Well, if you're not full of yourself, then lets take a look at your half-empty glass:

>>> "I mean, that condescension is still your middle name." <<<

There is no use trying to be polite or appreciative because you'll always interpret complimentary remarks as condescending. Okay, I give up; if you want to be a jerk then far be it from me to stand in your way.

>>> "As for "full of yourself" I've found some remarks about a certain auctioneer who certainly seems to be!" <<<

You probably had to look no farther than your own postings, but some folks might find such self-serving rhetoric suspiciously biased.

>>> " It's a pity someone has to be so high-handedly dismissive of his betters' attempts to create discussion. Over on Music it's quite common (for those who are ladies and gentlemen) to discuss the posted views of a critic who speaks up on, for instance, performance practice. But you're not having any of that, eh?" <<<

"Betters" huh? Okay, I yield to your superior ego. ;^)

As for comparing discussions of music criticism to film criticism, m'thinks it's an apples and oranges analogy due to the inherent nature of marketing of both products. The narrow window of opportunity to see films in a theater provides a much different dynamic for discussion and criticsm. Of course you already knew that because we've covered this turf before at greater length. Unfortunately, you seem disinclined to acknowledge those discussions or perhaps you're just claiming memory loss.

In regard to the "for those who are ladies and gentlemen" insertion, I'd rather ignor that bit of egotistical smarmery and drop it in the rhetorical dust bin along with other misdirected slap-down attempts coming from professor Johnsen's word-wrestling arena. "Betters" indeed! ;^D

Never let it be said that your posts aren't entertaining, Clark!

Kindest regards,
AuPh

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

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Apocalypto -- Not recommended, unless, that is... - clarkjohnsen 05:50:27 12/10/06 (18)

Re: Apocalypto -- Not recommended, unless, that is... - Awe-d-o-file 04:57:21 12/14/06 (0)

I thought it was... - mkuller 18:35:01 12/13/06 (1)

I don't think Gibson will even be considered, nt - Analog Scott 09:00:20 12/16/06 (0)

Thanks, Clark; that's a super review! - Audiophilander 12:22:54 12/11/06 (8)

Thank you. But your condescension is once again duly noted. - clarkjohnsen 07:47:12 12/13/06 (7)

No condescension intended. - Audiophilander 12:08:21 12/13/06 (6)

"All I ask of folks who choose to criticize a film is that they've at least seen the film." That is of course a truism. - clarkjohnsen 08:18:11 12/14/06 (5)

"Who are you to do this asking?" - Just a film aficianado desiring accurate, first-hand information ... - Audiophilander 02:22:58 12/15/06 (4)

"No condescension intended, but is that clear enough for you, Clark?" Condescension alert! - clarkjohnsen 08:50:56 12/15/06 (3)

How can one supply "pointers" for films admittedly unseen? - Audiophilander 10:12:08 12/15/06 (2)

"You're apparently a humbug." Thanks, teach, that's good to know. - clarkjohnsen 12:17:56 12/15/06 (1)

Well, if you're not full of yourself, then lets take a look at your half-empty glass: - Audiophilander 09:51:54 12/17/06 (0)

The movie critic of the Detroit Free Press agrees with you on every point ("masterpiece", "one for the ages", etc.)... - C.B. 12:50:58 12/10/06 (0)

Somewhat agree - jbmcb 11:35:17 12/10/06 (2)

My impression was almost exactly the same as yours - Analog Scott 09:35:59 12/16/06 (0)

Opinion has mostly (predictably) conformed to, ah, ethnic lines. - clarkjohnsen 07:52:00 12/13/06 (0)

I found the soundtrack very effetive and mood building . . . - mr grits 06:05:12 12/10/06 (1)

My criticism was regarding the post-pro mix, not the music. - clarkjohnsen 06:14:34 12/10/06 (0)

Follow Ups

Well, if you're not full of yourself, then lets take a look at your half-empty glass: - Audiophilander 09:51:54 12/17/06 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.