander 17:44:19 04/08/06 (11)

Re: Farenheit 9/11 The most forget full film of the decade and you know what? - patrickU 01:40:41 04/09/06 (10)

A superb documentary with nary a single fact proven incorrect. As - tinear 06:36:45 04/09/06 (9)

Re: As every film stucked in actuality it has already vanished AND... - patrickU 06:42:11 04/09/06 (8)

Actually, it is topical. Wait until we attack Iran, it suddenly will - tinear 05:01:42 04/10/06 (6)

Re: Actually, it is topical. Wait until we attack Iran, it suddenly will - patrickU 05:30:01 04/10/06 (5)

"...so full of blind hate, and with totally missing any kind of humour and so biased..." - Only folks... - Audiophilander 09:52:41 04/11/06 (4)

Re: I hope one day you may find our own gate. nt - patrickU 10:02:42 04/11/06 (3)

You mean this one: - Audiophilander 22:45:03 04/11/06 (2)

Re: It depends on what you are looking for....nt - patrickU 00:27:46 04/12/06 (1)

Naw, definitely NOT mia culpa tea. - Audiophilander 10:53:17 04/12/06 (0)

"A friend of mine would say: an overblowed ' Ka-ka '." - Sheeesh! C'mon, patrick, ... - Audiophilander 23:01:15 04/09/06 (0)

Sure... A Ronald Reagan biography? (nt) - Victor Khomenko 14:09:46 04/08/06 (1)

The Fx part would be the Star Wars depiction, I assume? Or would - tinear 15:19:28 04/08/06 (0)

Re: Making money is that a sign for a good film? - patrickU 12:30:54 04/08/06 (0)

Saying it was superior to the DDL version is very faint praise indeed. nt - sjb 12:11:55 04/08/06 (4)

Ummm, ...I did say VASTLY superior. - Audiophilander 12:27:57 04/08/06 (3)

I'm just saying that if you're trying to extoll the virtues of PJ's KK then using the DDL version - sjb 12:34:48 04/08/06 (2)

Okay, I see your point, but if I'm not mistaken, patrick apparently believes that the De Laurentiis version IS better! - Audiophilander 16:23:02 04/08/06 (1)

Actually, Lange was white hot and Bridges was a very cool, kind of - tinear 16:51:55 04/08/06 (0)

Re: The way dinasours behaving they won't last a week... - Misael 09:04:22 04/08/06 (1)

Re: The way dinasours behaving they won't last a week... - patrickU 10:26:18 04/08/06 (0)

Follow Ups

Re: We'll apparently just have to agree to disagree. - Analog Scott 09:43:06 04/10/06 (1)

"Words are just tools to convey ideas." - Yes, for wordsmiths who know better than to point them at live targets, but... - Audiophilander 00:39:25 04/11/06 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.