This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - πΊπππππ
πͺππππ
Pages: 1 ... 143144145 146147 ... 1000
4321
« on: June 11, 2017, 04:11:50 AM »
tfw a thread about yourself has devolved into a thread about the semantics of discrimination
kk back on topic what's your favorite form of discrimination
4322
« on: June 11, 2017, 04:11:04 AM »
in the case of chauvinist, MOST PEOPLE (even you, just now) automatically assume that the word has this strict definition, so in order to convey a different meaning, i'm forced to use a stupid word like "reverse" to get my point across
Even in that case, "chauvinism toward women" is a far better phrase than "reverse chauvinism"
4323
« on: June 11, 2017, 04:09:55 AM »
literally implies that "normal racism" can only be against black people it actually doesn't at all
why not use the extra syllables in order to not be a bigot? Language is all about efficiency, and less syllables doesn't mean more efficient. You lose meaning and clarity.
the history around the word "racist" is such that the implications of white racism are nearly inseparable from the word itself, unless you clarify that white people are the ones being prejudiced against
this concept is difficult not
then fucking clarify it "reverse racism" doesn't. Reverse from fucking what? Normal racism? In that case, you're saying that the opposite of "reverse racism" (racism against whites) is "normal racism" (racism against blacks) use the extra fucking syllable and say "racism against whites"
4324
« on: June 11, 2017, 04:05:11 AM »
(that literally argument for double standards was ridiculous) what
I believe Class is referring to the discussing on women being held to a higher standard, where Class argued that women should be held to the same standard as man less it be unfair to women.
oh you mean the "discussion" where i was purposely being a foil to his own reverse chauvinism
"Reverse chauvinism"? Eh, I agree to the assertion that all people should be held to the same standard, regardless of race of sex.
there's a reason we use the word "reverse" in these contexts
if you wanted to convey that someone was being racist against white people, how would you put it
you could just say "racist" and you wouldn't be wrong, but that doesn't necessarily get the message across
"reverse racism" is three syllables less than "racism against white people," and it conveys the same message, and only pedants would dick around over the semantics or implications of it imo
or, you know, intelligent people? It's not semantics, but you're right with the implications part literally implies that "normal racism" can only be against black people why not use the extra syllables in order to not be a bigot? Language is all about efficiency, and less syllables doesn't mean more efficient. You lose meaning and clarity.
4325
« on: June 11, 2017, 04:02:51 AM »
 oh I guess I never knew what this word meant until now
4326
« on: June 11, 2017, 04:00:30 AM »
 send me free shit septagon
4327
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:57:18 AM »
reverse chauvinism
this phrase makes zero sense
4328
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:56:47 AM »
analyzing a movie means recognizing it's not real
i think recognizing that movies aren't real just means that i'm mentally healthy, frankly
frank underwoodly
mentally healthy people don't appreciate media like me
4329
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:53:14 AM »
true immersion can never be reached
Even if that were true, it doesn't matter. The purpose of every story is to strive to reach true immersion. If yours doesn't, it means you have no integrity in your universe, either because of apathy or corruption.
the purpose of every story is to send a message, actually
That's the immediate purpose - and only of some stories. The immediate purpose of something like The Naked Gun is to make you laugh. The immediate purpose of The Notebook is to make you cry. What all of these have in common, though, is the strife towards full immersion. You can't make someone laugh if you don't believe in what you're writing, and the only way to believe in that storywriting is by believing in the universe you're trying to create.
which is STILL not impossible to do while taking a more formalist, analytical approach to the experience
maybe try it some time and you'll see
analyzing a movie means recognizing it's not real, which you shouldn't fucking do really all that needs to be said you might never be able to attain that true immersion, but you should still try to
4330
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:46:13 AM »
carson wants one over me so bad omg
haha as if I'm more trying to explain this to you, you're constantly so stubborn about nearly anything (that literally argument for double standards was ridiculous) and I'm putting my foot down
4331
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:44:57 AM »
true immersion can never be reached
Even if that were true, it doesn't matter. The purpose of every story is to strive to reach true immersion. If yours doesn't, it means you have no integrity in your universe, either because of apathy or corruption.
the purpose of every story is to send a message, actually
That's the immediate purpose - and only of some stories. The immediate purpose of something like The Naked Gun is to make you laugh. The immediate purpose of The Notebook is to make you cry. What all of these have in common, though, is the strife towards full immersion. You can't make someone laugh if you don't believe in what you're writing, and the only way to believe in that storywriting is by believing in the universe you're trying to create.
4332
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:37:54 AM »
true immersion can never be reached
Even if that were true, it doesn't matter. The purpose of every story is to strive to reach true immersion. If yours doesn't, it means you have no integrity in your universe, either because of apathy or corruption.
4333
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:33:59 AM »
Literally look at the purpose of a story from the most basic, caveman standpoint.
why in god's name would i do that
Because I'm arguing what the point of every story is. The meta aspects are a perversion of the inherent purpose of the story (total immersion), just like a lie is a perversion of the inherent purpose of language (communicating thoughts).
I can't do that unless I reference a time before that perversion existed.
i can be totally immersed in a film and still be analyzing the technical aspects
sucks that you can't i guess
No you can't. If you can analyze the film, that means you're admitting it isn't real.
immersion is not "this is real"βthat's total immersion, which is physically impossible, and something you wouldn't want to experience anyway
immersion is "this asymptotically approaches real, but i know in the back of my mind that it's not real"
Wrong. That's partial immersion. True immersion is "this is real" (which is far from impossible), you're just incorrect lol. Not much sense trying to explain the meaning of storytelling to you if you have such a flaw in your base-level thinking. And even if it was impossible, that doesn't matter. This is about what a story strives to do.
4334
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:29:39 AM »
Literally look at the purpose of a story from the most basic, caveman standpoint.
why in god's name would i do that
Because I'm arguing what the point of every story is. The meta aspects are a perversion of the inherent purpose of the story (total immersion), just like a lie is a perversion of the inherent purpose of language (communicating thoughts).
I can't do that unless I reference a time before that perversion existed.
i can be totally immersed in a film and still be analyzing the technical aspects
sucks that you can't i guess
No you can't. If you can analyze the film, that means you're admitting it isn't real. That's not total immersion.
4335
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:22:21 AM »
Literally look at the purpose of a story from the most basic, caveman standpoint.
why in god's name would i do that
Because I'm arguing what the point of every story is. The meta aspects are a perversion of the inherent purpose of the story (total immersion), just like a lie is a perversion of the inherent purpose of language (communicating thoughts). I can't do that unless I reference a time before that perversion existed.
4336
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:18:57 AM »
archer is dogshit
I mean, a lot of the humor is derived from the fact that Archer is a terrible person
It's a "laugh at him, not with him" situation. H. Jon Benjamin is one of my favorite VAs tho.
even if i liked the show's humor, the art style is headachingly ugly
i feel the same way about rick and morty
I actually like Archer's art style
I do agree with Rick and Morty tho, and the longer it takes for them to start S3, the more I realize the show is pretty shitty.
this is the first negative post i've seen about the show, ever
thank you
R&M has a shitty art style and is bogged down by Justin Roiland but you forget that Dan Harmon exists that's why the show is good
4337
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:17:36 AM »
Most? They're just a bit boring. It's like watching someone play an old 80s video game. I like narratives.
The most entertaining is probably football though
4338
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:14:44 AM »
What did everyone think of 13 reasons why?
Retarded concept executed in a retarded way You can't have a show based around a dead girl with a victim complex I mean, you can - it just sucks
4339
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:12:22 AM »
Maybe, but that's not something you recognize when you view the film. There are no actors. Harrison Ford isn't in a studio running from a prop, Indiana Jones is desperately sprinting away from a giant boulder that's about to crush him. The actor doesn't exist, and neither do any meta aspects like film quality or writing mechanics. It might be enjoyable to list off the tropes you can see, but it detracts from the nature of a story itself, not to mention viewing pleasure.
so i mulled this post over and i've determined that absolutely none of this is true
It feels so nice being right. Literally look at the purpose of a story from the most basic, caveman standpoint. Whether the immediate intention is to make the audience laugh, cry, gasp, whatever - the larger intention is to draw the audience into the universe of the story. Otherwise, there's literally no point in even telling it. Things like reviews, the recognition of common tropes, and any other meta stuff like that came long after, and were the result of the audience trying to gain greater appreciation of stories. But ironically, all of those meta aspects just take you out of the immersion you're supposed to feel as you view or listen.
4340
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:07:21 AM »
archer is dogshit
It's just like that old gypsy lady said! Spoiler seriously though it's like you go out of your way to have backwards tastes archer is dogshit
I mean, a lot of the humor is derived from the fact that Archer is a terrible person
It's a "laugh at him, not with him" situation. H. Jon Benjamin is one of my favorite VAs tho.
For me, most of the humor is just in the really sharp writing and characterizations. The episodes that hold true to that (like Skytanic, literally my favorite) are the ones I love, but there are some episodes, really prevalent in vice, where the humor is just shock/risqueness. I love the thing they do where someone will ask a question as a scene ends, and then the question will be answered coincidentally in the beginning of the next scene. Hard to word it, but you know what I mean
4341
« on: June 11, 2017, 03:01:16 AM »
sep7agon but every time verb is misogynistic they get woohp'd
i guess nobody is ever getting woohp'd
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slut-shamingSlut shaming is directed against women far more often than against men, not least because of the cultural perception that sex is something women do for men.If you aren't for women's sexual liberation, you're for the double standard that exists everywhere.
4342
« on: June 11, 2017, 02:56:01 AM »
sep7agon but every time verb is misogynistic they get woohp'd
4343
« on: June 11, 2017, 02:50:44 AM »
tbh I'm like the opposite of Class
I just want people to like me (not love, that's too much tbh), while Class likes being put down
<3 u tho
the thing is I don't want to be outright hated, more of a sol thing where people like me but still put me down and the funny thing is that some people think I'm sitting here getting off to people being mean to me, but its more because the meanness just gives me a feeling of pure catharsis and relief - I can go to writing.com if I want to get off lol  posts like this are just so amazing Spoiler from a purely psychological standpoint I probably developed the sub kink as a result of my general need to be disparaged, not the other way around
4344
« on: June 11, 2017, 02:43:31 AM »
i've seen movies with some extremely morally repugnant characters in them, but i still like them, because their charisma is not based in the character's personality or actions, but with the actor's own ability to play the role so well
So what you're saying is that you watch films and tv literally wrong
"Wrong" in the sense that the goal of any story - to be so invested in it, you can't separate it from the truth - is being consciously violated. For the purpose of...what? Indulging in the "behind the scenes" unnecessary? If an actor's motivations or life are being thought of while you're watching something, the entire point of the medium has failed.
shockingly enough i don't think you understood what i said
part of a film's quality is how well the actors portray the characters, yes
Maybe, but that's not something you recognize when you view the film. There are no actors. Harrison Ford isn't in a studio running from a prop, Indiana Jones is desperately sprinting away from a giant boulder that's about to crush him. The actor doesn't exist, and neither do any meta aspects like film quality or writing mechanics. It might be enjoyable to list off the tropes you can see, but it detracts from the nature of a story itself, not to mention viewing pleasure. shockingly enough I don't think you understood what I said
4345
« on: June 11, 2017, 02:29:27 AM »
also this discussion is distracting from the subject
me
wait but I posted itt it's about me now, that's how it works
4346
« on: June 11, 2017, 02:28:02 AM »
i've seen movies with some extremely morally repugnant characters in them, but i still like them, because their charisma is not based in the character's personality or actions, but with the actor's own ability to play the role so well
So what you're saying is that you watch films and tv literally wrong "Wrong" in the sense that the goal of any story - to be so invested in it, you can't separate it from the truth - is being consciously violated. For the purpose of...what? Indulging in the "behind the scenes" unnecessary? If an actor's motivations or life are being thought of while you're watching something, the entire point of the medium has failed.
4347
« on: June 11, 2017, 02:17:27 AM »
"As little as possible" tbh you just need to watch this film, it's a masterpiece
4348
« on: June 11, 2017, 02:15:57 AM »
most unlikable character ever is noah cross btw, intentionally so
if they're intentionally unlikable then that means they're actually likable
makes literally negative sense
a good actor can play an evil character in a really charismatic way
charismatic means you like their character while simultaneously rooting against them because you know they're bad
basic basic basic basic shit
That's what I'm saying - Noah Cross is no Frank Underwood. He has no charisma, and is literally impossible to like in every scene he's in. You never sympathize with him or understand his delusional, probably made-up worldview. He's pretty much the embodiment of evil, but was intentionally written that way, obviously (as he's a villain). All I'm saying is that he's probably the most unlikable character in film/TV history
4349
« on: June 11, 2017, 02:10:09 AM »
most unlikable character ever is noah cross btw, intentionally so
if they're intentionally unlikable then that means they're actually likable
makes literally negative sense
4350
« on: June 11, 2017, 02:06:07 AM »
most unlikable character ever is noah cross btw, intentionally so
Seriously, even if you don't want to watch the movie I highly recommend everyone at least watch these two scenes John Huston is a chillingly good actor 
Pages: 1 ... 143144145 146147 ... 1000
|
Show Posts