Master Index of Archived Threads


There Will Be Blood (split from Times of London Top 100)

Willets Point Jun 02 2008 02:58 PM

Two things I believe I've already said in this thread but I'll reiterate for clarity: 1. As Edgy pointed out, lists are mostly for fun and a way to recommend films and/or begin discussion of their merits. 2. There are many ways to determine value of a film, but arbitrary time limits are not valuable in my studied opinion. Vic Sage wrote: there are lots of ways... but surely its best to consider such determining factors, than to simply say "whatever you liked best today is good enough for the ages". Why is that a MORE intelligent way to determine value? Why is having no objective standards or criteria more intelligent? It's a great leap to say "arbitrary standards are not helpful" and have you have me say "there should be no standards at all." In fact I think you know that I didn't say that, and just said I did because you are an arrogant, obnoxious prick who likes to push buttons. And yes, I have many standards for determining who is an arrogant, obnoxious prick and you meet them all.

Vic Sage Jun 02 2008 03:27 PM

I knew, WP, that if this exchange continued for any length of time, you'd find an excuse to be personally insulting. And yet I'M the prick... go figure.

Nymr83 Jun 02 2008 05:59 PM

]and just said I did because you are an arrogant, obnoxious prick who likes to push buttons. And yes, I have many standards for determining who is an arrogant, obnoxious prick and you meet them all. i get split off into the red light forum for saying "shove it" but this gets by?

Elster88 Jun 02 2008 06:40 PM

Nymr83 wrote: ]and just said I did because you are an arrogant, obnoxious prick who likes to push buttons. And yes, I have many standards for determining who is an arrogant, obnoxious prick and you meet them all. i get split off into the red light forum for saying "shove it" but this gets by? Sounds like something iramets would say.