quote:

---

Originally posted by gkgyver:
Best of the decade remains either Fellowship Of The Ring or Return Of The King.

---

LMAO!!! Proof that you are CRAZY. It's pleasant to read lunatic fan-boy rants every now and then. The Lords Of The Rings movies are some of the worst out there: To say nothing of their horrendous running times, the pace and themes (not musical) are tiresome and torturous. They are just as derivative as the Star Wars prequels, if not worse.

quote:

---

Originally posted by gkgyver:
Riiiiiiight!

---

Same to you. You're clearly a wild and deranged maniac hell bent on domination and destruction.

Seriously, though, why are you writing down your nonsense in this thread? Did all the LOTR package-updates burn you out, or have they finally come to a welcome close?

Quote me on p****ng all over Dark Knight before its release.
I've told you before that you are a little paranoid. If it isn't "visible" what "hidden agenda" or whatever I follow, there's a possibility I have none ... ?

I just replied to the nonsense of Dark Knight being the best movie of the century by saing that honour most likely goes to Lord of the Rings, which is the opinion of many more people that the "über-nerds" (funny *you* should say that); and you replied in a most disrespectful and one-dimensional way, and went crazy like I just insulted you personally.
I don't know what your problem is, but you should really consider rethinking your personality.

quote:

---

You're very comparable to pathetic zimmerito, just a polar opposite in musical taste to that individual.

---

Regardless, you're right as rain for you about LOTR being the best there is, but it has to be a given that the overwhelming majority of the people who share that opinion were either fans of the books beforehand or LOTR fans in some other form before watching those movies. The only good thing I ever got from Rings was Howard Shore's music.

You didn't insult me, its just a nuisance to come to this thread, as I'm interested in The Dark Knight, to sift through your static comments. "[R]ethinking ... personality" isn't going to happen; I'm quite successful as is...

Anyway, that's that... Back to Dark Knight.

quote:

---

Originally posted by BackToTheFutureFan:
Sean crucifying people for their opinions again. Be nice.

---

quote:

---

gkgyver, you don't really have anything positive to add or anything that resembles constructive criticism about the score or it's former.

---

Neither do you, quite simply.
Why should I even think about any kind of criticism if I haven't even heard Dark Knight yet. I made that clear just a few posts above.
So, either you have an enormously short attention span, or you're just being ignorant ... but I forget, you have to "sift" through my enormously dumb posts, so you probably don't even bother reading them properly.

I would think people have just as much a hard time "sifting" through your helpful posts a la (quoting) "HAHAHA !!!"

quote:

---

but it has to be a given that the overwhelming majority of the people who share that opinion were either fans of the books beforehand or LOTR fans in some other form before watching those movies.

---

You're being enormously prejudiced to the point of being ignorant (again). But I forgot you can tap into each of the billions of people that watched them.
I for one bought the books around the time Two Towers was released.

quote:

---

its pretty cut-and-dry what your "opinion" is (in quotations because I know the difference between an oboe and a choir: Remember Bourne?).

---

Again we're thrown back to the short attention span and the ignorance, as you were sticking that to me some time ago, and I made it pretty clear that I saw Bourne maybe two times a LONG time ago, so memories do slip and I admit that (contrary to you, who seems to believe he has the answer to anything, but in fact nothing).

And kudos to you for (not) knowing the difference between oboe and bassoon; I've written parts for both instruments - have you?

So far you've been busy with nothing but judging me and pushing me into a certain corner without me having actually said *anything*. The *only* thing I've said was that I'm curious how a nine minute suite of a one note motif can work; which, strangely enough, prompted you to crap all over me like there's no tomorrow, for no damn reason whatsoever.
I've tried to deal with you politely, but apparently all you're able to do is to get under people's skin with a smug grin on your face.

You're telling me it's incorrect (putting it mildly) to bash a score in advance, and although I've never even come close to that here, don't tell me that gushing over that same score in advance like this

quote:

---

Oh, and that track list is AWESOME!!! I can't wait to here the finale piece.

---

is in any way better or more "correct" than being sceptical based on the predecessor score, composed by the same two people!

What you don't realise is that because you have that perverted image of me in your mind construct, you'll always see that in any of my comments.
But that's not me, that's you, a real pity.

All this is just opinion...He really enjoys the Lord of the Rings movies, and you don't. The trilogy is beloved by many (not just fanboys), but it's perfectly fine if someone doesn't like it. If someone finds it horrible, why act like it's qualities are facts and that he who enjoys it is crazy? It's only an opinion.

HAHAHA! I only read yours and Jeron's post. Poor, gkgyver, looks like you took all that space up writing for nothing; I did write something to the effect that I was done that skirmish with you, and I meant it. Back on topic...

quote:

---

Originally posted by NeoVoyager:
There are several theaters in my area... some rather large ones and a bunch of smallish ones. I recently discovered that one of the smaller on-campus theaters that I've never attended has upgraded their facilities to all-digital and is also now capable of showing 3D films. Now, for a non-3D movie like "The Dark Knight", what advantage can a theater like this offer, if any? I don't get it.

---

I work for an independent theatre in my city and the only "advantage" to 3-D projection is that you can see Brendan Fraser's new Journey To The Center Of The Earth! But I believe that's also an IMAX film, too. Anyway, unless its a 35mm print, I don't see why they'd bother upgrading to 3-D capable projection; aren't most, if not all, of these released in IMAX format these days, regardless? I'm thinking of something like Beowulf, which is the last 3-D IMAX I saw.

I do happen to think that the Lord of the Rings films are among the best of the decade. To me they represent everything I go to the movies for; by the time I am done, I have watched a complete journey and I am emotionally drained. But you have to be an obsessive to REALLY care for the type of movie that LoTR is. It's not for everyone (what really irks me is when people speak of the flaws they find as facts). I am an obsessive; I would rather be extremely passionate about one film than be "eh, good movie, but doesn't wow me" about 99% of all the films I watch. I watch good films all the time (I don't think I've ever HATED one), but I need a story to completely dissolve in.

We are all into different things. There is no one universal "best film of the decade", and so there is no point in arguing about it. There seems to be a love for There Will Be Blood on this site, especially by those who are in/want to be in the filmmaking business. I have a great interest in filmmaking as well, but I couldn't stand There Will Be Blood. That doesn't make me a person with bad/good taste - I'm just interested in different types of stories.

It is interesting to see the different perspectives on these issues though. Sean, I think, mentioned the similarity between the Star Wars prequels and the Lord of the Rings, while I think Lord of the Rings took everything that Star Wars did wrong and did it right. In the case of There Will Be Blood, I am simply not interested in a story about a man drilling for oil or the conflict between him and the church and his son or whatever (despite the level of artistry at work)...someone else sees the best film in a long time.

quote:

---

HAHAHA! I only read yours and Jeron's post. Poor, gkgyver, looks like you took all that space up writing for nothing; I did write something to the effect that I was done that skirmish with you, and I meant it. Back on topic...

---

So you can metaphorically slap gkgyver silly, make a bunch of insulting comments and then just run away and titter "I'm done!" and it's all good? At least give him the respect of reading his well-thought-out response, for pete's sake!

Same goes for your alleged refusal to read any of the others' posts (I say 'alleged' because I really have a hard time believing that anyone can be that self-centered and unwilling to take any criticism). I think I'm beginning to get it, though: when someone disagrees with you or criticizes you, you either (a) relentlessly attack and needle the offending person(s), or (b) totally ignore them and refuse to read their posts. You're not going to get very far in the real world with that kind of life philosophy, Sean. Please - for your own good - grow up a little.

quote:

---

Originally posted by BackToTheFutureFan:
Fellowship was pretty damn good. And I'm more of a SW fan.

---

Fellowship was the best of them, and I would say they are among the best of the decade. But I don't think I'd place Fellowship in my own Top 10.

But, as it goes, films and opinions.

And, Andrew, HAHA! you are being more kind than you should, and you know it (since I've heard worse from you, literally), in your words on LOTR.

quote:

---

Originally posted by StarlessWinter:
Sean, you should trademark "HAHAHA!"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by gkgyver:
Best of the decade remains either Fellowship Of The Ring or Return Of The King.
No matter how The Dark Knight turns out.

---

No offense.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sean:
CLAYTON: LMAO!

---

I've missed like the entire 2nd page of comments on here, so I figured, "hey, why not start here?"