>>0=the amount of weight you hold.
>
>Beyond the fact that you like using little cute rap slogans,
>what does that actually mean?

It means your opinion is shit.

>If you exchange the placement of "powerful" and "silly," I'd
>agree.

How is it silly?

>Reviews still hasn't killed the "Stanley Kubrick is a
>meticulous genius" idea?

Unlike you, I suppose, I don't let others stop me from liking someone?

>>"2001"
>>"Barry Lyndon"
>>"Dr. Strangelove"
>>"Paths Of Glory"
>>"The Killing"
>>"A Clockwork Orange"
>>"The Shining"
>
>You're one Hale-Bopp comet away from being laughable.

>Calling The Shining and 2001 brilliant is just the type of
>sickness I mean.

I guess Professor something er other (nice alias, by the way) thinks I'm sick. Whatever will I do?

> Don't let tracking shots and a hint of
>uniqueness have you believe his mechanics are anything but
>hollow and superficial.

Someone's been reading Pauline Kael.

>But the man
>was such a consistent perfectionist, right?

Apparently so.

> And yet beyond
>the pseduo-intellectual, showy nature of his films, the only
>thing consistent is that the good is outweighed by the heavily
>ladened attempts at "high art."

You think that's the only constant throughout his films?

>And are you ignoring the remainder of his filmography on
>purpose?

Which films? "Full Metal Jacket"? It was alright. I mentioned "Eyes Wide Shut".

>But making movies that cross genres is worth what when the
>movies are rather flimsy throughout.

Again, this is your opinion. Personally, I think it's so heaped in dogshit, I have a hard time even believing it's not baiting, but I'll play along.

>And if I say Robert Altman, does he hold no weight?

I like Altman. A strong argument could probably be made for him, sure.

>Eye Wide Shut >>>>> A Clockwork Orange

Wow.