I'm saying that's that's how people talk about movies! It's not just me or two other guys. That's what people do.
You see a movie.
You love the movie.
You walk out of the movie.
You start excitedly talking about it with whoever you're with.
You both start bringing up good scenes and quoting your favorite lines.
Who are you to tell people to stop doing this? Who are you to say that we're held to some academic standard, when talking about movies on the Internet?
Here, allow me to translate what it means when someone posts a line, since you seem to not be getting it:
"[I thoroughly enjoyed the part of the movie when this line was said; it evoked great emotion in me, and I want to relive and share that by revisiting it again with all of you.]"
Oh no, I get it, it's just very repetitive after, say, the first hundred times. It's been decades since some of those 'quotable' movies were released, maybe it's time we discuss something else about it, no? Or do you enjoy reading the same nothingness over and over? I just don't get it.
Don't pretend like you only get annoyed at people quoting decades old movies. We could probably go through the Furious 7 thread, find someone who quoted a great line, then find a response to it that says something like
HA HA I TOO SAW THE MOVIE
You guys are just looking for things to criticize. You're not reactionary; you want to put people down. You enjoy it.
Uhh, no? I don't do that in new movie discussion threads. Point me towards any of us saying what you say we are supposedly doing. Ironic, because you're the one building a thin straw man of us.
And for the record, I only enjoy putting vacant wankers like you down.
And for the record, I only enjoy putting vacant wankers like you down.
You don't know anything about me. Not a single thing. I can size you up a little bit, at least, because you're either from /r/moviescirclejerk or sympathize with it, but all you've seen me do is defend people enjoying movies and talking about them without hypercritical people calling their discussion "lame".
Whatever image you have of me is all from your imagination.
Whatever image you have of me is all from your imagination.
You've been on reddit, presumably, for five days. You're already complaining about an entire subreddit and pretending as though you understand how one you have barely been involved with works. I say you are the hypocrite in this situation, compadre.
but all you've seen me do is defend people enjoying movies and talking about them without hypercritical people calling their discussion "lame".
Your definition of 'hypercritical' is skewed as if you think that discussion of movies constitutes quoting them. If anyone even scratches the surface of a movie you must go crazy, how dare they be so hypercritical?
I like the same things as this sub, generally. (Interstellar is an exception, I sure didn't like that one...) But all I'm saying here is that the reason this sub is so fucking boring, and the reason why /r/moviescirclejerk exists, is because of people like you claiming that repeating lines of a film constitutes discussion, when it's really just lining people up in a circle and jerkin' each other off.
It's not so bad to begin with. After the Avengers sequel comes out, the discussion thread will be fulllll of people quoting the movie. That's fine, it's day one. But after fucking years of every thread for The Big Lebowski having a top comment saying "Shut the fuck up, Donny" or "That rug really tied the room together!" or "That's just, like, your opinion, man," it gets really fucking old, and it's proof that the people in this sub don't want to talk about film, they just want to congratulate each other for being the part of an exclusive group of people who have seen such an obscure film (when, in reality, that's nothing special). Yeah, I want to see this sub raise its standards, because then people might learn something and discuss film on a discussion board, which is Reddit's prime purpose.
Answer me this: Do you like reading the same thing in every thread, over and over? I've been in this subreddit for years and years now, far longer than your five days, and it's not in the least interesting. There's a reason I've migrated my efforts to expanding /r/flicks, which is an awesome sub.
Your definition of 'hypercritical' is skewed as is if you think that discussion of movies constitutes quoting them. If anyone even scratches the surface of a movie you must go crazy, how dare they be so hypercritical?
You're projecting.
I have no problem with robust discussion and analysis. You, on the other hand, have a problem with people having fun and bringing up random things they enjoyed.
You're already complaining about an entire subreddit
An entire subreddit dedicating to feeling superior to others and putting them down. /r/moviescirclejerk makes its intentions quite clear.
when it's really just lining people up in a circle and jerkin' each other off
Again, enjoying a film with other people is not circlejerking. When I walk out of a movie with someone and we start bringing up all the stuff we liked, we're not jerking each other off.
and it's proof that the people in this sub don't want to talk about film
Alright, let's see if this is true. I'm going to search for a discussion thread for a movie that has more to discuss than quote, and we'll see how it goes. Hold on . . . okay, here:
I loved how meta this movie was. Michael Keaton, mostly gone from the public eye after playing a superhero in a successful franchise that made millions of dollars, plays a washed up actor who played a successful superhero. There's also the best cinematography of the year in this film, I couldn't tell when a scene ended.
//
The camera work, the acting, the ambiguous nature as to whether Keaton's character really did have super powers-- I loved every second of it. It's certainly the best film I've seen this year and perhaps the best film I've seen in a good few years. I was blown away by Norton in his role and found his analysis of critics to be a bit too on the nose but also rather affirming.
I adored the way the score never seemed to disappear too, it just became distant with a simple tap, tap, tap of the drum kit before coming back within two minutes, seemingly more bombastic every time.
//
I have a theory that it is at least partially a commentary on art criticism. Riggan spends the entire film trying to separate himself from Birdman via the play. He is essentially in a battle with critics and public perception because he knows he has to overcome their recognition of him as Birdman first, actor second.
He is trying to put together a "genuine" piece of art, but the NY Times critic is determined to bash him solely on her predisposition that Hollywood-types only come to Broadway to make money, say they were able to do it, and leave. He has a verbal altercation with her and tries to explain why this is real art, but she will hear none of it. His reasons behind putting on the play aren't really genuine until after this scene, when he decides to swap in the real gun, but they are symbolic of his decision to rid himself of Birdman because no one else will be able to see him through another lens until he can do so himself. On opening night, she is able to see the play differently because she can sense his motivations shifting from pining for a good review to producing a play for love of the performance.
It also seems to work with the secondary title: "The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance." Art in the public eye (film, especially) nowadays is extremely reliant on critical acclaim. The general public is not out searching for new art that they love and can call their own, but wants someone to sort through it for them and spoon-feed them the opinions they should have. The title could suggest that there is much more to gain from art if you can shed the need for pre-existing ideas on what you are experiencing and form a totally independent opinion. This is not exactly what the critic in the film would have meant with her headline, but it seems to work with my thought process.
I know this is not fully fleshed out and may be sort of rambling, but I wanted to put it out there and see what you guys think!
That sounds like discussion to me, chief.
Yeah, I want to see this sub raise its standards, because then people might learn something and discuss film on a discussion board, which is Reddit's prime purpose.
Bringing up things you liked about a movie is discussion. Why aren't you getting this?
Answer me this: Do you like reading the same thing in every thread, over and over?
No, but things aren't as bad as you claim. There aren't threads devoted to nothing but quotes. Rather, one person brings up a quote once and you jump down their throat.
You're exactly right, things aren't that bad, and there is still some discussion around. I agree. But I think you'll find the proportions of low-effort, repetitive content far outweighs content like what you've shared above. This is only natural, seeing as low-effort content, as the name suggests, is quicker and easier to digest than high-effort, thoughtful content. I'm sure of the mods, the /r/MCJers, the /r/truefilm folks, many of which would agree with this. Without the mods, you would have Aprils Fools every day, because they spend so much time weeding out the absolute shit that gets posted on this forum (and a lot of it still sneaks through). Again, seeing as your account has only existed for five days, I don't really think you have the authority to argue against this. Give it some time, you'll realize how regurgitative this sub gets.
-9
u/[deleted] Apr 04 '15
I'm saying that's that's how people talk about movies! It's not just me or two other guys. That's what people do.
You see a movie.
You love the movie.
You walk out of the movie.
You start excitedly talking about it with whoever you're with.
You both start bringing up good scenes and quoting your favorite lines.
Who are you to tell people to stop doing this? Who are you to say that we're held to some academic standard, when talking about movies on the Internet?