Go back to previous topic
Forum namePass The Popcorn Archives
Topic subjectJesus H. Christ.
Topic URLhttp://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=23&topic_id=110748&mesg_id=110814
110814, Jesus H. Christ.
Posted by Orbit_Established, Thu Aug-28-08 10:12 AM
>So when is it okay to say that a movie actually DID elevate
>the genre, or was a work of art? You see where I'm going?

I can say that about 'Soulplane' and my opinion
would be about as valid as the ones I hear for
why 'Pulp Fiction' was artful.

Every single conversation, bar none, about 'Pulp Fiction'
descends into a wanna be discourse on the philosophy of art.

Not because PF fans are smart, but instead because they're
not smart enough to recognize they've been duped and have
divert the discussiont o "what is art?"

That way, they don't actually have to discuss the film.
They can simply say:

"Art is what it is. Pulp Fiction is art. How do I know?
Because who says that it is not?"

It sounds like the conversations I had with my boys in
the sixth grade, when niggas starting questioning the
biblekorantorah.


>So anytime a movie genuinely does elevate the genre or achieve
>high levels of "artfulness" - and someone makes such a
>statement - you could call them a fanboy...

No, you guys are fanboys because you can't actually
explain what the hell it was REALLY ABOUT let alone
what makes it so great(and miss me with the "redemption"
bullshit...haha...motherfucking Shawshank was about
redepmtion...Pulp Fiction was NOT).


>"Fanboy" is a pretty meaningless term, really.

No, it isn't, fanboy.

>Clearly what it's trying to imply is that the person doesn't
>judge the work on its merits, but rather, based on who made
>it.

Jesus H. Christ.

>And that's a nearly impossible thing for a third party to
>determine, isn't it? Unless the person admits it ("I will
>always love anything so-and-so does, even if it sucks"), or
>the entire world comes to a consensus that the work is a piece
>of shit that only "fanboys" can enjoy.


Jesus H. Christ.

That didn't make a grain of motherfucking sense, at all.


>Which rarely happens, and is certainly not true for either
>Grindhouse, Death Proof, or any other Tarantino movie, all of
>which have strong critical approval as well as fan support.

Another plea cop:

When Pulp Fiction fanboys run into people like me who
actually think for themselves, they retreat to:

"Well, it was critically acclaimed. That's why
its good"

Using POPULAR APPEAL by a bunch of CRITICS to argue
why it was good. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I MEANT BY:

"Well, its good because its supposed to be good."

No one can ever explain it.

Fans of PF do two things:

1)Get blabber mouthy about philosophy

2)Retreat to "Its good because everyone says it was."


HILARIOUS.



----------------------------


O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.



"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "Cosmic Slop"