This is a prime example of why I hate pretentious film buffs.
-
savagebiscuits — 11 years ago(March 20, 2015 10:58 AM)
Rosemary's Baby -
The husband is a satanist along with the neighbours and wants to turn their baby into a devil child.
Soylent Green -
Soylent Green is people.
Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf -
The son of George and Martha doesn't exist.
Friday the 13th -
Jason Voorhies' Mother is the killer.
Psycho -
Norman Bates is the killer and is posing as his dead mother.
Les Diaboliques -
The husband is alive after all and is attempting to get revenge on his wife.
Citizen Kane -
Rosebud is Kane's childhood sled.
You can't tell me you've seen all these and are not upset that I spoiled them. They've been out for decades.
[Spoiler tags added to SamoanJoes' quote above by savagebiscuits, to cover up the deliberate spoilers.]
Yes, I've seen them all.
I also notice that you're now acting like a spoilt jerk in deliberately spoiling films, not just for me (not that you have in my case), but also for others. Nowhere have I deliberately tried to spoil a film to upset others. Think about that and your own actions of self-entitlement.
Still, that doesn't mean that I get all upset when an old film, that I have had plenty of time to watch, gets spoiled. It's my issue and not the fault of those who reasonably want to discuss the merits and story of a film they've seen, and that's been out for decades. There are more important things in life than getting all wound up because someone has reasonably talked about an old film that you happen not to have watched.
BTW, if you're going to make a similar point, use the spoiler tags like I have done in quoting you. There are plenty of people out there who haven't seen those films and won't appreciate you
deliberately
spoiling them. My issue is people getting too upset about spoilers for old films, not one that's meant to mean that one should deliberately set out to spoil them. -
SamoanJoes — 11 years ago(March 20, 2015 04:02 PM)
First off, I just wanted you to read them that's why I didn't put the spoiler tags over them.
Secondly, I spoiled films that are all over 35 years old, so according to you, if it's not a film that's around 5 years old, it's fair game, so why complain when I spoiled it above?
There are more important things in life than getting all wound up because someone has reasonably talked about an old film that you happen not to have watched.
Sure there are more important things but I'm on IMDb. It's a movie site. If I decide to get "all wound up" about politics, I'll go to a site that talks politics.
It's my issue and not the fault of those who reasonably want to discuss the merits and story of a film they've seen, and that's been out for decades.
Again, if it's been out for decades who cares if I am acting like (in your words) a "spoiled jerk" by putting spoilers to movies that have been out for decades. It's a jerk move to spoil a film at all regardless of release date. And, no, it's not the fault of someone who is, say, 14 or 15, who has not seen many movies and decides to start watching a lot of the classics. They're young. I wouldn't expect them to watch hundreds of classics at such a young age.
My issue is people getting too upset about spoilers for old films
Aren't there more important things to worry about? -
savagebiscuits — 11 years ago(March 20, 2015 04:54 PM)
First off, I just wanted you to read them that's why I didn't put the spoiler tags over them.
I know why you did it, you petulant child, but your wheeze also caused some collateral damage. Then again, your self-entitlement issues don't really extend to others.
Secondly, I spoiled films that are all over 35 years old, so according to you, if it's not a film that's around 5 years old, it's fair game, so why complain when I spoiled it above?
I didn't say to deliberately spoil the films as an attempt to prove some childish point, though. You were acting like a dick in your attempt to show an example. My issue is that if you're on some film site or talking about old films, then it's quite reasonable to expect some spoilers. It's not alright to wantonly spoil for the sake of it, like you did, hypocrite.
Aren't there more important things to worry about?
You're the one blabbing like a child, so you answer me.
Anyway, enough, whinge to someone else. Just remember, if you're going to spoil and you think it might cause an issue, use spoiler tags. -
SamoanJoes — 11 years ago(March 23, 2015 06:13 AM)
You said yourself that it's not a big deal if a movie is spoiled if it's been out a while. I don't understand how you defend someone deliberately spoiling the ending of a movie as long as it's a few decades old, and then when I do it to prove a point, you get upset and say that I'm deliberately spoiling movies that are a few decades old.
-
savagebiscuits — 11 years ago(March 23, 2015 07:30 AM)
Your "prove a point" just exposed your hypocrisy and self-entitlement issues. It's not me being inconsistent, it's me pointing out your own inconsistency and lack of principle. You came here crying about an old film being spoiled, how you despise those that do so, then you proceed, in order to "win" some argument, to spoil other films for others. It just shows how little you believe your own words and how little one should take you seriously.
With that said, I won't be taking you seriously from now on, so will move on. Bye. -
SamoanJoes — 11 years ago(March 23, 2015 08:23 AM)
Your "prove a point" just exposed your hypocrisy
Of course it's hypocritical! You finally get it!
You said:
If it were a five-year-old film, then I could understand the grievance to a sympathetic degree, but a forty-seven-year-old film
So I replied to YOUR post by putting up spoilers (which after you read, I put spoiler tags over) to films that were over three decades old and your response was:
I also notice that you're now acting like a spoilt jerk in deliberately spoiling films
That right there should tell you that it's wrong NO MATTER HOW OLD A FILM IS, to spoil an ending for anyone who hasn't seen it. I never went on the IMDb pages for those films and just spoiled it. It was a response to you on this specific thread. Notice how I didn't even once mention the twist to Planet of the Apes in my original post? It's because I didn't want to spoil it for every one else.
And don't talk to me about self-entitlement! You made the rules by saying it's not okay to spoil the film if it's within five years old, but it's okay to ruin a film for anything over that. Who are you to make that decision for me? -
savagebiscuits — 11 years ago(March 23, 2015 09:50 AM)
I said:
Your "prove a point" just exposed
your
hypocrisy
(Emphasis added.)
You bleated:
Of course it's hypocritical! You finally get it!
I know, that's why I'm pulling you up on it, hypocrite. Naturally, you won't be finally getting it. Your kind never does.
That right there should tell you that it's wrong NO MATTER HOW OLD A FILM IS, to spoil an ending for anyone who hasn't seen it.
My issue isn't with someone, in context of the discussion, spoiling an old film that's part of the subject at hand. That's reasonable on a film board that's discussing the said film. My issue with you is the wanton spoiling of films that are not in the context of what's being discussed and your blatant hypocrisy. It's your reason for spoiling them that I'm calling to order.
Your post was a deliberate (I keep on saying that word for a reason) attempt to spoil for the sake of it and for your own self-gratification. It's got nothing to do with talking about films, just you showing off for the sake of it, much like what you whinged about in your first post. While anyone mentioning the ending of this film with Taylor on this board would be doing so because they would have expected people
who frequent this board
to have watched this film, which is quite reasonable seeing it's been out for coming up to fifty years. If you're scared about spoilers on the IMDb PotA board, then don't turn up till you've actually watched the film. Why should the rest of us not openly talk about this film because you can't be arsed to watch it?
Now, when I said that I would be sympathetic to the grievance of spoiling if the film had been five-years-old (note the words I use, I don't say it's good to spoil five-year-old films), I'm meaning in the context that one would be frequenting the board that the film is being discussed. I don't mean littering the board with spoilers of other five-year-old films. If I were in need to do that, I'd use spoiler tags or give a warning.
See, even if I don't have too much sympathy for the drama queens who scream about spoilers for films over five-years-old, I do try to not spoil without warning. Still, if someone else transgresses that practice, it's not the end of the world that you're making it out to be. Your OP came off as some hissy fit from a five-year-old that was about something very trivial, hence why I used the "Oh, the humanity" line. It's possible to not feel too much sympathy for something, but still tread carefully so as to not provoke for the sake of it.
What's also galling is that you "despise" others who spoil films, even old ones, yet in this discussion, I don't see you despising yourself or being in any way contrite. In fact, you seem pleased with yourself. Kudos. So, yeah, the calling of you as a hypocrite is apt. Actually, the word pretentious (such a trite word on IMDb; sorry about that) could well be applied to you.
Well, as I said before, I should wrap this up from my end. I know, I said that before, but I really should try this time. I mean, I don't want James to start listing other oldish films and causing the OP to explode and go postal.
-
SamoanJoes — 11 years ago(March 23, 2015 10:47 AM)
It's got nothing to do with talking about films, just you showing off for the sake of it, much like what you whinged about in your first post.
I haven't seen all those films that I spoiled so what am I showing off about?
Why should the rest of us not openly talk about this film because you can't be arsed to watch it?
First, I'm not just talking about IMDb threads. I'm talking general discussions with people. Secondly, I can't be arsed to watch it? Do you really think I possess a magic wand that allows me to get all films I want at my disposal? No, there are films that are impossible for me to find, but I've been spoiled with twists by my very own friends.
I don't have too much sympathy for the drama queens who scream about spoilers for films over five-years-old, I do try to not spoil without warning.
Again, all my spoilers were directed toward you, and you only. I didn't put a spoiler tag because I knew you wouldn't hover over it to see what it said. Again, I have censored it since my point TO YOU, was conveyed.
it's not the end of the world that you're making it out to be.
Which sentence would possibly make you feel that way? And you also say it's "so trivial". If it's so trivial, why would you care if I spoiled those films for you then? -
JamesA1102 — 11 years ago(March 21, 2015 08:01 AM)
You forgot a few:
Patton- The Allies defeat the Nazis.
All the President's Men - Nixon Resigns.
Apollo 13 - The crew makes it safely back to Earth.
Recount - The Supreme Court stops the recount and declares George W. Bush the winner.
Zero Dark Thirty - They kill Osama bin Laden.
Any James Bond movie - 007 saves the world, kills the bad guy and gets the girl.
- The Allies defeat the Nazis.
