I really hate doing this line by line shit, but here it is:
1337mokro said:
Well of course it is completely different one is a video made by a reviewer that you enjoy watching and the other is a random guy. In your mind the video is elevated above being an opinion and becomes a disputable fact, like the baiting title, which you call a strawman, which I call a shameless attempt at getting more views.
It's a strawman because it has nothing to do with the argument. You bring it up in an attempt to discredit Bob's opinions.
1337mokro said:
I did actually read his posts and he did give arguments as to the why's of his conclusion that Bob was wrong. It was a two parter after all so you should at least have looked at the other video to. It wasn't much but it was something.
That's still not valid film analysis but at least it's more concise. He could have just posted "I disagree, for XYZ reasons" instead of flat out calling an opinion wrong without any other arguments to back it up. Doing so on the other video does not excuse acting like a douchebag here.
1337mokro said:
So now we come to the conclusion that you don't consider someone else's opinion valid.... unless they make 2 videos worth of explaining and argumentation. That's kind of much to ask right? In the end I saw two arguments for why this guy didn't like the movie.
He felt that it was shifting moods rapidly not sure what it wanted to be, in his words schizophrenic, and that in the end everything that happened in the movie was pointless.
That's two arguments. So when DOES an opinion become valid? At 5? At 6? 10?
I'm noticing a trend with your posts, I post something, then you put words in my mouth and strawman to try and prove that some asshole on these forums is somehow correct for being a douchebag. Quit putting words in my mouth and making this about something it's not, I've already said what makes a criticism valid.
1337mokro said:
The the thing is opinions are never valid besides the value you ascribe to them. So again you value Bob's opinion because reasons of your own and don't value his opinion because reasons of your own. You don't really need an argument to disagree or wave someone else's opinion.
His are valid because they come from well reasoned concise arguments, this other guy's are not because they don't. Is it really that hard to understand the difference?
1337mokro said:
It's like saying I have to give clear arguments why in my opinion Blue is a nicer colour than Yellow. It's just my preference. You can make arguments that Yellow is a more natural colour, that it matches my eyes, thank you for that compliment, but in the end the arguments are pointless BECAUSE it is an opinion.
It's a total false equivalency to compare film crit to colors. Color isn't an art. In art you have to explain why you like or dislike something in order for it to be valid criticism.
1337mokro said:
It's kind of silly to go attacking people over it. In the end what do you gain? You don't change his opinion. You don't do anything except maybe root him in his opinion a bit more.
He was being a jerk, I called him out on it. I've seen this poster do this before, so I responded with harsh "criticism" of my own. I don't care if he changes his opinion or not. Maybe he'll think twice before deciding to act like a douche? I don't really care either way, if he does and I see it, I'll call him out again.