|
|
Post by Anasazie on Sept 16, 2009 2:56:25 GMT
??...don't get it? Yeah me too......12 paragraphs that could've been condensed to 2  |
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Sept 16, 2009 2:59:32 GMT
12 paragraphs that could've been condensed to 2 lol |
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 16, 2009 15:45:00 GMT
It's a hip-hop term...a "player" is someone who fucks a lot of different women. A "player-hater" is someone who dislikes said player, usually out of jealousy. |
|
|
|
Post by Anasazie on Sept 16, 2009 23:35:54 GMT
Oh right.....Bobby's resorting to hip-hop terms, either the marijuana's run dry and he can't come up with those lovely lengthy paragraphs we all desire or he's developing a whole new level of coolness! I wonder if he's a player-hater for Godard?
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator 
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Sept 17, 2009 0:06:17 GMT
You've never heard the term 'player hater'. Right...
And it's not a 'hiphop term', wtf.
Anyway, it was a joke, untwist your knickers.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Sept 17, 2009 0:09:05 GMT
I would've thought there were already too many horrible ghastly words and articulations of intellectual activity in this thread for your tastes anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anasazie on Sept 17, 2009 1:41:15 GMT
No i haven't heard of the term 'player hater', i must not be young and hip enough And nobody's knickers were twisted, my post was in jest too...maybe i need to put emoticons all over the place to prevent others from projecting onto my comments?   ;( ()()  :(O*IYGHGFRD/bnghfjklhvcgbrlhffb |
|
|
|
Post by Anasazie on Sept 17, 2009 1:42:45 GMT
I would've thought there were already too many horrible ghastly words and articulations of intellectual activity in this thread for your tastes anyway. Difference between a single word or term and and loooooong overwritten paragraph that uses a lot of said words or terms I believe in being concise, i believe the wise man can articulate himself in less words....whereas the talker just talks. |
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Sept 17, 2009 1:53:26 GMT
Rather convenient for you when you can't mount a rebuttal...
The wise man (yourSelf of course) can't articulate his disagreement with the loooooong overwritten paragraphs in an appropriately concise manner? The wise man is thus easily bested in debate, no?
The wise man is too wise for debate no doubt!
Good lord...
Actually my loooong overwritten posts, for the most part, are quite well and carefully written, particularly when I'm making an argument, and there are key points in there that, whatever your views on my literary style, can be responded to in whatever literary style you yourself prefer to use.
So please don't deny the world your wisdom over a piddling matter like literary style.
I would contend, however, that if this dictum of 'less is more', with regard to words, is behind your typical practice of offering up looooong lists of vague adjectives separated by commas, then the theory is perhaps flawed.
A thought...
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Sept 17, 2009 2:13:48 GMT
I hold Wetdog in the highest regard and look forward to reading his critical analysis and responses whose content I don't find superfluous in a debate/discussion. He's a highly articulate critical thinker.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Sept 17, 2009 2:33:10 GMT
Thank you very much, I appreciate that.
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Sept 17, 2009 4:16:36 GMT
Don't mention it.
Post reviews, man, seriously.
What do you think of David Walsh's little review of Werckmeister Harmonies?
Also, I remember you saying that a WSWS's critic review of Sokurov's The Sun was a great piece of criticism. Does your 8/10 rating of the film still stand? If it does, is it a case where you like the rigor of the piece, but don't agree with the arguments?
|
|
|
|
Post by Anasazie on Sept 17, 2009 4:51:02 GMT
Knickers! Rather convenient for you when you can't mount a rebuttal... Mostly have better things to do my friend, like finding homeless clients places to live! or just not the time to spend having a debate over days and days with you (this post is only existing because my 2pm appt was cancelled and i got time to kill). intellectualising, analysing, sitting in my bedroom writing loooong posts come pretty far down the list in importance in life for me! Oh i wouldn't refer to myself as the wise man and attempt to act like one by breaking all of life down to a debate or an argument or even a viewpoint. Can experiences be experienced fully when the head is involved in the whole thing so much? I'd say that's closer to the truth than most things that fly off your keyboard I totally disagree with that and feel you lack a bit of self awareness by making this claim as you are often guilty of breaking down others' comments even further and picking at the way people make their arguments, picking at the arguments as oppossed to responding to them is what you do often, even now it's what you are doing. I'd be very surprised if others round here didn't agree. Kino obviously not.... Not at all, the wise man knows how to listen in my book, not how to crap on! BUT if the literary style of the person you are conversing with is very long winded and you don't have the time or want to make the time to respond to the whole long winded post in order to have the "debate" then that literary style does of course matter? I think it's hilarious you're referring to your posts on an internet message board as literary...you must be a writer in your normal life? I create pictures myself.... Ha! Even i mock myself with the commas man!....football has no soul and it's a good escapism from the daily grind, especially when you deal with some of the stuff i do with work right now. Totally aware and happy to admit i crap on about a game that doesn't matter and my posts are biased...i just enjoy the banter with the Arsenal fan! But all words when strung together are vague, especially when conversing in this unnatural form because perecption plays an even larger part than it would if we were speaking in person. You seem to want a black and white description of or answer for everything and the wise man knows that's just not possible. I find your posts extremely vague myself because you use 8 words where i would use 1. That's creating a vagueness, not making a point in my book. It appears sometimes that your idea of debating is to attempt to out talk the other poster....which you succeed at often round here because frankly i feel people can't be bothered (and it's unnatural) to sit breaking down everything to extensive paragraphs or they probably just have a life to live. In a word, i think this approach is bollocks! I now fully expect 12 paragraphs on what can be and cannot be termed 'natural', probably with some quotes from a famous philosopher or socialist (whatever they are...more ideas involving the world whittled down to bullshit words) and with very specific definitions of what this word and that word means etc etc! Breaking down the way i wrote my "argument"....something you don't do hey? or 12 long ones |
|
|
|
Post by Anasazie on Sept 17, 2009 4:54:38 GMT
I hold Wetdog in the highest regard and look forward to reading his critical analysis and responses whose content I don't find superfluous in a debate/discussion. He's a highly articulate critical thinker. I totally agree when it comes to his stand alone posts/reviews on cinema, but not when he's conversing with other posters or in debate or whatever....it's like there's only one gear! I also enjoy good film criticism myself and feel Wetdog's probably got a talent for it....but things are different when it's a two way conversation.....as they should be! |
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Sept 17, 2009 16:05:55 GMT
If any of us have a fault here, it's that most of us suffer from Last Word Syndrome. On top of this, I also get involved in things when I probably shouldn't. But, three things. All directed to Anasazie. Firstly, you often fall back on the "I was only joking/messing around too" defence. I'm not convinced. You only use smileys when you're being sarcastic. It's usually a winking face. You also take very badly to people disagreeing with you, unless they include some statement like, "but that's just my opinion and I totally respect yours". And if you were only joking and messing around, why was your post so unfunny? (Was that one point or two?) Secondly, 'literary style' is writing style, which anyone who writes anything on a forum where written interaction is a defining factor, has. I'd elaborate, but feel content that anybody reading this other than yourself has understood the inanity of your comment regarding this. Thirdly, you're the most negative regular on here. Please try not to be henceforth. |
|
|
|
Post by Anasazie on Sept 18, 2009 1:52:05 GMT
If any of us have a fault here, it's that most of us suffer from Last Word Syndrome. On top of this, I also get involved in things when I probably shouldn't. Yay....some self awareness, i agree and admit i'm the same. As if you'd direct anything at wetdog.....(insert emoticon)....it was actually simple snidey (however much in jest) posts from both of you that fuelled this whole conversation....maybe other people need to take stuff on board also! It's not actually a defence, it's true. I come from a family (and a culture) of shit givers, so it's just part of my banter and my personality. There's plenty of things about other people's way of being on here that i don't like. Part and parcel of being involved in the human race. Sometimes yes, but sarcasm is a form of humour is it not? I also use them to soften what i've said as i realise is it easy to misconstrue stuff in this limited form of communication. In the past very guilty of this, but not so much now. I think there are others round here, yourself included, who are as much if not more guilty of this nowadays. Hence your simple comment about my lack of love for Malick voice overs (and wetdog's), rather than checking for understanding, you just assumed because you love Malick and don't like the different viewpoint. I think the world would be a very dull place if we all agreed and would never expect anyone to agree with me just for the sake of agreeing. SVSG found it funny....Wetdog's player haters comment (which has no "lol's" posted after it) was in jest too and although i realised that, i didn't find it funny at all myself. Everyone has a different sense of humour. I treat these boards as conversation and don't myself regard the posts on here as literary. I write posts as though talking with people, not as though writing literature. Different viewpoint. Some definitions of the word literary: 1. pertaining to or of the nature of books and writings, esp. those classed as literature: literary history. 2. pertaining to authorship: literary style. 3. versed in or acquainted with literature; well-read. 4. engaged in or having the profession of literature or writing: a literary man. 5. characterized by an excessive or affected display of learning; stilted; pedantic. 6. preferring books to actual experience; bookish. None of those can be attriubted to the general posts on these boads in my opinion, yours will probably be different of course. You continue to be quite a presumptious guy sometimes. It's great the way you feel you can speak for others. mmmm....i can be negative yes, but also very positive....i like balance! Aside from some of what i wrote in the Malick thread, my recent posts aren't negative. I think you just read everything i post with a negative mindset about my intentions because we've clashed in the past. I'm happy to take on board the previous quote from you and try harder to refrain from negative comments about opinions or posters (but not the subjects at hand) (even tho the first negative comment (in jest like mine) about a poster on this thread come from wetdog) if you also take on board my advice about the way you approach my posts defensively. What do you think? |
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Sept 18, 2009 14:01:25 GMT
Yes, I continue to be quite presumptuous because I have confidence in board members here. They're not dumb.
Re your last statement: fine by me! ;D
To get back on topic, then, could you tell me some examples of voice-over that you like? That way I can perhaps see more where you're coming from.
To go back to what I said earlier, which I meant in all seriousness, isn't any use of voice-over expository, or used as "gap-filler"? If narrative cinema is in essence a means of narrating via a series of connected images, off-screen dialogue - which is what voice-overs are - is going to come off as 'uncinematic', and thus 'cheap'.
That's not to say I dislike all use of it, though; it depends how you use it. I think I approach it with a view of measuring how much it overwhelms the 'cinematic' devices, how much it compliments or even contrasts the images we see, and to what effect, intended or otherwise, this has on my understanding of the narrative. Is it necessary, or is it insulting me by being there when it oughtn't?
In Badlands, I see three contradictory layers in the aesthetic: the images, which are beautiful and sunny (with this we may include soundtrack); the performances, which are very minimal and elusive; and Spacek's voice-over, which tells us something else entirely, which lends an ironic innocence to the whole thing. I actually find this relationship very complex.
Your suggestion of Days of Heaven being a lot longer and without voice-over is interesting, but it would have a very different feel to it. I think as it is it's rather succinct and affectively so, as are all of our memories of lost love; there are the same kind of aesthetic relations happening as in Badlands, too...
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 19, 2009 17:14:18 GMT
wetdog is an over analytical condescending elitist twit with god-awful taste in music, Capo is much of the same, but only due to the fact that he's in love with wetdog, anasazie has a serious problem with exclamation points and wink smilies (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ), Kino is like a fucking robot who just spits out film/music/literature/television recommendations in any thread he pleases, svsg is a fucking pussy, Omar is boring as shit, LLC never contributes anything to the film part of this board, blibblblabbl is an old stepdad trying to fit in with the cool, hip, young intellectuals of the world, and I'm an over-emotional hyperbole-prone immature child who never has a fucking clue as to what he's saying. GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH |
|
Jenson71
Ghost writer
Bush is watching you
Posts: 810
|
Post by Jenson71 on Sept 19, 2009 18:54:24 GMT
You left me out! Fuck you!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 19, 2009 19:51:19 GMT
I left you out. No more needs to be said.
|
|
:(O*IYGHGFRD/bnghfjklhvcgbrlhffb
