I was confused because I wasn’t certain what the term “special features” referred to. If I’ve heard the term before at all, it’s only been a few times, and I was really just guessing as to what the term meant. I was only bothered because drm used the term “special features” as if everybody should know immediately that it meant the extra features of the DVD and it took me a while to figure that out. Please quit using the word “obviously” about things like this, because what you’re really doing is calling me stupid.
I didn’t watch the DVD at all. I very seldom watch DVD’s, and I even more rarely watch the extras on DVD’s. The fact that you don’t care about why the revelation that the film was not based on a true story is irrelevant to my question. I thought it was somewhat interesting that the film claimed that it was based on a true story. I felt slightly tricked when I found that this wasn’t true. I saw the movie in the theater when it first came out. I found out in reading reviews (or something) not long afterwards that it wasn’t based on a true story. I didn’t lose interest in the film because I learned that it wasn’t based on a true story. My rating of the film really didn’t change at all because of finding this out. My opinion of Fargo has always been the same, that it’s a very good film but not a great one. It’s not as good as Blood Simple, for instance.
You don’t run this board and you don’t determine what posts are worthwhile. I had a legitimate question about the meaning of the term “special features.” The fact that not everyone understands the same terms that you do doesn’t mean that they are stupid.
