>You posted this article on Zach Braff. The tone of the piece
>clearly is, "Hah hah, Zach Braff, you can't fool ME. I'm
>going to tell the people what this guy's REALLY like." PTP
>responded with a shrug, said "no shit, Sherlock/Garden State
>blew but this dude's hating," and you got mad because we
>apparently were supposed to say, "yeah, FUCK Zach Braff and
>his marketing niches... whither the ART?" I mean, is it not
>okay to disagree with this dude, whatever the reason may be?

You can disagree. But claiming that Braffs ability to generate profit makes discussion of what he stands for completely inane is an alarmingly defeatest outlook.
Is that your opinion here?
I didn't know writing a 10 paragraph essay--or agreeing with one--so easily makes someone a dick riding hater.

>Now, back to this "great break down"... one last time.
>
>The "egghead" as you described him, or as I will now call him,
>"Captain Obvious," can write about Zach Braff all he likes.
>And we can certainly disagree with what he wrote, as well as
>discuss why he wrote it. But thanks for posting it anyway.

Captain obvious? So you think Braffs claim that he's speaking for a generation is bunk? Then why come to his defense so quickly?