“I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore.”
Contrarians of earth: Please, for the love of all that is holy, stop writing about Inception.
This happens every time people start going apeshit about something. Suddenly, haters sprout up like weeds bashing it, griping about how overrated it is, writing long diatribes about how much they hate it. People, like myself, rave about how much they love Inception and then other people actually spend time writing about how no one anywhere should ever love it, under any circumstances.
Stop wasting everyone’s time, especially your own. Instead, use all that energy and passion raving about something that’s better, something you feel is more worthwhile.
First, to the general problems I have with hating on movies to begin with.
Movies are an art form, a creative medium, and watching a movie is a subjective experience. We can pretend all we want that our claims about the movies we love and the movies we hate are objective facts, but it just isn’t true. The mood we are in, the people we are with, the audience at the theater for that particular showing, some random chemicals firing in our head, all sorts of crazy subconscious shit bubbling up unbeknownst to us… there are an endless number of factors influencing how we feel about a film (or about anything for that matter).
So, why does it make you so angry that you want to prove to the people who love something that they are deluded and weak-minded? It’s insane. What bothers you so much about people who love Slumdog Millionaire, or Juno, or Crash?
The most common argument I’ve seen is that the contrarians are film advocates, that they are just steamed that subpar films are getting attention over great films. Bullshit. If that was the case, why are you wasting more ink on the film you hate, thus giving it more attention?!? Sure, make snarky comments with your friends, make fun of it in passing while you are writing about something else, but how much energy do you really want to expend trying to rain on someone else’s parade? Why would you want to rain on someone else’s parade to begin with? They are having a fucking parade, be happy for them!
Instead of whining and complaining, make a commitment that every time you see a [insert movie you hate here] article, you are going to write about Kurosawa and Wenders, or rave about Korean cinema, or try to get everyone to watch your favorite unrecognized movie. That, my friends, is advocacy. Negativity and criticism advocates nothing but negativity and criticism.
Also, why does it seem that everything written whining about a movie being generic and derivative is written so… well, generically and derivatively. You are going to complain about a movie being uninspired drivel by writing your own uninspired drivel? Come, again. (That’s what she said.)
Now, on to my problems with people complaining about Inception specifically. The complaints about Inception are particularly baffling. Sure, there are some people who hate it, but most of the people debating it are debating whether or not is a masterpiece, or just really good.
Really?!?
To quote Eli Cash, “Why would a reviewer make the point of saying someone’s not a genius? Do you especially think I’m not a genius?”
I’m pretty smart, and unquestionably passionate about the things I love. I could come up with a bunch of pretty solid arguments and big words to prove Inception was brilliant, then you could use similarly solid arguments and big words to prove it wasn’t. The question is, why? We both like it, why are we going to argue about just how much one should really like it? Talk about minutia. It’s the epitome of insipid. Let’s just get it out of the way now, if you want to spend time trying to convince me Inception wasn’t great, I’m not interested.
However, to briefly rave about the film a bit more, it is brilliant storytelling. Without spoiling it with specifics, there is a particular moment in the film where a large number of people at our screening made audible noises. Not out of fear, or disgust, but because they were so engaged in the story. Nolan told a heady, complicated story, and still had a cinema full of Americans involuntarily making noises because they were not only following along, but were on the edge of their proverbial seat (actually, my friend Austin sat in front of me, and there were times he was on the edge of his literal seat). I thought that maybe this phenomenon was unique to my viewing, or to my city, but as it would turn out, Warner Bros. has been pulling down video from the internet where viewers were using cell phones to document theaters full of people making noise at the exact same moment all across the country. To quote our vice president, that’s a big fucking deal.
Okay, back to my diatribe. I guess the thing that bothers me so much about this is how much energy people put into being negative. It’s really easy to hate on stuff, it’s lazy. Our culture actually says you are smart because you can critically tear something apart. That’s just not true. Tearing something apart is simple. Building something up is hard. You actually put yourself on the line when you praise something, that’s scary. Throwing temper tantrums because all the other kids like stuff that you don’t like is, well, you know.
I have tons more to say about this, but I’m going to stop for now. Suffice it to say that I implore you to put something positive into the world instead of being so negative.
Learn to advocate the things you love with more passion than you bitch about the things you hate.
Mike
Unintentionally ironic “I Hate Haters for Hating,” post you got here, especially given the Freudian ‘projection’ coping mechanism you are demonstrating. You know, where the unconscious act of denial of a person’s own attributes, thoughts, and emotions are then ascribed to the outside world, such as to the weather, a tool, or, in your case, to other people. Thus, it involves imagining or projecting that others have those feelings. Hilariously ironic for a fanboy of Inception to fall into… HA!
I’ll quote from a wise man: “Stop wasting everyone’s time, especially your own. Instead, use all that energy and passion raving about something that’s better, something you feel is more worthwhile.”
Furthermore, “why does it make you so angry that you want to prove to the people who [hate] something that they are deluded and weak-minded? It’s insane. What bothers you so much about people who [hate] Slumdog Millionaire, or Juno, or Crash…” “…writing long diatribes about how much [you] hate it.”
And BTW: “I truly have no idea what so many people are raving about. It’s as if someone went into their heads while they were sleeping and planted the idea that Inception is a visionary masterpiece and—hold on … Whoa! I think I get it. The movie is a metaphor for the power of delusional hype—a metaphor for itself” – New York magazine’s David Edelstein
I would have liked Inception if i were into lack of character development, erratic scene transitions, and dull action. The most annoying thing is that people who like it persist in saying that its detractors don’t get it because it is too clever!!! Tedious in the extreme.
HA!
Scott
Ha, wow, so if you use Psych 101 you must be right. You smart. Me dumb. I was wrong all along. What a convenient way to attempt to pretend arguments other than yours have no merit. Just call it projection. I’m going to take a wild guess and say you already knew exactly how you were going to respond to this post before you even read it. It has very little to do with my feelings about haters, and much more with your feelings about ‘Inception,’ but there we go with that projection again… oops.
The article was as much in favor of writing about the things you love as it was hating on haters, and I spend 99% of my time on this blog writing about the things I love, so I am doing exactly what I am asking others to do in the quote you used from the post, I am being more passionate about the things I love more often and with more fervency than I write about the things I hate. If you read this blog instead of dropping in to snipe at a random Inception post, you might have an idea what you are talking about. That’s sort of what this entire blog is, so… you know… I’m not sure what your complaint is there.
The post was obviously written to vent frustration, but I wasn’t trying to ‘hate haters,’ I implored them to write about the things they love, because that is what I would love to read.
Also, if we are going to talk about my projection, lets talk about your irresponsible and typically modern American use of language. You decided to go ad hominem, attacking me and my argumentation style, while never actually discussing any of the relevant things I had to say. What is contributed to life when someone hates on Inception because they don’t like that everyone else likes it. There are tons of bad movies out there. Why pick on one just because there are a bunch of fanboys and fangirls out there?
You said that Inception lovers keep saying that those who didn’t like it just weren’t clever enough to get it. That has nothing to do with Inception lovers, unfortunately that is what people do when they disagree with someone else… it’s what you did in your comment, especially in the David Edelstein quote. Talk about unintentionally ironic. You accused Inception lovers of something… then you did that exact thing. What was the point of this comment again? Oh yeah, you were ripping me for doing what your entire comment did. You probably shouldn’t claim people who like Inception are too stupid to to realize it sucks, while deriding people for saying the same thing on the other side of the argument.
This article also had nothing to do with random people who don’t like Inception, it never mentions them. I was writing about people who spend huge amounts of time writing about how much they hate ‘Inception.’ The point was not to hate on haters, it was to encourage the people hating shit all the time (not just Inception, that was just the proverbial straw) to instead, “learn to advocate the things you love with more passion than you bitch about the things you hate.” I drew that from… you know… the post.
Emily
WOW, what an asshole!!! talk about taking things out of context and someone being insecure in their own feelings towards things. I also personally love the fact that he could hate so greatly on you but couldn’t use his own words to express why he hated Inception so much. I guess he had to turn to someone else’s words to do the talking for him. It’s a shame that he fell right into what you were talking about and couldn’t rise up to the occasion. Your article had a lot less to do with liking Inception or movies in general and more into where people should put their energy. Finding beauty in things opens up the world to individuals, continuously being negative just leaves people lonely and unhappy with the world around them.
Mike
Again, your own words: “Learn to advocate the things you love with more passion than you bitch about the things you hate.”
HILARIOUS! Your entire post about how much you loved Inception was a grand total of 73 words (and a little heavy on the hyperbole if you ask me). Your post about “hating haters” was 976 words. Explain that.
“I’m going to take a wild guess and say you already knew exactly how you were going to respond to this post before you even read it.”
I used your own words against you. How could I have known I was going to respond that way before reading your post? Maybe someone planted the idea in my head while I was dreaming…
“It has very little to do with my feelings about haters, and much more with your feelings about ‘Inception’.”
No, it has everything to do with your feelings about haters. You hate haters for taking time to write hate posts, yet somehow, you feel entitled to do the exact same thing, not about Inception, but about haters. Practice what you preach. Your post is a self-contradiction. You spent 13 x more time on your post about hating haters than your post on loving Inception — sorry to knock you off your high horse.
“Also, if we are going to talk about my projection, lets talk about your irresponsible and typically modern American use of language. You decided to go ad hominem, attacking me and my argumentation style, while never actually discussing any of the relevant things I had to say.”
The argumentum ad hominem is not always fallacious, for in some instances questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue. That you feel entitled to, on your blog, write a rant about something you hate — OTHER people writing rants on their blogs about something they hate — is personal conduct relevant to the argument. Hypocritical personal conduct is relevant.
“Emily: I also personally love the fact that he could hate so greatly on you but couldn’t use his own words to express why he hated Inception so much. I guess he had to turn to someone else’s words to do the talking for him. It’s a shame that he fell right into what you were talking about and couldn’t rise up to the occasion. ”
Emily, I guess you didn’t read the part that said: “I would have liked Inception if i were into lack of character development, erratic scene transitions, and dull action. The most annoying thing is that people who like it persist in saying that its detractors don’t get it because it is too clever!!! Tedious in the extreme.”
W
Damnit, Mike. I need more commentary like yours on my posts. I feel like it’ll draw more people in. Trolls always do.
Let your friends and family know that I could use more of this raw talent you’ve got – and send them this link:
http://rousedtomediocrity.com/category/wes/
Mike
I take exception to being referred to as a troll. My comment was on topic and directly responded to the original post, and I did not hit and run. My comment was provocative and elicited a response, but the ensuing discussion is relevant to the OP.
Your blog has zero comments from people not named “Emily.” I would think you’d appreciate the increased traffic and interest in your postings. I guess anyone not named Emily who comments on your site is considered a troll.
Have fun talking amongst yourselves. If Scott responds to my second comment, I’ll continue the discussion.
Scott
1. You’re right Mike, my post about Inception was short. I didn’t want to give anything away, so I just gave my opinion and left it at that. However, you are ignoring the context of this entire blog. How many posts have I written on this blog praising something, and how many have I written “hating haters.” Hmm… I’m pretty sure at this point the ratio is around 100-1.
Also, in my post, which according to you is only about “hate,” Which is 976 words according to you, there are 173 more words raving about ‘Inception.’ In addition to the fact that you are still ignoring the bulk of the content of the post. Yay, we can all use wordcount!
2. Just because you lifted a quote from the blog doesn’t mean you hadn’t already decided what you were going to say before you read the post, that’s called ‘proof texting.’ A lot of people make a really good living that way. You think FOX News hasn’t already decided how they are going to spin quotes and clips before they write a story? They go into it knowing full well what sort of story they will write, pull out quotes and such, and then spin them to mean what they want.
3. You didn’t actually use my own words against me, you pulled them out of context and ignored everything in the post that was actually asking people to contribute something positive to the world. You are still ignoring the content of the post.
Your ad hominem argument is fallacious, because you are hiding behind it to keep from actually dealing with the ideas in my argument. I argue that my thesis is not what you say it is, and thus that I am not being hypocritical. You are claiming that I am doing nothing but hating on haters, and thus doing exactly what I am saying people shouldn’t do. Yet, the thesis of this post is pretty clearly, use some passion and energy advocating things, because all the energy spent hating on stuff is wasted. I am most certainly railing against that in this post, but not for the sake of railing. I don’t just say “haters suck, they should stop, what a bunch of big assholes.”
I call for people to remember that interaction with all of life is always subjective:
“We can pretend all we want that our claims about the movies we love and the movies we hate are objective facts, but it just isn’t true. The mood we are in, the people we are with, the audience at the theater for that particular showing, some random chemicals firing in our head, all sorts of crazy subconscious shit bubbling up unbeknownst to us… there are an endless number of factors influencing how we feel about a film (or about anything for that matter).”
Although, this is where you may have me, because I have indeed written about my love for movies like it is fact, and it just isn’t.
I call for them to give something to the world that isn’t just tearing down someone else’s artistic endeavor. I call for them to actually advocate for good films and not just bitch about the bad ones:
“Instead of whining and complaining, make a commitment that every time you see a [insert movie you hate here] article, you are going to write about Kurosawa and Wenders, or rave about Korean cinema, or try to get everyone to watch your favorite unrecognized movie. That, my friends, is advocacy. Negativity and criticism advocates nothing but negativity and criticism.”
And that’s just to name two. Also, that’s another 143 words that isn’t just hating on haters.
I argue that, for all your passion, my post isn’t about what you say it is. I am responding to haters by asking them to try something else for a change, I think it is pretty clear that my thesis here argues that.
You used my quote to say that I am calling haters “deluded and weak-minded.” I disagree that I am saying that. I wouldn’t spend this energy asking people to use their passion to rave about the things they love if I assumed the people hating on stuff are deluded and weak-minded. I would just ignore them if that were the case, the same way I ignore Glenn Beck.
If someone wrote a post hating on ‘Inception,’ which, like my post, offered an alternative. Say, something along the lines of ‘Inception lovers, I say this movie pales in comparison to Blade Runner.’ Then I would say, bravo, you are advocating. That’s what I want to read and see.
Also, if we are going to talk about hypocrites, how is it not hypocritical to say “The most annoying thing is that people who like it persist in saying that its detractors don’t get it because it is too clever!!! Tedious in the extreme.” While also quoting, ““I truly have no idea what so many people are raving about. It’s as if someone went into their heads while they were sleeping and planted the idea that Inception is a visionary masterpiece and—hold on … Whoa! I think I get it. The movie is a metaphor for the power of delusional hype—a metaphor for itself”
You just complained about people saying someone doesn’t like the movie because it is too clever, AND said people who liked it aren’t clever enough to realize they only like it because of the hype.
Scott
Also, Emily isn’t the only person who comments here. Granted, it is basically a conversation amongst ourselves, but if you take out Emily, you, and the writers here, we have 15 other unique commenters. I know, I know, that’s really low, but we are a baby blog, we don’t even have 150 posts yet, cut us some slack.
Scott
Alright, I know, I’m getting a little overzealous with the comments here, but to be honest, it bugs me that instead of disagreeing with my post, you would actually accuse me of being a hypocrite who doesn’t do what I am asking people to do in the post. So, here is just some proof that you are, in fact, wrong.
1. I started an entire blog, the point of which is to rave about awesome shit. In addition to my former blog, gloaminganddawn.wordpress.com, which also raved about awesome shit.
2. You used the word count thing to “prove” I was a hypocrite. Well, my post raving about ‘Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell’ was 935 words, my post raving about ‘Y; The Last Man’ was 835, Joss Whedon’s run on ‘Astonishing X-Men’ (which, for the record, had comment from TWO WHOLE PEOPLE who I don’t know, yay for people!) 835 words. If you’d like, I could keep going, if you are going to continue to maintain that I write more about what I hate than about what I love.
Mike
There is an obvious conflict between your two Inception posts, which are intimately related, the rest of your blog and your other website nothwithstanding.
Spending so much time composing a nasty diatribe about how people should spend more time being positive, while spending so little time ACTUALLY building up, praising, and defending the movie that ultimately was the genesis of that very diatribe IS a contradiction.
And make no mistake, this OP is not positive shit. It’s negative. It’s snarky. It’s as pretentious as the film school snobs you snipe at with your “Kurosawa” and “Korean cinema” jabs. You brand “contrarians” — who more than likely simply offer their opinion as to why Inception is not a “brilliant, near-perfect event in cinematic storytelling,” — as lazy, childish, and simple.
You really want to talk about ad hominem?
You write about how brave it is to build something up, to praise something, to put yourself out there on the line. It’s as if you forgot your Inception reaction piece was the complete opposite of effort.
I was highly anticipating Inception, and couldn’t have been more disappointed. In my opinion the movie lacked soul, depth of characters, emotion and had no meaningful or compelling message.
Being in a minority of people who think Inception turned out to be just another summer blockbuster, putting that idea out there, defending that idea against conventional wisdom — that takes as much courage as it would take to defend the movie as a cinematic masterpiece.
To skillfully defend the idea that Inception was just another summer blockbuster requires as much effort as it would take to skillfully defend the movie as a cinematic masterpiece. Who are you to say otherwise?
And I could not possibly disagree more with your overall premise/thesis that people should only write about positive stuff that makes them and other people feel good. To use some passion and energy advocating things, because all the energy spent hating on stuff is wasted.
Wasted? You must hate Vonnegut, Heller, Palahniuk, Salinger, Orwell, Steinbeck, Burgess, Joyce, HST, and oh, Shakespeare, or any other work of tragedy, tragicomedy, or satire with an anti-hero. Literature, films, writing devoted to excoriating a particular group, thought, or conception by being negative really doesn’t interest you at all?
Do they have no value? Are they lazy? Childish? Simple? Is there not value in questioning conceptions of what’s good and bad, even about movies?
“I didn’t want to give anything away, so I just gave my opinion and left it at that.”
You know Scott, a lot of people can write a praising review of a movie without giving anything away, in fact a lot of people make a really good living that way (see what I did there? was that ‘proof texting’ too?).
To me, a thoughtless review full of hyperbolic cliches like yours is the easy way out. To then follow a post of lazy praise with an indictment of contrarian writers as being lazy and simple, is… well, it’s something worth noting.
But I’ll readily admit that upon closer inspection, your site and posts generally rave about shit you think is awesome.
You are not a hypocrite for spending one post ripping on contrarians. But I still assert your Inception reaction post is in direct conflict with this post. You spent a lot of time and effort on your snarky post about contrarians after devoting so little to your post praising the film.
Which begs the question: now that Inception has been out for a while, why haven’t you taken the time to do a post about why you think it was a near cinematic masterpiece? Isn’t that, you know, your thesis in action?
Scott
Okay, well, at least now you are actually talking about the ideas in the post, and we can begin the conversation in earnest. That’s a relief.
Again, perhaps you disagree, and since I did spend time praising Inception again I can see why you would disagree, but as I said before, this post was not an Inception post, Inception was just the straw that broke the camel’s back. I spend very little time talking about Inception in this particular post on purpose, that is why I was sure to mention Slumdog and Juno and such later on, because I was attempting to write about this phenomenon in movies in general, not just regarding Inception.
So, you keep calling what I wrote a nasty diatribe, please offer proof from my post that you consider ‘nasty.’ I use strong language, but I don’t see any of it being nasty, and most of that strong language is directed at behavior, not at people. I never call any people idiots or weak-minded, I strongly ask people to stop writing posts about movies in which they say those who like it are idiots and weak-minded.
As far as Kurosawa and Korean Cinema, again, you should really spend more time looking at the blog before you start making accusations. I wasn’t sniping at anyone with that comment. I mentioned those two things because I love Kurosawa and Korean cinema. And while I haven’t yet written about films like ‘Old Boy’ and other Korean cinema, the Kurosawa reality should be pretty obvious if you only look as far back as June. I think he is the bee’s knees, and that portion of my post was not meant to be nasty or sniping in any way. Although, it is troubling that you received my entire post just assuming I was being an asshole, even when I was simply asking for people to praise good stuff.
I used hyperbole in the first Inception post to be funny, I do it all the time. If you don’t like that, cool, don’t read my blog. However, I’m not going to apologize to you for it. I also will write a longer post defending Inception if and when I feel like it. I have no burden of any kind to argue for my ideas concerning something as silly as my opinion of a movie. It’s just an opinion, if I ever feel like writing at greater length, I will, if not, who the hell cares?
Again, why do you keep harping on one particular post, obsessing about my opinion of Inception? I’m not saying people need to pour huge amounts of effort into every single post they write, my intention was to write about people who seem to make a habit of only sniping at whatever is popular in the moment.
I also never said people should only write about things that make others feel good. And I cannot believe you compared guys who sit at their computer and complain about bad movies to Vonnegut, Heller and Palahniuk. Really?!? Authors who offered brilliant critiques of culture, war and how we understand the human condition are the same thing as people who rip apart movies?
I love tragedy, and tragicomedy, and satire… I’m not sure what it has to do with people tearing apart another person’s work of art. You’re going to have to show me where they connect.
Now, if someone can “skillfully” defend why Inception was crap, go for it. All I’ve seen is people taking the piss out of the people who liked it. Sort of like your quote from the NYT. Plus, don’t keep giving me shit about cliches and laziness when your review here in the comments did the same thing. You think calling the action dull is a thoughtful review? Really?
And are you really going to claim you didn’t proof text in your first comment? You feel good looking at the quote of mine you used, and really believe that I was intending to say what you made me say in how you used the quote? And you will also stand by the idea that because you used a quote that means you hadn’t already made up your mind before you started reading? Regardless of whether or not you actually had made up your mind, you are really going to defend the idea that you obviously hadn’t because you used a quote?
Why did you have to rip into me so much to begin with? Making it clear you felt your dizzying intellect was so far superior to mine. You claim I have a high horse, but you also have done quite a bit of that yourself. “HA!” “HILARIOUS!”
Why couldn’t you just have offered me the benefit of the doubt to begin with, looked at the actual blog to see that literally 99 times out of 100 I practice what I preach, and say “Hey, for someone who rails against lazy reviews, your Inception review felt pretty lazy. Any more ideas to support your opinion?” Heaven forbid you try to be cordial. Yet, instead, you did exactly what I was talking about in this post. You decided you needed to rip me apart with all the ferocity you could muster. I think you failed, in that you misrepresented my post and ignored all context, in that I’ve written more than two posts on this blog. I stand by that opinion. I think your first two comments had nothing to do with the ideas I was expressing here.
I stand by every word in this post. I don’t feel it is hypocritical, lazy or childish. I don’t feel like I was unfair or out of line. And I certainly don’t think this post has anything whatsoever to do with some of my literary heroes like Vonnegut, Heller, Palahniuk… or Hemingway and McCarthy for that matter. Again, I don’t see how the two are related whatsoever. I think the tragedy is the highest form of story, and I believe story has the power to change the world, god dammit.
I do think you are right that it doesn’t take courage to write a short, silly, hyperbolic review of Inception like I did. I didn’t mean to claim it did. However, I stand by the idea that it takes more courage to advocate good art than it does to tear down bad art. Yet, our society makes clear that one proves their intelligence by how well they can rip something else apart, even if they do so by misrepresenting the work in question. That is what I intend to rail against in this post, and if your desire is to prove otherwise somehow, you can save your energy, because I won’t be swayed in that particular area. We’ll have to agree to disagree.
Scott
Also, hopefully I made clear here that I don’t see the two posts as intimately related as you claim, at least not in the sense that the first should be the only thing used to judge the validity and integrity of my argument, because my argument wasn’t purely about Inception, that was just the event in question in the larger argument I was making. Perhaps I should have just left Inception out of the post altogether, then we wouldn’t have to keep talking about one intentionally absurd, hyperbolic post I made at 1 in the morning when I got back from the showing of Inception.
Certainly not to the extent that we have to somehow throw our the rest of my writing as a result.
Scott
Actually, I just looked back at my first Inception post, and it is fine. It might not offer some sort of well-reasoned argument, which you seem to want, but aside from the intentionally cliche list of critic phrases, which are strung together making it obvious I am just trying to lump a bunch together to make the point that I really loved the movie, I also pointed out that the film exceeded all my expectations and that it could even be my favorite movie. Succinct, making quite clear I loved the movie, and since, as you so astutely pointed out, this is apparently just a conversation amongst ourselves, it made sure my good friends who read this blog would check it out themselves.
Again, not a reasoned argument for the film, but it more than adequately served the purpose of what it was meant to be. I was just trying to use colorful language to articulate that I loved the movie. Perhaps you think I failed, but it’s not exactly a moral argument here. So, I stand by that post too.
Casey
So. Mike, what movies do you like?
Mike
I like movies that:
(1) make me care about the characters I am watching;
(2) movies that have a meaningful and compelling message about the human experience, and
(3) are entertaining.
Some examples of movies that, in my opinion, achieve all three:
– Schindler’s List
– Platoon
– Forrest Gump
– Wall-e
– In the Bedroom
– Adaption
– No Country for Old Men
– The Hurt Locker
– Babel
– Mystic River
– Lost in Translation
– A Beautiful Mind
– Lost in Translation
– Traffic
– American Beauty
… to name a few.
Alexis
Hi, I’m Alexis, long time reader, first time commenter…
So, I haven’t seen Inception and didn’t really intend to but now, oh man! I can’t wait! Mike, you have completely changed my mind! If someone with your intellect takes this much interest in a topic than it must be of value! I’m generally not a person who is so easily swayed by the opinions of minions but, I have to say, when such an aggressive stance is argued so indelicately it gets me all sorts of excited! It makes me want to use really big words and “quotation marks” and reference whole genres of film until my head spins around like in that one movie… um… the one with the ghost? You guys know which one, right?
Anyhow, Inception is now penciled into my Saturday night. And right after that I’m going to go onto random blogs and trash the authors. Because although I have a weekend filled with friends, lovers and activities, the best use of my time ripping strangers a new one. As eloquently as possible, of course.
Mike
Scott and Wes… if you have any lingering doubts as to what constitutes a troll or what constitutes an ad hominem attack, look no further than the above post.
Alexis
HA.
Mike
“If you don’t like that, cool, don’t read my blog. However, I’m not going to apologize to you for it. I also will write a longer post defending Inception if and when I feel like it. I have no burden of any kind to argue for my ideas concerning something as silly as my opinion of a movie. It’s just an opinion, if I ever feel like writing at greater length, I will, if not, who the hell cares?”
As silly as my opinion of a movie….
Are you serious Scott? Who the hell cares? Apparently YOU!
Isn’t your diatribe a reaction to something as silly as an opinion on a movie? Yet you get all red-faced, frustrated, you “just can’t take it any more.”
What happened to: “if you don’t like it, cool, don’t read [their] blog.” They’re just silly opinions on movies.
After waxing poetic about the power of story to change the world, grand rhetoric about putting something positive into the world, you dismiss opinions on movies as silly? Good thing you started, not one, but two blogs to spend your time sharing silly opinions.
The premise of your post is that there are bloggers who do nothing but rip on movies. That 99/100 of their posts are just raining on other people’s parades. That they should get off it, because, you know, it’s take courage build something up and you’d rather read posts about shit they love, not hate.
Which begs the question: what the fuck are you doing spending so much time on contrarian websites that do nothing but hate, if you aren’t interested in reading about negative shit? And you must spend A LOT of time on those websites to know for sure that the authors do nothing but hate on shit all the time. Seems strange for a person who claims to hate shit like that so much. In your words: “If you don’t like that, cool, don’t read [their] blogs.”
And that is my problem with this post. You get on your high horse and lecture other people about what they should be writing about, while proceeding to call them lazy, childish, simple, and cowardly for what they currently write about. Then when someone (me) applies your own logic to your own post, you fall back to: (1) I can do whatever I want and (2) opinions about movies are silly. Then why write this post if the contrarians’ opinions on movies can be easily dismissed as simply silly?
If you can write about whatever you want, whenever you feel like it, then why can’t they? If opinions about movies are silly, why are you so frustrated by contrarians?
And to make even more clear my point about Vonnegut, et. al. – you claimed: “all the energy spent hating on stuff is wasted.” You treat that as a statement of fact when it simply isn’t true. Vonnegut, et. al. prove that great value can come from being negative, from critiquing.
When contrarians devote an entire post about how Inception was not the “brilliant, near perfect event in cinematic storytelling” they are creating a forum for a discussion of good vs. bad movies, i.e. good vs. bad art, i.e. good vs. bad storytelling. And if “story has the power to change the world” there is obviously value in defining what constitutes meaningful moviemaking, meaningful storytelling.
“I have no burden of any kind to argue for my ideas concerning something as silly as my opinion of a movie.” You’re right… according to you that burden only falls on the shoulders of contrarians.
But hey, it’s your prerogative to spend vast more time and energy on this post praising nothing, than defending your claim that Inception was a “brilliant, near perfect event in cinematic story telling.” It’s your prerogative to start a blog to rave about shit you love, and then not explain why you think it’s your new favorite movie. It’s your prerogative to spend vast more time lecturing contrarians about the need to have courage to defend good art than to actually have that courage yourself. (And if opinions on movies are silly, does it really require that much courage Scott?)
Scott
Okay Mike, I thought about this for a few minutes, and I think that if we are going to continue this conversation we’ll need to set a few grounds rules. I started defending myself against your charges again, and I realized that you haven’t responded to any of mine. So, if we are going to keep doing this, you will need to actually respond to some of the places where I say you have failed to make a coherent fair argument. You keep sniping at the things I am saying, but when something comes back at you a response is nowhere to be seen. I’m not going to continue defending myself if you are unwilling to do the same, and this is getting pretty tiresome so I might give up soon anyway, but I needed to put that out there.
For now, I will defend myself against your unrelenting accusations one more time.
1. “Are you serious Scott? Who the hell cares? Apparently YOU!
Isn’t your diatribe a reaction to something as silly as an opinion on a movie? Yet you get all red-faced, frustrated, you “’just can’t take it any more.’”
First off, I was just trying to be humorous by including that ‘Network’ quote, I just thought it would be fun to add in a quote from a film to get things rolling. Although, it is odd that I would include a quote from that movie, you know, one of those unhappy movies you’ve decided I must hate.
Mike, the point of my post was about the fact that we should advocate quality where we see it. Such as your list of brilliant movies, almost all of which I love. I think that debates about good art vs. bad art can be valuable, yet this blog post wasn’t about those conversations, the only one claiming it was is you, the post was about contrarians, it SAYS it is about contrarians. I never said everyone who hates Inception should keep their opinion to themselves, I said they shouldn’t spend huge amounts of time ragging on it and the people who like it.
Let this argument be about what it actually should be about, my blog post, and your initial comment to my blog post. I argue that you misunderstand what my blog post was actually saying, and that you are making it say things it isn’t.
No, I don’t care about arguments regarding opinion. To say that I write this blog based purely on opinion is a failure to grasp nuance in conversations. The point of this blog is not to defend opinions. It’s purely for us to say “hey guys, check this out!” That’s it. Granted, that is our opinion, so opinion is involved, but it is not in the sense you are implying it is, in which our desire here is to offer a well reasoned argument defending why good things are good.
I do feel like long debates and arguments about opinions are a waste of time, and yes that includes the people who make a good living that way. The reason I feel this way is simple, and it was included in the initial post, most of which you ignored: “I could come up with a bunch of pretty solid arguments and big words to prove Inception was brilliant, then you could use similarly solid arguments and big words to prove it wasn’t. The question is, why?” I’m not interested in that. As a culture, we continue to mistake the objective and the subjective, and it has gotten so old. No one can win that argument, because you can’t prove to me I didn’t enjoy something I enjoyed, and I can’t prove to you that you didn’t hate something you hated.
More often than not, our experience of movies are subjective, and then we fill in a bunch of solid sounding arguments to try and prove our experience was valid. I think it is more valuable to articulate our personal experience of the movie, talking about where it connected with us, as opposed to trying to pretend we are reaching for some objective fact. Again,AS I SAID IN THE BLOG, this isn’t just about people disliking the movie, it is about people acting as if it is utterly devoid of value, implying that anyone who likes it is weak-minded and deluded, and that “no one anywhere should ever love it, under any circumstances.” That goes beyond mere opinion. I didn’t say people weren’t allowed to offer negative opinions, you said that I said that, and then argued with what you said I said. That’s not particularly helpful.
So, no, while you contest that it is, my diatribe is not the response to something as silly as an opinion about a movie. The diatribe is about what the words in the diatribe say it is about: contrarians who act like someone who doesn’t like the movie are stupid, and like the masses and large percentage of critics who like it are deluded. You actually complained about the same thing from Inception fans in your first comment, while also quoting from a review that did the exact same thing, offering your own unintentional irony while you accused me of hypocrisy. It should be noted, I agree with you there too, I haven’t seen it happen as often as you claim it happens, but perhaps it does, so, if people are acting like those who didn’t like Inception are a bunch of big idiots, then they could be included in this post as well. But, before you respond, reread my post, I am not saying that people who don’t like Inception are idiots, I don’t believe that to be the case, stop telling me it is how I feel.
2. I don’t spend tons of time on contrarian websites. I’m not really going to say any more about that, because it seems a waste of time, and while you clearly disagree, I’m not sure what that has to do with this argument, and the same question could be argued of you. Why on earth are you spending so much time arguing with me? Why not just write me off as the idiot you have decided I am and go back to your own brilliant writing and friends and life. You continue to read my post as entirely negative, and it isn’t. You mistook a tone of humor for a tone of fury, that may be my fault as a writer, but understand now, the post is not purely negative, it isn’t hating on anyone, and it is arguing that it is more vulnerable to share the things you love with people then to snipe at things. I have a feeling I know what you are going to say to that paragraph, but it can’t be avoided, I have a feeling no matter what I say you are going to respond by picking up two or three isolated sentences and attempting to rip them apart.
3. There is also a big difference here you seem to misunderstand. I didn’t wander around the internet looking for people who hated Inception to rail against, and then bash on their posts. I offered something I thought was worth saying on MY blog. Yet, you came to my blog and railed against me. And the reason you were called a troll is because as you were doing it you were being a complete asshole. That is why everyone keeps making fun of you in this thread. The general response to me outside of the blog from people is that they were amazed at the tone of your comment. You accused me of hypocrisy and arrogance, while your comments are dripping with them. Yet, you still haven’t answered questions regarding that. Head back up to some of my previous comments and defend some of the things I asked you about, anything that requires you to look at yourself the way you so desperately want me to look at me.
4. It is clear you aren’t trying to understand what I am saying at all. I know, you disagree that is the case, but the rest of us here don’t. I hope that I can get the sense in your next response that you might, someday, somehow give me the benefit of the doubt (another comment above you never responded to), but as much as we appreciate the inside jokes and such this thread has provided, it doesn’t really seem like we are getting anywhere, because you refuse to let me say what my blog actually meant, and instead, you keep telling me what it meant instead.
This is getting really sloppy on my part, because these responses have all been stream of consciousness, and as I get more and more confused as to why you hate me so much, and why you are spending so much time on my blog when you hate it so much, which is the same question we already discussed above.
Perhaps it would be better to continue this conversation in email or something.
Eh, shit, I don’t have time to edit any of this. Hopefully the sentences above even make sense. Eesh.
Ofelia Legaspi
How about I hate one movie, and love another, all in one post? “Hating” a movie is only bad if you don’t back it up. Criticism is how we grow.
Check out my review of Inception AND Eternal Sunshine as part of my 500 Movies, 365 Days. “Shedding some Eternal Sunshine on concept-driven Inception”
http://ofelialegaspi.com/2010/07/23/500-movie-dare-now-playing-shedding-some-eternal-sunshine-in-concept-driven-inception/
Scott
I agree that criticism can be valuable, and I didn’t really mean to be referring to that in my post. I was more talking about those people out in internets who revel in negativity. I think it’s often easy to tell by someone’s tone when they are writing about “hating” a movie, whether or not they are doing it because they love good movies, or because they love hating movies, if that makes sense. I have no patience for the second. Actually, it isn’t even about disliking a movie for me, as much as it is about long posts doing nothing but spewing hatred at something.
Based on the tone of your comment, I’m betting your article falls into the ‘someone who loves movies’ category. I will definitely check it out! Thanks for the comment. =)