And here is where you once again lose complete hold on what we're discussing. I never once called DW Griffith a racist. ** You said all his work was racist (even though it isn't). I'm not quite sure I see the distinction.** quote: I called one single body of work he produced "Birth of a Nation" a racist piece of work,
Which it is, but you didn't JUST say Birth was racist, you were talking about all his work. Now you're trying to backpedal hastily, as you realize you've been caught out on the facts.
Grow up, dude. I never called any single other work he's done racist. I never called him racist. How exactly have I been "caught on the facts"? At no point did I refer to his other work or him as a racist, and now you are saying I did such a thing. If you need to resort to making things up to make some kind of point, feel free, but at least be factual.
quote:
Producing a body of work that is racist does not make a person racist. ** Yes it does, and Griffith was a racist. That isn't all he was, and that isn't all his work was. You seem to be having trouble keeping up here.
Once again, never said he was racist in the first place. You seem to have trouble keeping up with the distinction between an artist and their work (or in this case, one particular film).
quote:
I think the problem here is that you shouldn't have brought up Griffith at all, knowing so little about him and his work. You do that kind of thing a lot, btw.
Oh, so brilliant. Except if you learned how to comprehend what you were reading you'd see I didn't bring up Griffith at all. I brought up a film he made. Big difference, something you have trouble understanding.
quote:
That's my opinion, and I hope you support my right to express it, as much as I support your right to your own idiotic misinformed opinions about Burton and Griffith.
Except I've never mentioned my opinions of Burton or Griffith as artists. Based on my posts you have no idea what my personal tastes are, or my opinions about Griffith as an artist or his other work. I mentioned my opinion about Burton's public praise and some of his films, and a single work from Griffith. I expressed an opinion about the cultural significance of a film produced by Griffith. I never said BOAN wasn't important or worth seeing. I said it's presence on the AFI TOP 100 list is an indication that quality of a film is less important than cultural significance. My personal opinion of the work was never brought up. It's why a lot of films on the Top 100 list are films that were bombs in their day but grew in popularity over time, etc.
quote:
Okay, but you did the same thing to Burton, just now, on this thread. So why do you have a problem with my doing that?
Both of us have the right to express said opinions. My opinion is that both artists are being called over-praised, and IMHO, only one is really praised at all in any way that matters (Burton) and said praise is largely for work that is mediocre.
quote:
If I think his work is uniformly awful, and I see a lot of people praising it, why can't I say he's overpraised? It's a lot less silly than saying the guy who made films you agree are extremely good and influential is overpraised. Even though I'd agree he is, sometimes. See, I can be reasonable. Try it sometime.
You have every right to express your opinion. Just like anyone else has the right to disagree with it. Until Fuller starts getting awards and accolades for his work or covers on Entertainment Weekly, etc. I'll still think he's as praised as he deserves at this point (by some rabid fans online). You say Fuller gets a free ride on TV but Burton gets the same free ride in the movie industry. He's constantly offered opportunities with high profile adaptations or remakes (Charlie & the Chocolate Factory, Planet of the Apes, etc) and tends to do very little with those opportunities. I personally think many other, better, directors could have done amazing films with those properties, but Burton got the chance based on a few films he made years prior. Even if Fuller is ripping off another work (which I don't really think he does) at least the work he creates is based on his own ideas.
quote:
Which a lot of critics have smarmed all over, while most intelligent TV viewers roll their eyes and change the channel. Why is this hard for you?
I had no idead ABC was out there conducting intelligence tests on the people watching Pushing Daisies...
quote:
I think the real problem here is that you think I think I'm smarter than you.
Trust me, never thought it.
quote:
Well, we can all think whatever we like, can't we?
Yeah, it's SO immature to get your facts straight.
quote:
I never called any single other work he's done racist.
Our exact exchange:
Me:You're about to suggest DW Griffith's work isn't good--it may have sometimes been a force for evil, and so was Wagner's music, but anyone who loves cinema or music has to agree they were the genuine article.
You: Yes. Highly influential and worth remembering, and completely racist.
You can see my confusion--or more to the point, everyone can see yours.
quote:
I never called him racist.
Why the hell NOT? He WAS a racist! Racism was NORMAL back then. The President of the United States said of Birth of a Nation "It is like writing history with lightning and it is all too true." That's Woodrow Wilson, btw, not Bush, though Dubya probably does agree with Wilson's assessment--privately.
Griffith was racist, AND he was a great artist, however flawed. Bryan Fuller is probably a jerk in some ways as well. Tim Burton, most certainly. I think you're just desperately trying to keep to your original point that I slam artists personally, and you only talk about their work. But frankly, it's impossible to attack an artist's work without also attacking the artist in some way. And that's the only sense in which I've done it. I don't know enough about Bryan Fuller as a person to attack him personally. I just think he sucks at his job. Okay? And GRIFFITH WAS A RACIST, fercryinoutloud! What, you're worried he'll SUE?
quote:
How exactly have I been "caught on the facts"? At no point did I refer to his other work or him as a racist,
It would be so much easier to converse with you if you didn't keep insisting you didn't say what you did, in fact, say. No, you didn't say Griffith was a racist, and I didn't say you said he was a racist, but I said "his work is influential" and you said "It's racist", and you never bothered to say you only meant Birth of a Nation. Of course, Birth of a Nation is probably the only film of his you've ever seen, and you've probably only seen clips on YouTube. Or something.
quote:
and now you are saying I did such a thing. If you need to resort to making things up to make some kind of point, feel free, but at least be factual.
And you go right on being hysterical, kiddo.
quote:
Once again, never said he was racist in the first place.
Much more than once again, I wasn't saying you said that, and I can't understand why you think I have a problem with anyone calling Griffith a racist, which he was. You were saying his WORK was racist, and you obviously didn't know anything about his work except that the Ku Klux Klan were the heroes of his most popular film. Which I think kind of establishes the fact that he was, in fact, racist. Which you did not say he was. Because you're exceedingly dense.
quote:
You seem to have trouble keeping up with the distinction between an artist and their work (or in this case, one particular film).
No, I have trouble understanding why you don't understand that any artist worth talking about can be understood very well by a thorough examination of his or her work. Fuller, for example, can be understood to be a pompous derivative hack.
quote:
Oh, so brilliant. Except if you learned how to comprehend what you were reading you'd see I didn't bring up Griffith at all.
No?
quote:
I brought up a film he made.
Ohhhhh!
You should seriously considering applying for the job of White House press secretary. I'm sure it'll be vacant again soon.
quote:
Except I've never mentioned my opinions of Burton or Griffith as artists.
If anybody is still reading this thread (and I can't see why anyone would be), please just refer back to MOS's last few posts. Save me the trouble of snarking him.
quote:
Both of us have the right to express said opinions. My opinion is that both artists are being called over-praised, and IMHO, only one is really praised at all in any way that matters (Burton)
Yeah, but isn't that because he's the only one who's produced any work that is at all praiseworthy?
quote:
You have every right to express your opinion.
Gee, thanks--of course, only Marc has the right to say otherwise here, and you can't do didley-squat to shut me up, but I appreciate the thought, man.
quote:
Even if Fuller is ripping off another work (which I don't really think he does) at least the work he creates is based on his own ideas.
1)We don't know that for a fact.
2)If they were my ideas, I'd be just as happy to let Fuller take the blame for them.
quote:
I had no idead ABC was out there conducting intelligence tests on the people watching Pushing Daisies...
They aren't. That was an opinion. Remember opinions? That you said I had a right to express?
quote:
Trust me, never thought it.
I do. I trust nothing resembling a thought has ever passed through your head.
quote:
Now you get it.
Well, that makes one of us.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: pisher,
I never called any single other work he's done racist. ***Our exact exchange: *** Me:You're about to suggest DW Griffith's work isn't good--it may have sometimes been a force for evil, and so was Wagner's music, but anyone who loves cinema or music has to agree they were the genuine article.
You: Yes. Highly influential and worth remembering, and completely racist.
You can see my confusion--or more to the point, everyone can see yours.
Our actual exact exchange.
quote:
Look at the AFI top 100 list to see why racist trash like Birth of a Nation is listed--Not because of film quality, but because it played a pivotal role in the shaping of the American cinema.*** You're about to suggest DW Griffith's work isn't good--it may have sometimes been a force for evil, and so was Wagner's music, but anyone who loves cinema or music has to agree they were the genuine article.
You brought up his other work. My response "worth remembering, and completely racist" was relating to his FILM, not him or his other bodies of work.
quote:
Why the hell NOT? He WAS a racist! Racism was NORMAL back then. The President of the United States said of Birth of a Nation "It is like writing history with lightning and it is all too true." That's Woodrow Wilson, btw, not Bush, though Dubya probably does agree with Wilson's assessment--privately.
Why not? It wasn't relevant to the point I was making. Racist or not, I offered my opinion of his film, not him.
quote:
and you never bothered to say you only meant Birth of a Nation. Of course, Birth of a Nation is probably the only film of his you've ever seen, and you've probably only seen clips on YouTube. Or something.
No, the fact that I mentioned only Birth of a Nation, and never mentioned D.W.'s name or any other his other works except in response to your comments should have given away that it was the only film I mentioned. For that matter, I own the special edition of BOAN and have seen quite a few of his works, rented from the library, not as clips on youtube.
quote:
and you obviously didn't know anything about his work except that the Ku Klux Klan were the heroes of his most popular film. Which I think kind of establishes the fact that he was, in fact, racist. Which you did not say he was. Because you're exceedingly dense.
name calling pisher? Well, forgive me for thinking I was talking to an adult. I was talking about anything but the longevity of a single film. You brought up Griffith, and his other films.
quote:
I do. I trust nothing resembling a thought has ever passed through your head. Cool
I've got plenty of thoughts in my head now... just nothing favorable about you. I feel sorry for your girlfriend and dog now, however...
I brought up the exact remark you were responding to--you can go as Rush Limbaugh as you like here, but unless you genuinely did not know Griffith had made any other films besides Birth of a Nation, you just don't have a leg to stand on here, man.
quote:
You brought up his other work.
Yes, because you brought up his most famous work, in a context that made absolutely no sense whatsoever, and did not remotely make the point you wanted it to make.
You started by saying "Here is why posterity can't be trusted--critics now say this ancient racist film is worth remembering--now I'm going to say it IS worth remembering--now I'm going to say that my thinking it's racist doesn't mean I think the guy who made it is racist, because I can only have opinions about the work, not the guy who did the work--help, I don't remember what point I was trying to make!"
Would you say Casablanca is a bad movie because Rick basically sells Sam, along with his restaurant, like he was a piece of furniture? Triumph of the Will is a Nazi Propaganda piece--still a great documentary. Posterity rejects the viewpoints the artists express, while still admiring the way in which they were expressed--opinions change, hopefully progress, but we can admire ancient Grecian Urns while still not sharing all the sexual and racial viewpoints of the culture that created them.
Your original point is invalidated. By you. Moving on.....
I'd personally say Pushing Daisies is racist by virtue of being so blindingly nauseatingly white, but I kind of feel like it's white people who should be offended by it.
quote:
Why not? It wasn't relevant to the point I was making.
If you ever made a relevant point, I think I'd die of the shock--so try it.
quote:
Racist or not, I offered my opinion of his film, not him.
And you somehow think that you can completely separate the two? If you wrote a story, and I read it, and I said "This story is racist!" you wouldn't feel like I was calling you a racist?
Actually, better example--if you typed an opinion on a message board, and I said "This opinion is stupid!", you wouldn't feel--oh never mind.
quote:
name calling pisher?
Truth-telling pisher.
quote:
Well, forgive me for thinking I was talking to an adult.
Right, because you know all the kids are talking about silent film history these days.
quote:
I was talking about anything but the longevity of a single film. You brought up Griffith, and his other films.
You were talking about anything but what we're actually talking about here. Which is that we both say disrespectful things about prominent persons making films and TV shows--if we diss their work, we're dissing them. It's that simple. If I had said "Bryan Fuller is a serial adulterer and cheats at cards" you'd have a point. I just said I don't like his work. And if you'll check out the latest thread here, you'll see I'm not alone in this.
quote:
I've got plenty of thoughts in my head now... just nothing favorable about you.
Awwwwwwwwwwwww!
quote:
I feel sorry for your girlfriend and dog now, however...
Wow, actually talking about somebody's realspace life. Yes, I do that ALL the time. ZILLIONS of times.
But just for the record, why don't you produce a link to ONE post I've made on this forum that talks about somebody's loved ones. Just one. One out of zillions. Shouldn't be hard.
You started by saying "Here is why posterity can't be trusted--critics now say this ancient racist film is worth remembering--now I'm going to say it IS worth remembering--now I'm going to say that my thinking it's racist doesn't mean I think the guy who made it is racist, because I can only have opinions about the work, not the guy who did the work--help, I don't remember what point I was trying to make!"
My original point was that a racist film that has little redeeming value has stood the test of time based purely on historical significance, not necessarily by quality. That point was and is still valid. BOAN's quality is not why it's on the top 100 list, nor does quality have every factor in such a list. That was my point.
quote:
I'd personally say Pushing Daisies is racist by virtue of being so blindingly nauseatingly white, but I kind of feel like it's white people who should be offended by it.
The presence of a major character of color would go against said statement.
quote:
If you ever made a relevant point, I think I'd die of the shock--so try it.
Well, if ever there was a reason to try...
quote:
And you somehow think that you can completely separate the two? If you wrote a story, and I read it, and I said "This story is racist!" you wouldn't feel like I was calling you a racist?
Not if it was unintentionally so. Example, I found the film CRASH interesting upon viewing it and later, amongst others who had seen the film I heard many people discussing it with comments like "Yeah, I mean, it's a great film, cause like, we're all a little racist aren't we?" or "Yeah, every single ethnicity was depicted as a racist, because everyone has it in them, even to a small degree. I personally don't think the message of the film was that EVERY person has a racist side, I think the message was more "there are people of every ethnicity that exhibit racism" which is probably accurate, but anyone would have a hard time polling the entire world to find out that fact... Either way, I doubt writer Paul Haggis meant for the film to have the "everyone a little racist" message, but it's a message some people obviously got. I wouldn't go as far as to call the film racist or him a racist, however. More recently Adam Sandler made that Chuck & Larry film that some found to be extremely offensive to homosexuals. It appeared that the general theme of the movie was acceptance, but a muddled script obviously lost that message. Would I call the screen-writer's homophobic because of that. No, I think they had good intentions and just really really did a bad job.
quote:
Right, because you know all the kids are talking about silent film history these days.
Well, when I was in my early teens my friends and I enjoyed many silent films. Either way, I guess I was just talking to a childish adult. Thanks for correcting me.
quote:
diss their work, we're dissing them. It's that simple.
Not in every case.
quote:
Wow, actually talking about somebody's realspace life. Yes, I do that ALL the time. ZILLIONS of times. Roll Eyes But just for the record, why don't you produce a link to ONE post I've made on this forum that talks about somebody's loved ones. Just one. One out of zillions. Shouldn't be hard.
Well you called me dense and said I'd never had a thought in my brain. That's talking about my boy-friend's loved one, not to mention insulting his taste in dating a "dense" person. Close enough.
The point I was making is that Tim Burton has had many opportunities to make a great film and has made just a couple. In the few opportunities at making a good series Fuller has done fairly well. That is a matter of opinion, obviously...
This message has been edited. Last edited by: mayorofsmpleton,
My original point was that a racist film that has little redeeming value has stood the test of time based purely on historical significance, not necessarily by quality.
Well, I don't understand your point. What does the film's undoubted racism have to do with quality? And in any event, do you really think the whole point of Birth of a Nation is that racism is cool? It also had a few points to make about war being bad, and both sides having good people fighting for them.
quote:
That point was and is still valid.
Says the person who made it.
quote:
BOAN's quality is not why it's on the top 100 list
Yes it is. Otherwise, why would such a racist film even make the list? Don't you think they'd LOVE to get it off the list? They can't, because it's too great a film to leave off. I still don't know what the hell you think you mean when you use the word 'quality'. It was the best-made film anybody had ever seen up to that point in time, and there wasn't a filmmaker then (nor is there one now) who didn't envy Griffith's staggering ability to tell stories with images.
If we removed from the library every single famous novel of the past that expressed ideas we now find offensive, there'd be nothing left but self-help books. The problem here is that you don't want to admit that something you find personally offensive can be great art, and something you find entertaining and sympathetic to your general worldview can be UTTER CRAP.
quote:
nor does quality have every factor in such a list. That was my point.
It's a bad point. Is my point.
quote:
The preseance of a major character of color would go against said statement.
Geez, Birth has TONS of major characters of color. Even though most of them are played by white actors in blackface. Seriously--you're saying the presence of a black person proves something isn't racist? Which I'm not saying PD is, btw. I don't give it credit for having even that much of a point to make.
quote:
Well, if ever there was a reason to try...
But you'd always fail, so why bother?
quote:
Not if it was unintentionally so.
Liar.
quote:
Example, I found the film CRASH interesting upon viewing it and later, amongst others who had seen the film I heard many people discussing it with comments like "Yeah, I mean, it's a great film, cause like, we're all a little racist aren't we?" or "Yeah, every single ethnicitiy was depicted as a racist, because everyone has it in them, even to a small degree. I personally don't think the message of the film was that EVERY person has a racist side, I think the message was more "there are people of every ethnicity that exhibit racism" which is probably accurate, but anyone would have a hard time polling the entire world to find out that fact... Either way, I doubt writer Paul Haggis meant for the film to have the "everyone a little racist" message, but it's a message some people obviously got. I wouldn't go as far as to call the film racist or him a racist, however. More recently Adam Sandler made that Chuck & Larry film that some found to be extremely offensive to homosexuals. It appeared that the general theme of the movie was acceptance, but a muddled script obviously lost that message. Would I call the screen-writer's homophobic because of that. No, I think they had good intentions and just really really did a bad job.
You really have no idea how you come across here, do you?
quote:
Well, when I was in my early teens my friends and I enjoyed many silent films. Either way, I guess I was just talking to a childish adult. Thanks for correcting me.
No problem, kid.
quote:
Well you called me dense and said I'd never had a thought in my brain.
Yes, I did. And way way earlier, you said I was being personally insulting to a showrunner whose paychecks you envy, instead of just giving my negative opinion of his work, like plenty of other people, and that's what got us into this mess. But I never said anything about your significant other. I don't even know if you have one. And please PLEASE do not feel obliged to tell me. Just recognize you crossed a line--my girlfriend and my dog are not involved in this. You do not bring up loved ones in realspace in a negative manner--you DO trashtalk the people you're arguing with, because this is the frakkin' INTERNET.
quote:
That's talking about my boy-friend's loved one,
::sigh: I KNEW you would feel obliged to mention you had a significant other. And btw, congrats. Having no idea what you're like when you're not making idiotic points about things you don't understand on the internet, I have no idea whether your squeeze deserves my sympathy or not. Nor is that really something I'd normally feel the need to contemplate--so why did you?
So for the record, when you said I was being personally offensive to Bryan Fuller (even though I said nothing about anything not directly related to his work in television), does that mean you were saying my girlfriend and my dog were showing poor taste by not dumping my offensive ass? Just how deep into the realms of total illogic do you intend to sink here?
I mean, you're now saying I insulted your boyfriend when I belittled your intelligence--EVEN THOUGH I DIDN'T KNOW HE EXISTED.
quote:
not to mention insulting his taste in dating a "dense" person. Close enough.
Only in your world, Mayor of Likeminded Persons.
quote:
The point I was making is that Tim Burton has had many opportunities to make a great film and has made just a couple.
You do realize hardly anybody working in Hollywood has managed just the one, right?
Sheesh, I've probably talked more trash about Burton than you--I was livid at him for foisting that wretched Wonka-remake on us all, and getting away with it. But face it, he's vastly more talented than Fuller, and even his worst films are better than Pushing Daisies or Wonderfalls.
quote:
In the few opportunities at making a good series Fuller has done fairly well.
He walked away from the only good show he's ever had a hand in creating, which other people managed to tinker with until it sort of worked, though Fuller's unworkable contrivances were a handicap to the very end. Wonderfalls was deservedly shortlived crap that only a handful of people admire--and OVERPRAISE. PD will last a bit longer, but the writing's already on the wall.
quote:
That is a matter of opinion, obviously...
Obviously!
This message has been edited. Last edited by: pisher,
BOAN's quality is not why it's on the top 100 list Yes it is. Otherwise, why would such a racist film even make the list? Don't you think they'd LOVE to get it off the list? They can't, because it's too great a film to leave off. I still don't know what the hell you think you mean when you use the word 'quality'. It was the best-made film anybody had ever seen up to that point in time, and there wasn't a filmmaker then (nor is there one now) who didn't envy Griffith's staggering ability to tell stories with images.
The fact that it was the first full-length film probably has something to do with it as well.
quote: The presence of a major character of color would go against said statement.
quote:
Geez, Birth has TONS of major characters of color. Even though most of them are played by white actors in blackface. Seriously--you're saying the presence of a black person proves something isn't racist? Which I'm not saying PD is, btw. I don't give it credit for having even that much of a point to make.
That was because black people weren't allowed to play any major roles in film. No, I'm saying that the absence of a black person in a film or television series doesn't make the film or show racist. Which you implied was true, jokingly or not.
quote:
Example, I found the film CRASH interesting upon viewing it and later, amongst others who had seen the film I heard many people discussing it with comments like "Yeah, I mean, it's a great film, cause like, we're all a little racist aren't we?" or "Yeah, every single ethnicitiy was depicted as a racist, because everyone has it in them, even to a small degree. I personally don't think the message of the film was that EVERY person has a racist side, I think the message was more "there are people of every ethnicity that exhibit racism" which is probably accurate, but anyone would have a hard time polling the entire world to find out that fact... Either way, I doubt writer Paul Haggis meant for the film to have the "everyone a little racist" message, but it's a message some people obviously got. I wouldn't go as far as to call the film racist or him a racist, however. More recently Adam Sandler made that Chuck & Larry film that some found to be extremely offensive to homosexuals. It appeared that the general theme of the movie was acceptance, but a muddled script obviously lost that message. Would I call the screen-writer's homophobic because of that. No, I think they had good intentions and just really really did a bad job. You really have no idea how you come across here, do you?
Enlighten me...
quote: Well you called me dense and said I'd never had a thought in my brain.
quote:
Yes, I did. And you said I was being personally offensive, instead of just giving my negative opinion of a TV showrunner's work, and that's what got us into this mess. But I never said anything about your significant other. I don't even know if you have one. And please PLEASE do not feel obliged to tell me. Just recognize you crossed a line--my girlfriend and my dog are not involved in this. You do not bring up loved ones in realspace in a negative manner--you DO trashtalk the people you're arguing with, because this is the frakkin' INTERNET.
Only thing is that I didn't say anything negative about them. I said I felt sorry for them, ie, something negative about you, which was in response to your comments about me. Now I'm up to speed. It's okay to called each other idiotic, dense, and having a head void of thought, but it's a no-no to say I feel sorry for your girlfriend for having a mean-spirited individual for her boyfriend. I'll refrain from mentioning her and your dog any further.
quote:
So for the record, when you said I was being personally offensive to Bryan Singer, does that mean you were saying my girlfriend and my dog were showing poor taste by not dumping my offensive ass? Just how deep into the realms of total illogic do you intend to sink here?
Fuller man. Singer has made a few missteps of his own, but remember who we're talking about... I said I wouldn't mention either your g/f or dog again, but my comment was more you obviously like to be snide and poke fun at the people you have any disagreement with, as opposed to discussing things rationally.
quote:
Only in your world, Mayor of Likeminded Persons.
Well, anything is possible. I found out recently you've been living in my town, I'd better call the sheriff...
quote:
The point I was making is that Tim Burton has had many opportunities to make a great film and has made just a couple. You do realize hardly anybody working in Hollywood has managed just the one, right?
If you want to get technical, I'd call pretty much Ed Wood the only thing he's made that is great, and largely for the script, which Burton had no hand in. Beetlejuice is a movie I like, but it's far from flawless. I can think of several directors in the last several years who have made movies that I felt were truly spectacular, and they most have received a tenth of the praise that Burton has for making a lot of pretty carnival rides.
quote:
he's vastly more talented than Fuller, and even his worst films are better than Pushing Daisies or Wonderfalls.
Maybe so, but I never said otherwise, only that he's infinitely more over-rated than Fuller, and that's with infinitely more opportunity and creative freedom.
The fact that it was the first full-length film probably has something to do with it as well.
So why isn't Judith of Bethulia on the list? Cuz, you know, that's the first full-length film. And Griffith also made it. And it's set in biblical times. Admit it, most critics think Birth is a masterpiece, not a museum piece. Deplore the racism, acknowledge the artistry.
quote:
That was because black people weren't allowed to play any major roles in film.
Actually, no. It's because no serious black actor wanted anything to do with making a film based on Thomas Dixon's The Clansman.
quote:
No, I'm saying that the absence of a black person in a film or television series doesn't make the film or show racist. Which you implied was true, jokingly or not.
It can be an indicator of a sort of racism, but I wouldn't call it racist, per se. Nor would I call it terribly anti-racist and progressive to cast a black person in a show, when there are millions of them walking around in real life, and The Cosby Show was #1 in the ratings back in the 80's. Casting a LOT of black people in a show targeting a general audience--maybe. But not ONE black person, no. Unless it's Token on South Park.
quote:
Enlighten me...
You seriously did not see the need to weed out that long pointless rant you made in an earlier post? I fear the job is beyond me.
quote:
Only thing is that I didn't say anything negative about them.
MOS, let me try again--it was completely out of line for you to reference them at all, in any context remotely offensive to a person you are conversing with online. Personal lives are offlimits here--we don't know each other in realspace, and we have no means of knowing what the other is like when not typing snarky slams, when they're supposed to be doing something else.
If you don't see that, you have no business critiquing anyone else's netiquette, ever.
quote:
I said I felt sorry for them, ie, something negative about you, which was in response to your comments about me.
Yes, and you actually think it's the same thing. You call me offensive, and we get into an argument. We say offensive things about each other, but all in good fun. Then, feeling bested in the exchange, you suddenly feel the need to mention my girlfriend and dog being unfortunate to have me in their lives (which frankly, means you pay an awful lot of attention to what I say here, because I don't mention them very often).
quote:
Now I'm up to speed. It's okay to called each other idiotic, dense, and having a head void of thought, but it's a no-no to say I feel sorry for your girlfriend for having a mean-spirited individual for her boyfriend.
YES. And if you don't get that, you have better things to worry about than Bryan Fuller's impending unemployment.
quote:
I'll refrain from mentioning her and your dog any further.
You'll find some other way to be an insecure ass.
quote:
Well, anything is possible. I found out recently you've been living in my town, I'd better call the sheriff...
Speaking!
quote:
If you want to get technical, I'd call pretty much Ed Wood the only thing he's made that is great
I would have to agree. Hasn't this been an illuminating exchange of ideas?
Ed Wood is the best thing Burton has ever done--and it's worth ten times as much as everything Bryan Fuller has ever done. Or will ever do.
quote:
and largely for the script, which Burton had no hand in.
Um yeah, and Hitchcock is well-remembered for films like Psycho, the script for which he had no hand in, because he was a DIRECTOR, and most of the great directors in film history didn't write their own scripts. And could I just mention, Bryan Fuller doesn't write all the scripts for his shows? Like for example the most successful show he ever created, which ran two seasons, and he wrote TWO of the scripts for?
quote:
Beetlejuice is a movie I like, but it's far from flawless. I can think of several directors in the last several years who have made movies that I felt were truly spectacular, and they most have received a tenth of the praise that Burton has for making a lot of pretty carnival rides.
Yeah, nobody cares what you think of Beetlejuice, man. Personally, I thought the animated series was better.
quote:
Maybe so, but I never said otherwise, only that he's infinitely more over-rated than Fuller
BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT MORE TO RATE.
quote:
and that's with infinitely more opportunity and creative freedom.
Two things Fuller has in abundance with PD, and which he is now in the process of wasting. As he has already done with Wonderfalls, which even the LOGOS channel doesn't show anymore.
Now I really do have to go home to my unfortunate girlfriend and dog, who will once again have the execrable poor taste to be happy to see me.
Please do go soak your head a while. It'll feel better soon. Promise.
