You don’t take disagreement well, do you?
The Swedish Bikini Team scores you a 1 out of 10 for style.
Well, lissener, as usual you’re making an ass out of yourself by throwing a tantrum that anyone would dare try and open a debate with you on a message board dedicated to open debate. In the linked thread, you asked:
No, I just don’t see the point of starting a debate on a public message board if you don’t want to hear differing points of view. Maybe I’m crazy, but I thought the entire point of offering a critical analysis of a work of art was to test its soundness by inviting people to try to knock holes in it. It seems you just wanted people to post if they were going to give you a big, sloppy blow-job. Maybe you should have made that clearer in your OP, since I was operating under the assumption that you had some sort of intellectual curiosity or inquisitiveness. Clearly, I was wrong. I will keep this in mind when I see threads from you in the future, and avoid them accordingly.
I can tell this thread will go well, 100% in favor of lissener. lissener, I did not think a thread could make me weep from the wit, intelligence, and dogged fact finding, but you sir, you proved me wrong!
I do believe I will also be re-evaluating my participation in lissener threads. I may disagree with you in some areas, but dammit I like Starship Troopers. I was getting ready to post to the thread with my own interpretation. I just don’t feel like being treated like a steaming lump of dung in Cafe Society. You owe Miller et al. an apology for this utterly stupid thread. People will disagree with you, it’s what we do around here. You need to learn to live with it.
You really are staking out that prime piece of whiny pissant territory aren’t you? You aren’t going to get points just because this isn’t a stupid thread about homophobes. A stupid thread remains stupid no matter the subject area.
**Verhoeven Reconsidered (Unless of course you disagree with me, in which case piss off)**
Yes, only happy talk allowed there.
I went through and read that whole thread. I’m glad I did. There’s good stuff in there.
While lissener is going about it pretty petulantly, the basic idea is there. When lissener, Cervaise and others make pages-long analyses and critiques that are very well thought-out and sensible, people coming in and dumping on the thread with ‘say all you want, he’s a no-talent hack’ and ‘shit is shit, and I know shit when I see it’ contribute next to nothing to the discussion. Refute their claims if you can, but to think that ‘I hated the movie, and Verhoeven sucks’ is a valid refutation is patently stupid. It’s reasonable to want to ask that those who can’t say anything intelligent just move on.
lissener may be stomping his feet and getting ready to throw a tantrum, but he’s got a point. Of course, telling people to stop posting will never get you anything but jeers, but is it so hard to come up with a little more substance?
The thread was about Verhoeven; it continued to be hijacked to be about Heinlein. The hijacks were rude and combative, in a nice quiet little Cafe Society thread. I was giving the hecklers a place to take their hijack, so they wouldn’t continue it in the other thread.
Just out of curiosity, who’s treating who like a steaming lump of dung? the hecklers, or the people who are asking the hecklers to please take it outside? serious question; the only scatalogical remarks in that thread have come from the Heinlein defenders.
I was ready to respond to that thread, since I actually liked the absurdity of Showgirls but didn’t agree with the assessment that Verhoeven is some misunderstood genius. That is, until I saw it was from lissener. There’s really no way to discuss anything with him - his mind is already made up before he posts a single word.
Take my above opinion - it would be met with “It’s too bad you fail to understand that he is a misunderstood genius - I guess I don’t care really that you’re missing out on this insight” or words to that effect (probably meaner).
I think blackclaw said it best in that thread:
I’ll say it again here -
Am I getting whooshed? No one actually thought Showgirls was a good film, did they? :eek:
Holy fuck!
And Dooku, I have one topic no one here has been able to sway me on: homophobia. One topic.
I open one thread to discuss a controversial writer and bristle at getting drowned out by hecklers with nothing to add.
How is this “really no way to discuss anything with” me? Why don’t you search my posts before you make such blanket statements.
And thanks for making up a fictional response that you THINK I’d have to your opinion; certainly a good way to have something to object to.
Diane, did you read Cervaise’s carefully written critique of it?
What we have here is someone adapts a classic science fiction novel (Hugo award winner) and in the process distorts (almost to the point on not being recognizable) the work of a grand master.
cite
Then a “discussion” is started about the adaptor. Is it surprising that people who loved the original stop by to say “Oh by the way this guy screwed up a really great story”?
Why does this surprise you? :wally
It’s along the same lines as if Macbeth got turned into a slasher movie.
note to the reading comprehension challenged. I said ALONG THE SAME LINES I did not say they were exactally the same thing
The movie comparision that comes to mind is “The Scarlet Letter”. The movie starring Demi Moore rewrites the story into a triumph of forbidden love with Hester Prynne the protofeminist riding off into the sunset with her adulterous paramour. Yeesh.
lissener, you a dishonest, spineless, whining little film snob, you’re so full of shit you could grow a wheat crop on your scalp.
Bullshit. You named me specifically when you started this thread: Go back and look at my posts in the other thread, and find one place where I mentioned the name “Robert Heinlein.” I don’t criticize movies based on their fidelity to their source: I criticize movies on their own merits. Starship Troopers doesn’t have any merits, and I don’t need to bring up the novel to prove that.
Rude and combative? Would that be something like saying, “So it’s possible that if you watched his films with some effort and attention, you’d see what’s there too.” That was your response to Wumpus, who was the first poster in that thread who wouldn’t bend his knee to the altar of Lissener’s Film Theory. And unlike you, he was able to disagree without insulting the people he disagreed with.
Hijack? Disagreeing with the OP isn’t a hijack, you imbecile. But ignoring dissent to whine about how everyone’s being such meanies by not falling into lockstep with the OP just might count as one.
“People”? Refering to ourselves in the plural now, are we? I suppose it’s appropriate: you are quite the drama queen.
Yeah I did.
It still blows me away that anyone could think of that movie as anything more than a big of shit. With corn.
Mushrooms.
It’s mushrooms that grow in shit.
Well, shit is an all-purpose fertilizer.
But mushrooms would have been funnier.