[Reiter]

*Re-enters*

Originally Posted by Josh Z

Filmmaker, your entire argument hinges on the fact that you believe that some films are "above criticism". There is no such thing. Who makes the decision about which films are allegedly above criticism? You? What criteria are used? Because they're old, or popular, or a lot of people have seen them? That makes a movie completely beyond reproach to you?

I say that's horsesh*t. No matter how famous or popular the movie, every viewer has the chance to approach that movie from an angle they haven't in the past. If a critic can make a reader think about a movie in a way they never have before, that critic has done a damn good job.

Your ideas of what constitutes a "professional review," what the purpose of this site is, and what our greater readership (i.e. human beings other than yourself) want from it, also fall far from the mark.

I'd like to know what really you do for a living, because I don't believe for a millisecond that you're actually a filmmaker. I'd like to go to your office, having no knowledge of your job whatsoever, and loudly proclaim to everyone there what a terrible job you're doing. The less I understand about that job, the more assertive I'll be.

Because that's what you're doing here. You're coming to our office and telling us how to do our jobs, when you don't have even the faintest clue what you're talking about.

To be fair, you're criticizing other's work as well. It's part of your job, but still, why should you be free from it? Dumb argument anyway.

*Leaves again!*

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by Josh Z

Filmmaker, your entire argument hinges on the fact that you believe that some films are "above criticism". There is no such thing. Who makes the decision about which films are allegedly above criticism? You? What criteria are used? Because they're old, or popular, or a lot of people have seen them? That makes a movie completely beyond reproach to you?

I say that's horsesh*t. No matter how famous or popular the movie, every viewer has the chance to approach that movie from an angle they haven't in the past. If a critic can make a reader think about a movie in a way they never have before, that critic has done a damn good job.

A fair point of view; to answer your question, I quote the man who said, "I know it when I see it". It may not be an exact science but, by the same token, it ain't rocket science, either, baby. We all know the films that have already found their place in the collective popular conscience. The more critical part of this section of your post is that final line; tell me, where did Mr. Krauss really make the readership here think differently about FIELD OF DREAMS? Tell me, where did he meaningfully quantify how the film is really nothing more than a manipulative failure? Where did he even once go beyond any exploration less shallow than "I just didn't buy it"? There you go. He may be a great guy and, under other circumstances, maybe even a fine film reviewer, but he markedly failed to do "a damn good job" on this review and I maintain, he was the wrong reviewer for the job.

Originally Posted by Josh Z

Your ideas of what constitutes a "professional review," what the purpose of this site is, and what our greater readership (i.e. human beings other than yourself) want from it, also fall far from the mark.

Considering I'm a consumer of the site and you are a supplier, that makes me one substantial step closer than you to being able to legitimately comment on what the readership of this site is interested in.

Originally Posted by Josh Z

I'd like to know what really you do for a living, because I don't believe for a millisecond that you're actually a filmmaker. I'd like to go to your office, having no knowledge of your job whatsoever, and loudly proclaim to everyone there what a terrible job you're doing. The less I understand about that job, the more assertive I'll be.

Because that's what you're doing here. You're coming to our office and telling us how to do our jobs, when you don't have even the faintest clue what you're talking about.

I'm not a professional filmmaker, no, anymore than the guy here who calls himself TomSelleck is really one of the three men with a baby. So sue me. It's just a username, man. If my resume is so important to you, I have been involved in the making of 12 student films at UCLA, three of which I wrote and directed; I also worked as grip on one straight to video flick. All of this was done back in 1999-2000 when, gasp!, I created this username for the forums I was frequenting at the time, such as DVDTalk. Currently, I'm a new hire trainer for a major cell phone company. And I can assure you of this--if I had a customer come to me and say "your products and services aren't best meeting my needs; here's how you can improve them to retain my loyalty", you can guaran-damn-tee I'd pay respectful attention. I may elect not to change how I operate my business, but I certainly wouldn't lay into my customer like you have for expressing their preference for an alternate experience. Nothing will kill a business faster than the supplier telling the consumer what he needs. So again, you prove that your ego concerns rank higher than your readers' suggestions...

[Josh Z]

Originally Posted by Reiter

To be fair, you're criticizing other's work as well. It's part of your job, but still, why should you be free from it?

We are not above criticism or feedback. However, saying that, "A movie should only be reviewed by someone who likes that movie" is not constructive feedback or a valid criticism. It's a fundamental misunderstanding of the job.

It's like going to a sailboat builder and insisting that he should cut big holes in the bottom of all his boats, because some people might like to dip their feet in the water while they're sailing. Or insisting that a cell phone company make phones out of chocolate, for people who get hungry while they talk. It's just nonsense.

You can ask for it, but you ain't gonna get it. And as soon as you start demanding it and disrespecting the boat or phone maker for not bowing to your wishes, you'll be asked to leave.

The customer is not always right. Sometimes, the customer is just a jerk.

[eastx]

Every time you intelligently counter his viewpoint, he fills up my screen with thousands upon thousands of lines of text... Please don't argue with him any more.

[Reiter]

Originally Posted by Josh Z

We are not above criticism or feedback. However, saying that, "A movie should only be reviewed by someone who likes that movie" is not constructive feedback or a valid criticism. It's a fundamental misunderstanding of the job.

It's like going to a sailboat builder and insisting that he should cut big holes in the bottom of all his boats, because some people might like to dip their feet in the water while they're sailing. Or insisting that a cell phone company make phones out of chocolate, for people who get hungry while they talk. It's just nonsense.

You can ask for it, but you ain't gonna get it. And as soon as you start demanding it and disrespecting the boat or phone maker for not bowing to your wishes, you'll be asked to leave.

The customer is not always right. Sometimes, the customer is just a jerk.

?

But seriously though, I take no sides here as I never read the reviews at any of these websites. If it's a movie I like, I'll probably buy it.

[FreddyC]

If I have to read "intellectual masturbation" one more time, I think I'll have to grab a tissue. Freddy

[Filmmaker]

The following is a revised version of my original post #56, which caused me to be suspended; this copy removes the sections deemed inappropriate according to HDD's forum policies:

Sorry to disappoint, eastx; "all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy..." Oh, and as long as Josh Z's counterargument consists of accusing me of wanting everything written at HDD to be "happy, shiny reviews", he has most assuredly not "intelligently countered my viewpoint" in even the most fleeting manner. In fact, he has yet to even begin to address my arguments, which (eastx, you can breathe easy) I won't reiterate because I already have more than enough times for everyone here to understand. Josh, pretty much from the start, chose to respond to my opinions with emotional insults and outright reinvention of my points of contention, rather than offering a shred of intelligent discourse (which I damn well know he's capable of). If you think comparing my concerns (which, some of you may have noticed, a few have publicly agreed with) with asking for a chocolate cell phone represents intelligent counterargument, I'm going to have to assume you never earned above a D- in high school debate class. Josh has elected to take the route of the wounded martyr and pedantically defended his beliefs with nothing but vitriol and issue avoidance. It is quite clear from the unprecedented crumbling of his usual confidence and clarity in this debate that he truly recognizes, deep within, that I might be "on to something", but witness the frightening, I say again, pathological inability of this service provider to, at minimum, offer to one of his readers, "the staff at HDD appreciate your feedback; we'll take it under advisement". I think what we're seeing something that runs much deeper and darker than an amusing personality quirk from Josh here. I hope he achieves true fulfillment serving his audience of one.

[The Ebbtide]

For god sake, let it die. They banned you for a reason, and probably hoped a temporary hiatus would cause you to drop it.

I like the film, Josh and David don't. That doesn't mean I'm going to harass these two forever because they disagree on an opinion. I've also met more people who hate this film than like it, so I'm not bothered by such a review.

The reviewers on this site get way too much bickering thrown at them. I agree and disagree with them on movies, but I don't come out and demand to know how one could (dis)like such a film. If you've been in film school, you should personally know that not everyone will like a film. Accept it and move on.

[rayley1]

Originally Posted by Filmmaker

The following is a revised version of my original post #56, which caused me to be suspended; this copy removes the sections deemed inappropriate according to HDD's forum policies:

Sorry to disappoint, eastx; "all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy..." Oh, and as long as Josh Z's counterargument consists of accusing me of wanting everything written at HDD to be "happy, shiny reviews", he has most assuredly not "intelligently countered my viewpoint" in even the most fleeting manner. In fact, he has yet to even begin to address my arguments, which (eastx, you can breathe easy) I won't reiterate because I already have more than enough times for everyone here to understand. Josh, pretty much from the start, chose to respond to my opinions with emotional insults and outright reinvention of my points of contention, rather than offering a shred of intelligent discourse (which I damn well know he's capable of). If you think comparing my concerns (which, some of you may have noticed, a few have publicly agreed with) with asking for a chocolate cell phone represents intelligent counterargument, I'm going to have to assume you never earned above a D- in high school debate class. Josh has elected to take the route of the wounded martyr and pedantically defended his beliefs with nothing but vitriol and issue avoidance. It is quite clear from the unprecedented crumbling of his usual confidence and clarity in this debate that he truly recognizes, deep within, that I might be "on to something", but witness the frightening, I say again, pathological inability of this service provider to, at minimum, offer to one of his readers, "the staff at HDD appreciate your feedback; we'll take it under advisement". I think what we're seeing something that runs much deeper and darker than an amusing personality quirk from Josh here. I hope he achieves true fulfillment serving his audience of one.

The first thing any film maker needs is a good editor. You've told your story now seal it with a kiss or ride off into the sunset. We hope there isn't a sequel in the wings for your over-the-top opus. *Good grief !*