Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Fri Dec 26, 2014 10:20 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10 
Author Message
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 559
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
iljitsch wrote:
If anything, I didn't get the joke. Was the original spoiler complaint serious? It seems stupid to complain about spoiling and then do it yourself immediately. Taking a joke spoiler seriously would be a strange way to go into a movie.

There is no such thing as common knowledge. For any fact you can think of, there are millions of people that don't know it.

(And BTW, I canceled my subscription to the paper after the review of Perfect Storm gave away the ending, and the reviewer shrugged off my complaint using that argument.)

As you may have already seen, this forum has many people who are fairly knowledgeable and thus capable of a high level of discourse on the topic of films. You are certainly welcome to contribute, but I would very strongly advise you to gain some more knowledge before doing so. The first post I saw by you had a patently ignorant statement (that Dredd 3D was a remake of the Stallone version), so my impression of you so far isn't all that favorable.

_________________
"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."


Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:12 pm
Profile
Gaffer

Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 6:35 pm
Posts: 27
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Ragnarok73 wrote:
I would very strongly advise you to gain some more knowledge before doing so. The first post I saw by you had a patently ignorant statement (that Dredd 3D was a remake of the Stallone version), so my impression of you so far isn't all that favorable.

How is questioning my intelligence relevant to the topic at hand? That Dredd thing was days ago in a different thread.


Fri Jan 04, 2013 6:19 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6499
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
iljitsch wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
I would very strongly advise you to gain some more knowledge before doing so. The first post I saw by you had a patently ignorant statement (that Dredd 3D was a remake of the Stallone version), so my impression of you so far isn't all that favorable.

How is questioning my intelligence relevant to the topic at hand? That Dredd thing was days ago in a different thread.


Yeah Ragna here is demonstrating the proper use of the logistical fallacy called an ad hominem attack

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Fri Jan 04, 2013 6:55 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 445
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
JamesKunz wrote:
iljitsch wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
I would very strongly advise you to gain some more knowledge before doing so. The first post I saw by you had a patently ignorant statement (that Dredd 3D was a remake of the Stallone version), so my impression of you so far isn't all that favorable.

How is questioning my intelligence relevant to the topic at hand? That Dredd thing was days ago in a different thread.


Yeah Ragna here is demonstrating the proper use of the logistical fallacy called an ad hominem attack


You're being generous. I've never had an issue with Ragna, but this is a totally dick-move of an attack, projecting that everyone must pass Ragna's Test of Film Intelligence before dipping a toe into the discussions here. And yes, he needs to let the Dredd thing go.

But iljitsch is also a bit out-of-whack. Berardinelli himself has made clear several times that in his own writing and on the forums he has a general one-year rule regarding when it is okay to drop spoilers into discussions. Now you can say Argo fit into that rule (although it is still mind-boggling to me that anyone interested at all in seeing it would not know the outcome), but the rest of iljitsch's "no common knowledge" argument is pretty silly. Yes, we can think of a million people who don't know a certain fact... but you're on a movie board. Are you going to flip if someone spoils The Usual Suspects or The Sixth Sense? Should we discuss Zero Dark Thirty without spoiling the ending?


Sat Jan 05, 2013 5:19 am
Profile
Assistant Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:23 pm
Posts: 134
Location: South California
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Was it a one year rule or did I remember ~10 years?

Either way...you gotta go into anything written or shown about a film expecting spoilers. That's at least my mindset...

_________________
...


Mon Jan 07, 2013 12:46 am
Profile
Gaffer

Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 6:35 pm
Posts: 27
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
I'll never understand the type of people who read the last page of a mystery first to see how it ends.

One of the saddest things in the world is reading a great book or seeing a great movie and knowing that you'll never be able to read/see it with fresh eyes again.

Speaking of the top 10: I just watched The Dark Knight Rises on blu-ray. The story put me to sleep, but some of the photography as better than anything I've ever seen before. Could it be that 70mm makes all the difference? Or are Christopher Nolan and Wally Pfister just that good?

I also watched all the Harry Potters recently, and the difference is enormous. HP is dark dark dark dark dark, there are literally parts that are black on even blacker black where you can't even tell who's in the frame. (Strange choice for stuff that is at least partially targeted at kids, by the way.) TDKR also isn't terribly bright, but the images are so much better. I had to pause playback to admire the shots of New York from time to time.


Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:45 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 559
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
JamesKunz wrote:
iljitsch wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
I would very strongly advise you to gain some more knowledge before doing so. The first post I saw by you had a patently ignorant statement (that Dredd 3D was a remake of the Stallone version), so my impression of you so far isn't all that favorable.

How is questioning my intelligence relevant to the topic at hand? That Dredd thing was days ago in a different thread.


Yeah Ragna here is demonstrating the proper use of the logistical fallacy called an ad hominem attack

Kunzie here is demonstrating that he doesn't truly understand what an ad hominem fallacy is. I was talking about Iljitsch's *knowledge* level, given the ignorant statements he's been making so far. There's a difference between intelligence and knowledge. All I'm saying to him is that he's free to express any opinion he wants, but I and others reserve the right to point out his ignorance when it's displayed.

_________________
"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."


Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:57 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 559
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Shade2 wrote:
You're being generous. I've never had an issue with Ragna, but this is a totally dick-move of an attack, projecting that everyone must pass Ragna's Test of Film Intelligence before dipping a toe into the discussions here. And yes, he needs to let the Dredd thing go.

Read my reply to Kunzie's statement, as it appears that Iljitsch isn't the only one who is ignorant here.

_________________
"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."


Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:59 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6499
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Ragnarok73 wrote:

Kunzie here is demonstrating that he doesn't truly understand what an ad hominem fallacy is. I was talking about Iljitsch's *knowledge* level, given the ignorant statements he's been making so far. There's a difference between intelligence and knowledge. All I'm saying to him is that he's free to express any opinion he wants, but I and others reserve the right to point out his ignorance when it's displayed.


"Attacking an opponent rather than answering his argument" ... yeah I don't think I misused the term there

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:00 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 559
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
iljitsch wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
I would very strongly advise you to gain some more knowledge before doing so. The first post I saw by you had a patently ignorant statement (that Dredd 3D was a remake of the Stallone version), so my impression of you so far isn't all that favorable.

How is questioning my intelligence relevant to the topic at hand? That Dredd thing was days ago in a different thread.

I was talking about your level of knowledge, not your intelligence. I was bringing up the Dredd statement as an example of your lack of knowledge. If you want to take criticism as a personal attack, then you're only further demonstrating your degree of ignorance.

_________________
"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."


Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:01 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 559
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
JamesKunz wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:

Kunzie here is demonstrating that he doesn't truly understand what an ad hominem fallacy is. I was talking about Iljitsch's *knowledge* level, given the ignorant statements he's been making so far. There's a difference between intelligence and knowledge. All I'm saying to him is that he's free to express any opinion he wants, but I and others reserve the right to point out his ignorance when it's displayed.


"Attacking an opponent rather than answering his argument" ... yeah I don't think I misused the term there

I wasn't referencing any argument that Ilijitsch made in this thread, as I was talking about him specifically. Yes, you misused the term. Read my entire post above again, then let your brain process it, rather than jumping to the knee-jerk "outraged" response.

If you want to talk about fallacies, you can look at your own post and then look up the "Appeal to emotion" fallacy.

_________________
"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."


Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:03 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 445
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Ah, the old "I'm not calling you stupid, I'm calling what you said stupid" stance, taken by internet bullies the world over.

Rags, you took a single post made by a new member with a pretty minor mistake in it and from there jumped to a conclusion that he needs to go get smarter about cinema and then come back. That's lame, and a lot more damaging to good discussion than the occasional mistake.


Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:09 am
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 559
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Shade2 wrote:
Ah, the old "I'm not calling you stupid, I'm calling what you said stupid" stance, taken by internet bullies the world over.

Rags, you took a single post made by a new member with a pretty minor mistake in it and from there jumped to a conclusion that he needs to go get smarter about cinema and then come back. That's lame, and a lot more damaging to good discussion than the occasional mistake.

You're using the old "appeal to emotion" fallacy too, more so than Kunzie was.

I have nothing to base my impression of anyone here aside from what they say. If they say something ignorant, then I will call them on it. If they can't take it, that's tough. In the same vein, don't think you or anyone else is immune to this anytime you say something ignorant, exactly as you did above. I didn't attack him personally, I was referring strictly to his lack of knowledge *based on what he said*, same as with you. If you think that is "internet bullying", then you clearly have no idea what that is, either.

_________________
"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."


Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:15 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 445
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Shade2 wrote:
Ah, the old "I'm not calling you stupid, I'm calling what you said stupid" stance, taken by internet bullies the world over.

Rags, you took a single post made by a new member with a pretty minor mistake in it and from there jumped to a conclusion that he needs to go get smarter about cinema and then come back. That's lame, and a lot more damaging to good discussion than the occasional mistake.


You're using the old "appeal to emotion" fallacy too, more so than Kunzie was.

I have nothing to base my impression of anyone here aside from what they say. If they say something ignorant, then I will call them on it. If they can't take it, that's tough. In the same vein, don't think you or anyone else is immune to this anytime you say something ignorant, exactly as you did above. I didn't attack him personally, I was referring strictly to his lack of knowledge *based on what he said*, same as with you. If you think that is "internet bullying", then you clearly have no idea what that is, either.


First of all, I'm not using that fallacy. To do so would be to attempt to manipulate your emotions rather than use logic to make my point. And I assure you, all I'm doing is using logic: I genuinely believe we're better off with the occasional mistake than the fact police. If that hurts your feelings I'm sorry, but that's not my point and there's not a trace of that fallacy in my statement.

And you did attack him personally. Multiple times. You didn't just correct the mistake, which would have been fine; instead you called him ignorant. And then much later in a totally unrelated conversation, you brought it up again and used that single incident to say he's not qualified to enter into the discussion here.

And I'm perfectly fine being thought of as ignorant by you, I assure you. Once again you're acting like this is your website, we're just living in it and waiting to be found worthy enough to enter the discussions. Feel free to create that place, but it isn't here, and if you're going to continue to be a dick to people you're going to get called on it.


Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:45 am
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 559
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Shade2 wrote:
First of all, I'm not using that fallacy. To do so would be to attempt to manipulate your emotions rather than use logic to make my point. And I assure you, all I'm doing is using logic: I genuinely believe we're better off with the occasional mistake than the fact police. If that hurts your feelings I'm sorry, but that's not my point and there's not a trace of that fallacy in my statement.

You keep on demonstrating your ignorance. You're basically saying, "Leave the poor widdle kid along- stop pointing out his ignorance!", so yes, you are in fact using an appeal to emotion rather than actually understanding what I was saying. I'm not telling the guy not to post, I'm just advising him to get more knowledgeable before doing so. Again: it's not an attack on his intelligence- an attack on his intelligence would be if I were to tell him that he was too dumb to ever know what he's talking about. See the difference?

Shade2 wrote:
And you did attack him personally. Multiple times. You didn't just correct the mistake, which would have been fine; instead you called him ignorant. And then much later in a totally unrelated conversation, you brought it up again and used that single incident to say he's not qualified to enter into the discussion here.

Pointing out someone's ignorance is not a personal attack. By your logic, a teacher is attacking a student personally if he points out that student's mistakes in his homework.

Shade2 wrote:
And I'm perfectly fine being thought of as ignorant by you, I assure you. Once again you're acting like this is your website, we're just living in it and waiting to be found worthy enough to enter the discussions. Feel free to create that place, but it isn't here, and if you're going to continue to be a dick to people you're going to get called on it.

And the appeal to emotion fallacies just keep on coming. I don't care whether you're fine with being called ignorant or not, since I'm just calling it like I see it.

_________________
"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."


Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:11 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 445
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Ragnarok73 wrote:
You keep on demonstrating your ignorance.


This literally made me laugh out loud -- my cat woke up and is unhappy with you. You're the one using an appeal to emotions here, and I gotta tell you, you're not hurting my feelings. Not because I don't care what you think (although that's true too), but because you're incorrect. You're ignorantly calling me ignorant. Which is funny, no? Too bad Mittens doesn't understand this.

Ragnarok73 wrote:
You're basically saying, "Leave the poor widdle kid along- stop pointing out his ignorance!"


Yes, yes I am. Especially when I said that it is okay to point out mistakes, that's exactly what I was saying.

Ragnarok73 wrote:
It's not an attack on his intelligence- an attack on his intelligence would be if I were to tell him that he was too dumb to ever know what he's talking about. See the difference?


I do. I would like to see the point. Because, you know, I didn't say that you attacked his intelligence. I said you called him ignorant and were a dick to him and held on to a very minor mistake. But yes, I see the difference. It's another bullying tactic.

Ragnarok73 wrote:
Pointing out someone's ignorance is not a personal attack. By your logic, a teacher is attacking a student personally if he points out that student's mistakes in his homework.


I agree -- phew, good thing I didn't say that pointing out his ignorance is a personal attack. A teacher correcting a student in class is doing her job. A teacher who runs up to a student in the grocery store wagging her finger about a past mistake is being a dick.

Ragnarok73 wrote:
And the appeal to emotion fallacies just keep on coming. I don't care whether you're fine with being called ignorant or not, since I'm just calling it like I see it.


Clearly. I'm outta here.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Image


Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:29 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
I find all this back-and-forth a trifle unnecessary. Everybody flubs one every so often, and there will not be a final exam for this course. Perhaps everyone should just lay off and declare cease-fire.

That said, I did four-point my courses in evidence methodology and cognitive biases in college, so if anybody wants to consult with me vis a vis logic and fallacies, please see me in my office.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:31 am
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 559
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Shade2 wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
You keep on demonstrating your ignorance.


This literally made me laugh out loud -- my cat woke up and is unhappy with you. You're the one using an appeal to emotions here, and I gotta tell you, you're not hurting my feelings. Not because I don't care what you think (although that's true too), but because you're incorrect. You're ignorantly calling me ignorant. Which is funny, no? Too bad Mittens doesn't understand this.

Really? This is your argument now? I'm not laughing- I'm starting to become depressed, frankly.

Shade2 wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
You're basically saying, "Leave the poor widdle kid along- stop pointing out his ignorance!"


Yes, yes I am. Especially when I said that it is okay to point out mistakes, that's exactly what I was saying.

"I genuinely believe we're better off with the occasional mistake than the fact police."- that doesn't strike me as saying that it's ok to point out mistakes.

Shade2 wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
It's not an attack on his intelligence- an attack on his intelligence would be if I were to tell him that he was too dumb to ever know what he's talking about. See the difference?


I do. I would like to see the point. Because, you know, I didn't say that you attacked his intelligence. I said you called him ignorant and were a dick to him and held on to a very minor mistake. But yes, I see the difference. It's another bullying tactic.

Again, you have no idea what bullying is.

Also, you said the following earlier:

"...this is a totally dick-move of an attack, projecting that everyone must pass Ragna's Test of Film Intelligence before dipping a toe into the discussions here."

This was in agreement with Kunzie's erroneous statement that I was attacking Iljitsch's intelligence. Really, you have no idea what you're talking about here, at all.

Shade2 wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Pointing out someone's ignorance is not a personal attack. By your logic, a teacher is attacking a student personally if he points out that student's mistakes in his homework.


I agree -- phew, good thing I didn't say that pointing out his ignorance is a personal attack. A teacher correcting a student in class is doing her job. A teacher who runs up to a student in the grocery store wagging her finger about a past mistake is being a dick.

No, you didn't say that pointing out his ignorance is a personal attack- that's because you thought that I was attacking his intelligence. Good thing I can see through straw-man arguments like the one you just presented.

Shade2 wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
And the appeal to emotion fallacies just keep on coming. I don't care whether you're fine with being called ignorant or not, since I'm just calling it like I see it.


Clearly. I'm outta here.

Here's a better one for you:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Image

_________________
"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."


Last edited by Ragnarok73 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:59 am, edited 2 times in total.



Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:49 am
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 559
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Ken wrote:
I find all this back-and-forth a trifle unnecessary. Everybody flubs one every so often, and there will not be a final exam for this course. Perhaps everyone should just lay off and declare cease-fire.

Knee-jerk reactions lead to much unhappiness, especially when the one who has one decides to dig himself in deeper.

_________________
"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."


Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:51 am
Profile
Gaffer

Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 6:35 pm
Posts: 27
Post Re: Rewinding 2012 - The Top 10
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Kunzie here is demonstrating that he doesn't truly understand what an ad hominem fallacy is.

And since when is that relevant to discussing 2012's top 10 movies?

Don't you realize your contributions to this thread have brought down the percentage of postings containing intelligent discussion about film on this forum much more than my egregious mislabeling of Dredd 3D ever did?

That's a rhetorical question, by the way. (The kind that doesn't require an answer.)


Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:21 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: H.I. McDonough and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr