Movies

[irishjayhawk]

Yeah, so I saw a lot of movies this weekend.

Elizabeth: The Golden Age - Mediocre, at best. Slow and dragged on. Shorten it to 2 hours and it's golden. It's not, so it fails.

Michael Clayton - Amazing. Everything about it is awesome. However, it's VERY complex and mind bending. You have to think, so be prepared. I still feel like I'm missing key details of exactly what happened. Gotta see it again.

Across the Universe - Perfect is one word that comes to mind. It just works. And, contrary to many people I bet, the movie is best viewed sober. Trust me.

[Buck]

Oh and if there is any movie that can beat The King's Speech for the Oscar, its going to have to be an incredibly good film

If there is any actor who can beat Colin Firth for Best Actor, he'll have had to acted his ass off.

[KevB]

Originally Posted by Buck

Oh and if there is any movie that can beat The King's Speech for the Oscar, its going to have to be an incredibly good film

If there is any actor who can beat Colin Firth for Best Actor, he'll have had to acted his ass off.

Agree on both counts

[mikeyis4dcats.]

MACHETE!

Fun.

[Hammock Parties]

Finally going to see Das Boot. Listened to the soundtrack and it blew me away.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

I'm having to jump through significant mental hoops to read it as ambiguous. I finally figured out how to do it, though:
1.) pretend that I don't know what "context" is
2.) ignore the first three sentences of the post

Are you ALWAYS a pedantic ass?

He posted about two types of movies, ones he's seen and ones he hasn't, then listed 4 movies without reference to which type they were. YES, if you go back and map the entire strand of the conversation AND assume his accounting principles are up to snuff, you can make a relatively safe assumption about which type they are. But the sentence as structured is ambiguous.

Humor is replete with examples of the overall meaning being relatively clear, but a certain turn of phrase possessing enough ambiguity to introduce confusion, even if just fleeting. That's all this was. When I read it, my thought was;

'wait! what? oh . . . '

taking place in less than a second. pat seems to have had a similar reaction [without the 'oh. . . '] and chose to expend a little energy to heckle the poster about it. pat's continued confusion suggests he didn't expend sufficient effort to deconstruct the post after initial confusion, but the initial confusion is reasonable.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Are you ALWAYS a pedantic ass?

He posted about two types of movies, ones he's seen and ones he hasn't, then listed 4 movies without reference to which type they were. YES, if you go back and map the entire strand of the conversation AND assume his accounting principles are up to snuff, you can make a relatively safe assumption about which type they are. But the sentence as structured is ambiguous.

Why capitalize those words? The cognitive effort required to "map the entire strand of the conversation" (you make it sound so difficult) is insubstantial. Practically nil.

But I'm the pedant here, I guess, while you can twist and mold KevB's post to fit a narrow reading of it.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

Why capitalize those words? The cognitive effort required to "map the entire strand of the conversation" (you make it sound so difficult) is insubstantial. Practically nil.

But I'm the pedant here, I guess, while you can twist and mold KevB's post to fit a narrow reading of it.

I get it. You're embarrassed that you didn't recognize the ambiguity yourself and now you need to go on and on about how insignificant it was to make yourself feel better. It's really not that big of a deal. Go easy on yourself.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

Why capitalize those words? The cognitive effort required to "map the entire strand of the conversation" (you make it sound so difficult) is insubstantial. Practically nil.

But I'm the pedant here, I guess, while you can twist and mold KevB's post to fit a narrow reading of it.

Absolutely, going 'wait! what? oh . . . ' can be a particularly taxing fraction of a second.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Absolutely, going 'wait! what? oh . . . ' can be a particularly taxing fraction of a second.

This seems like an odd place in the thread to compliment you, but what came to mind reading this post was that 98% of CP members read some of your posts and go "Wait! What?" for five minutes without ever getting to the "oh" part. Not out of ambiguity on your part, but out of over-their-heads vocabulary.

Maybe I just read more unclear student writing than you or Pat. KevB could have stated things more clearly, but I long for his clarity out of some students.

[KevB]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

This seems like an odd place in the thread to compliment you, but what came to mind reading this post was that 98% of CP members read some of your posts and go "Wait! What?" for five minutes without ever getting to the "oh" part. Not out of ambiguity on your part, but out of over-their-heads vocabulary.

Maybe I just read more unclear student writing than you or Pat. KevB could have stated things more clearly, but I long for his clarity out of some students.

It's truly mind-boggling how long we've discussed my original off the cuff post. To sum it up from my perspective, I thought the post was relatively clear. I assumed that any ambiguity would be quickly translated and certainly not mocked here among "iFriends". I generally try to keep it short and sweet. Next time I suppose I'll be more careful, or more likely just not post anything at all.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by KevB

It's truly mind-boggling how long we've discussed my original off the cuff post. To sum it up from my perspective, I thought the post was relatively clear. I assumed that any ambiguity would be quickly translated and certainly not mocked here among "iFriends". I generally try to keep it short and sweet. Next time I suppose I'll be more careful, or more likely just not post anything at all.

Please don't pout. It was all in fun and the subsequent argument really has nothing to do with what you posted and everything to do with Reaper's need to scratch his superiority complex itch. No one should be the least bit butthurt over this.

BTW, you didn't assume anything about the ambiguity because you didn't recognize it as ambiguous, which is completely understandable since you knew exactly what you meant.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by KevB

It's truly mind-boggling how long we've discussed my original off the cuff post. To sum it up from my perspective, I thought the post was relatively clear. I assumed that any ambiguity would be quickly translated and certainly not mocked here among "iFriends". I generally try to keep it short and sweet. Next time I suppose I'll be more careful, or more likely just not post anything at all.

I don't understand what you're saying.

[jiveturkey]

Originally Posted by blaise

I don't understand what you're saying.

[Lzen]

Originally Posted by luv

Not reading back through to see if it's been mentioned but I watched The A-Team. Hilarious. Kind of like the old series only set in a more recent scenario.

I loved the A Team. This is one remake that Hollywood got right, IMO. Sure, there were parts that I thought "okay, that would never happen in reality", but at least they weren't over the top cheesy like the original series. Although I loved the original series.

[Lzen]

Originally Posted by Vanilla Thunder

Kick-Ass was better than expected.

I didn't know what to expect. I thoroughly enjoyed Kick Ass.